The big question.
Suppose you have an old bloke, say 68 years old. He's told that he has a nodule on the right side of his prostate and he asks the doc if it's likely to be anything else but cancer. 'No' is the answer.
Well, given that it is indeed the case of almost certain probability, then one of the options at this age is to play the waiting game. Monitor and wait.
Firstly, what is the risk factor of playing that game like at this particular age?
If deciding to monitor only, is there any point in going through the tedious ritual of a biopsy? I mean, what will it profit you to be sure of something you're not going to do anything about?
Just wondered.