Should I have biopsy

Personally, having had a couple of biopsies of the prostate - one awake, one with general anaesthetic - I would, in your situation, take the doctors' advice and consent to whatever biopsy they want to do and soon. In my case cancer was suspected on the first and confirmed on the second, but I haven't needed treatment. I have cancer but, over 5 years, it isn't developing. I'm more comfortable knowing than living in uncertainty.

You should have a 3T parametric MRI prior to having a biopsy. The fact that the urologist did not suggest this is cause enough to find a new urologist.

Good luck.

scotth42's recommendation notwithstanding, I didn't have MRI until after biopsy - biopsy was offered quickly in my area, whereas it was several months before the mri was available to me. Maybe the US and UK systems differ in this respect. All my care has been free of charge as a UK taxpeyer. I respect and trust my urologist, having seen him (and others when he wasn't working) over many years and I rather resent the call to switch urologists just because the MRI isn't offered first. What if the biopsy was targetted with the info from MRI and the cancer is still missed? There is, in my view, a place for the saturation biopsy (in my second one 36 samples were taken), although I do understand the fears of complications. Maybe I was just lucky, but I had no long-term problems recovering.

Same feedback as scotth42. My urologist had me do an MRI first followed by a biopsy. This allows him to zoom in when he does the biopsy and avoids you having to do several biopsies. At any rate, I would say have it done fast.

Hi allen, Are you saying your PSA reading was 12. You had a problem that you could not pee, so doctor put you on tablets of some kind? Then three weeks later, the PSA was at 10, then after a further 6 weeks, it was at 1.5? If this is so, then you sound like you had a UTI or some infection and do not need a biopsy.

As other have said, if you are concerned you still have a prostate problem, eg, the PSA is more than 5, or has doubled in 12 months....for no reason, have a mpMRI. It is not intrusive and if anything reported as an issue, then get a biopsy. 

I would agree with Scotth and Geoff90305. Firstly (in UK as well as USA and Australia) MRI-TRUS fusion guided biopsies are now recognised as the norm. ie it is recognised that a biopsy guided just by ultasound regularly misses all the cancer areas present in the prostate and therefore returns a false negative. Secondly 3T mpMRI is a diagnostic tool in itself. It not only identifes the cancer but also stages it (tells you how advanced it is). If it returns a negative you do not need a biopsy. The only thing that 3T mpMRI is not yet able to definitaively do is score the cancer cells (ie differentiate the type of cancer and the cell differentiation - ie how fast it will progress).

If your urologist is insisting on a blind biopsy I would ask for a second opinion to a urology department that has mpMRI (eg Brighton, Sussex where I had mine). I haven't even attempted to look at the issues surrounding your PSA results as I'm not fully sure what you are saying (eg has your PSA fallen to 10 follwoing medication for hypertrophic problems? And are you wanting to try a natural route - cannabis is the only effective natural route that I know if you indeed have PCa... ).

It is rare to have symptoms until you get to late stage PCa other than those associated with increased size - ie it becomes harder to pee.

I would recommend you to take template prostate biopsy ,it is better to find out at early stage if you have prostate cancer or not then you can decide which way you wants to go,some people can live with stable low grade cancer all their life ,