Hi Caretaker2 -- Look at my biopsy history (below) and you might want to get your friend another biopsy before making a final decision.
Apparently, the urologist who did my biopsy had bad aim or poor ultrasound imaging equipment, and kept taking samples from the same area of my prostate during my biopsy. The volume of cancer suggested by that biopsy was very high.
Immediately after my surgery, the surgeon told my wife that from what he could see and feel, the volume of cancer was not near what the biopsy had suggested. When the the post-op pathology report came in, it confirmed what my surgeon suspected.
So get a second opinion for your friend, if possible.
By the way, I'd like to give that ***hole Dr. who declared your friend, "unworthy," an examination of my own invention -- the DUE -- Digital Urethral Exam (without the glove).
What a piece of garbage that guy is. Report him. Call your local media people. Whatever. That jerk is out of line.
D.O.B - 8/9/52
PSA: First ever was 9.8 in late Oct. ‘06, two weeks later, 10.1
Biopsy results 11/22/06. Both lobes involved. Six out of eight cores positive - from 100 percent to 90, to 60, to 50, two 20s and two zeros.
Gleason 3+3 = 6
Da Vinci Robotic RP surgery, City of Hope, Jan 12, 2007
Post surgery pathology – Organ confined, Gleason still 6, margins clear. Volume of tumor much less than biopsy suggested. 12 percent overall.
First post-surgery PSA -- Undetectable, 2/20/07
Second post-surgery PSA -- Undetectable, 9/11/07