Thanks for that, Aussieand all.
I'm trying to work my way through all sorts of problems at this juncture of life. The cancer has seemed like minor, if rather tedious, interruption into what has become a chronic nightmare. Having said this, I accept life's challenges for what they are, and am just hanging on...flying through a storm, as I put it the other day. The endless banter on JB in my case, is an indicator of the extent One can go to to avoid reality.
maxter. I read obgraham's post several times. Getting skilled advise that you can trust is always problematical. Humans are strange creatures, and sometimes interaction that is good in one instance, is bizarrely inadequate in another. But all in all, I think you can trust this finding as a starting point at least.
I assume that you've had a biopsy. The samples should be very carefully laid out for the lab work, so that the physical position of each sample is reasonably well known. I wasn't ready to accept this as the only indicator with my Gleason 7 - containing among others, one 4+3 sample...but the surgeon in Texas was. Robotic removal, without any further tests. As I've said, that wasn't enough for me.
For reasons that I don't understand, I think a 3+4 is better than a 4+3. The overall Gleason is the guideline, but the 'ferocity' of localized bits is indicated by the layout of those numbers. I'm sure you'll be fine providing you follow expert advise.
Right now, as I've said, it is the almost total lack of side affects that leave me wondering if enough has been done. aussie's post has, or will, galvanize me into planning the next stage, but if the treatment so far turns out to be adequate, it will have been a very minor burden to bear.
All in all, having been diagnosed at this stage, you're way ahead of the game statistically. Good luck.