Notification

Error

Focal vs Prostatectomy

User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 09:31

Hello, I am looking for some advice about how to choose the right treatment option. My dad, has recently been diagnosed with prostate cancer, T2 N0, Gleason 3+4. The cancer is fully contained within the prostate. He’s 59 years old, pretty healthy with no other health conditions.  

Our local hospital has advised that they think surgery would be the best option. We have had positive conversations with the surgeon and he was somewhat confident that nerve saving could also be carried out. Obviously there is no guarantee. This would be my personal preference as it sounds like this is your best chance to get rid of the cancer completely and not require any further treatment. But that’s easy for me to say as I’m not the one having to have the operation. 

Focal therapy has been all over the news recently and sounds positive and I think this is where the problem lies. All the coverage of focal therapy has been quite one sided which makes it appear the most attractive option. My dad has managed to get a referral via the NHS for this treatment to discuss eligibility. My concerns really are to do with the recurrence rate and whether this is just kicking the ball down the line. 

I am looking for people who have had to make a similar decision and how you made a choice. For me, it seems impossible and later down the line you would regret the choice you made either way. 

Any advice would be appreciated! 
Lucy 

User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 19:57
Hello Lucy - I understand your concerns, and it's always shocking at first to get the news, but your dad is clearly at a very early stage on this journey, and prostate cancer is generally regarded as slow-growing and in his case has been picked-up erarly so please do together take your time to decide on which route to take.

Your dad is much younger than I was (aged 74) when diagnosed, also with Gleason 3+4, and his PSA level at 4 is very low so certainly no rush to make decisions.

Gleason 3+4 is regarded as favourable intermediate PCa. I would ask what his MRI scan showed, ie PI-RADS or Likert score was? How many cores in the biopsy were taken and how many contained cancer? A Gleason score of 3+4 means that the majority of the cancer seen is pattern 3 which is very slow-growing, if at all.

The question is, how much pattern 4 is contained? If this is less than 5% then, as in my own case, this is generally regarded as 3+3 so active surveillance could come into the mix, although I appreciate at your dad's age and life expectancy he would prefer treatment. However, and sorry if this sounds pessimistic or alarmist, those who have undergone treatment need to be monitored for many years afterwards because of the risk of recurrance so the worry never really goes away anyway.

The usual NHS treatments are RT (with unpleasant HT for months), brachatherapy or radical prostacetomy, all of which have pretty ugly long-term side effects.

You mentioned focal therapy (HIFU, cryotherapy or in some situations nano-knife) and he is indeed fortunate to get an NHS rereferral as it's mostly only available privately for patients with insurance or self-paying many thousands. I certainly wouldn't rule it out as the side-effects are much less severe than the other options and it's usually done as a day case.

I checked this out thoroughly for myself and found I was eligible and it would be my treatment of choice if my own cancer changed after over four years on active surveillance. It's true that HIFU is relatively new, although statistics over 20 years or so have proved it's success. The only proviso is that it sometimes, in a minority of cases, it needs to be repeated which isn't generally a problem.

Hope that's helpful and with all good wishes, Julian

User
Posted 28 Aug 2026 at 01:04

Lucy,
The risk of biochemical failure after Prostatectomy is about 25% to 40%. This varies depending on the grade, position and extent of an individual's case, the skill of the surgeon and to a lesser extent whether there are other factors, such as the surgeon causing some cancer cells to break away during removal of the Prostate leading to seeding. So Prostatectomy is not necessarily an end to treatment.

You make no reference to radiotherapy, this being the usual alternative offered, so there must be some reason for this, I would think.

I had HIFU, in my case as a salvage treatment for failed Radiotherapy, although it can be given as a primary treatment. It took two sessions to put me into remission, which I still am. A couple or so hours after my second HIFU, I was driven 200+ miles home. It's a very easy procedure with milder side effects than Prostatectomy, so lower risk of incontinence or Erectile Dysfunction. (The latter in my case had suffered due to the Radiotherapy). Where the HIFU probe cannot reach to focus on the tumour, Cryotherapy is the usual alternative, although Nanoknife, Irreversible Electroporation, is a more recent treatment that can be used more widely in the Prostate. The objective with Focal Treatment, is to treat only significant tumour(s) preferably, but not essentially, on one side of the Prostate so the Prostate retains as much function as possible. Where Focal is not successful, Radiotherapy or Prostatectomy can be done after it.

Dad has been diagnosed at any early stage so he can take his time in considering his options. He may find it helpful to take a look at 'The Tool Kit' https://shop.prostatecanceruk.org/our-publications/all-publications/tool-kit?limit=100&_ga=2.206109653.795867346.1564408880-1013787081.1564408880

 

Whichever, treatment is given - they all have their pros and cons - the man will be monitored for years to come by way of PSA and MRI at increasingly longer intervals.

Edited by member 28 Aug 2026 at 01:05  | Reason: to highlight link

Barry
User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 22:32

Focal may only be offered if the lesion is small enough. I was told my 14mm lesion was too large.

User
Posted 28 Aug 2026 at 10:12

Hello Lucy,

My starting point was very similar to that of your Dad’s.  Aged 56, quite healthy, no symptoms, PSA 6.5, T2c N0, Gleason 4+3 (spoiler alert, after surgery this was reassessed at 4+5 with cribiform pattern).

My discussion with the oncologist was really around my age and that I ought to be hoping for at least another 25+ years of healthy active life so with, what was then 4+3, some type of treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, etc) was going to be needed at some point. The strong advice was that given that the cancer was still contained within the prostate I had a ‘window of opportunity’ to try and get all of the cancer removed before it reached the prostate margin.  Had I been older then they might have erred towards recommending something less invasive with - to be blunt - a greater likelihood that I would be towards end of life before the cancer became a more significant problem.  In the end I opted for the surgery on the basis that I was probably fit enough to make a ‘full’ recovery and it had the most likely best outcome for a longer period of time.  Obviously that’s just one perspective but 2+ years on I’m still comfortable with the decision.

I hope everything works out okay. Best wishes

User
Posted 29 Aug 2026 at 00:21

Thanks Julian for taking the time to reply! You’re right, the news was shocking but as you say, it’s early and he’s lucky to have these options in front of him. I think we’re so used to taking advice from medical professionals that it’s hard when the choice is suddenly with you. 

The PI-RADs was a 4 and I believe there were 6/17 cores that came back as problematic, all within the left side I think.

You raise a good point about the worry never fully going away. Thank you for your thoughts on the focal therapy. 

I  wish you all the best with your active surveillance. 

Lucy

 

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
Hello Lucy - I understand your concerns, and it's always shocking at first to get the news, but your dad is clearly at a very early stage on this journey, and prostate cancer is generally regarded as slow-growing and in his case has been picked-up erarly so please do together take your time to decide on which route to take.

Your dad is much younger than I was (aged 74) when diagnosed, also with Gleason 3+4, and his PSA level at 4 is very low so certainly no rush to make decisions.

Gleason 3+4 is regarded as favourable intermediate PCa. I would ask what his MRI scan showed, ie PI-RADS or Likert score was? How many cores in the biopsy were taken and how many contained cancer? A Gleason score of 3+4 means that the majority of the cancer seen is pattern 3 which is very slow-growing, if at all.

The question is, how much pattern 4 is contained? If this is less than 5% then, as in my own case, this is generally regarded as 3+3 so active surveillance could come into the mix, although I appreciate at your dad's age and life expectancy he would prefer treatment. However, and sorry if this sounds pessimistic or alarmist, those who have undergone treatment need to be monitored for many years afterwards because of the risk of recurrance so the worry never really goes away anyway.

The usual NHS treatments are RT (with unpleasant HT for months), brachatherapy or radical prostacetomy, all of which have pretty ugly long-term side effects.

You mentioned focal therapy (HIFU, cryotherapy or in some situations nano-knife) and he is indeed fortunate to get an NHS rereferral as it's mostly only available privately for patients with insurance or self-paying many thousands. I certainly wouldn't rule it out as the side-effects are much less severe than the other options and it's usually done as a day case.

I checked this out thoroughly for myself and found I was eligible and it would be my treatment of choice if my own cancer changed after over four years on active surveillance. It's true that HIFU is relatively new, although statistics over 20 years or so have proved it's success. The only proviso is that it sometimes, in a minority of cases, it needs to be repeated which isn't generally a problem.

Hope that's helpful and with all good wishes, Julian

User
Posted 30 Aug 2026 at 16:23

I don’t have the wider knowledge of others on this site so I can only speak from my own experience which would be for your dada to get as fit as possible before the surgery and to start the pelvic floor exercises asap.  They are a bit of a pain but they do work (or at least did for me).  

User
Posted 30 Aug 2026 at 16:55

Edwardshepherd husband didn't have a RP. He is on HT and finished RT in July. He's doing very well at present.

Various strategies! 

However the one thing he has been consistently doing is his pelvic floor exercises. We both use the NHS Squeezy app. It's brilliant. A one off fee of 4.95 but that's all.  It can also help with ED. He does 4 a day .

I have no idea why professionals don't push this more. It is 10x more motivating than a few paper sheets they give you.  After he has finished RT he does sometimes need to rush to the loo but he feels it is a big help. 

Show Most Thanked Posts
User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 09:50

Hi, Lucy.

I'm sorry that your dad has prostate problems, but it's great to see that you've joined our club to support him. Welcome to the forum. You'll get plenty of help and advice here.

Do you know his PSA level?

Most treatments have about the same success rate. The problem with HIFU, is because it's relatively new, the long term outcomes aren't as clear. There is also brachytherapy, that a lot of the lads on here have had and are happy with. He may also be suitable for SBRT, which often only needs 5 radiation visits.

Here's an excellent video detailing various treatment options and possible side effects. It's well worth viewing.

https://youtu.be/zYTU94-8pTc?si=xW83bOb0AVFQFD2l

Please keep us updated and good luck with whatever treatment he decides to take. 👍

Edited by member 27 Aug 2026 at 10:22  | Reason: Add link

User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 13:21

Hi Adrian, 

thanks for the reply. 

His Psa was 4. 

I suppose my concern is, is choosing focal the easy option but not necessarily the best. Trying to educate myself as much as possible. 

User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 19:57
Hello Lucy - I understand your concerns, and it's always shocking at first to get the news, but your dad is clearly at a very early stage on this journey, and prostate cancer is generally regarded as slow-growing and in his case has been picked-up erarly so please do together take your time to decide on which route to take.

Your dad is much younger than I was (aged 74) when diagnosed, also with Gleason 3+4, and his PSA level at 4 is very low so certainly no rush to make decisions.

Gleason 3+4 is regarded as favourable intermediate PCa. I would ask what his MRI scan showed, ie PI-RADS or Likert score was? How many cores in the biopsy were taken and how many contained cancer? A Gleason score of 3+4 means that the majority of the cancer seen is pattern 3 which is very slow-growing, if at all.

The question is, how much pattern 4 is contained? If this is less than 5% then, as in my own case, this is generally regarded as 3+3 so active surveillance could come into the mix, although I appreciate at your dad's age and life expectancy he would prefer treatment. However, and sorry if this sounds pessimistic or alarmist, those who have undergone treatment need to be monitored for many years afterwards because of the risk of recurrance so the worry never really goes away anyway.

The usual NHS treatments are RT (with unpleasant HT for months), brachatherapy or radical prostacetomy, all of which have pretty ugly long-term side effects.

You mentioned focal therapy (HIFU, cryotherapy or in some situations nano-knife) and he is indeed fortunate to get an NHS rereferral as it's mostly only available privately for patients with insurance or self-paying many thousands. I certainly wouldn't rule it out as the side-effects are much less severe than the other options and it's usually done as a day case.

I checked this out thoroughly for myself and found I was eligible and it would be my treatment of choice if my own cancer changed after over four years on active surveillance. It's true that HIFU is relatively new, although statistics over 20 years or so have proved it's success. The only proviso is that it sometimes, in a minority of cases, it needs to be repeated which isn't generally a problem.

Hope that's helpful and with all good wishes, Julian

User
Posted 27 Aug 2026 at 22:32

Focal may only be offered if the lesion is small enough. I was told my 14mm lesion was too large.

User
Posted 28 Aug 2026 at 01:04

Lucy,
The risk of biochemical failure after Prostatectomy is about 25% to 40%. This varies depending on the grade, position and extent of an individual's case, the skill of the surgeon and to a lesser extent whether there are other factors, such as the surgeon causing some cancer cells to break away during removal of the Prostate leading to seeding. So Prostatectomy is not necessarily an end to treatment.

You make no reference to radiotherapy, this being the usual alternative offered, so there must be some reason for this, I would think.

I had HIFU, in my case as a salvage treatment for failed Radiotherapy, although it can be given as a primary treatment. It took two sessions to put me into remission, which I still am. A couple or so hours after my second HIFU, I was driven 200+ miles home. It's a very easy procedure with milder side effects than Prostatectomy, so lower risk of incontinence or Erectile Dysfunction. (The latter in my case had suffered due to the Radiotherapy). Where the HIFU probe cannot reach to focus on the tumour, Cryotherapy is the usual alternative, although Nanoknife, Irreversible Electroporation, is a more recent treatment that can be used more widely in the Prostate. The objective with Focal Treatment, is to treat only significant tumour(s) preferably, but not essentially, on one side of the Prostate so the Prostate retains as much function as possible. Where Focal is not successful, Radiotherapy or Prostatectomy can be done after it.

Dad has been diagnosed at any early stage so he can take his time in considering his options. He may find it helpful to take a look at 'The Tool Kit' https://shop.prostatecanceruk.org/our-publications/all-publications/tool-kit?limit=100&_ga=2.206109653.795867346.1564408880-1013787081.1564408880

 

Whichever, treatment is given - they all have their pros and cons - the man will be monitored for years to come by way of PSA and MRI at increasingly longer intervals.

Edited by member 28 Aug 2026 at 01:05  | Reason: to highlight link

Barry
User
Posted 28 Aug 2026 at 10:12

Hello Lucy,

My starting point was very similar to that of your Dad’s.  Aged 56, quite healthy, no symptoms, PSA 6.5, T2c N0, Gleason 4+3 (spoiler alert, after surgery this was reassessed at 4+5 with cribiform pattern).

My discussion with the oncologist was really around my age and that I ought to be hoping for at least another 25+ years of healthy active life so with, what was then 4+3, some type of treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, etc) was going to be needed at some point. The strong advice was that given that the cancer was still contained within the prostate I had a ‘window of opportunity’ to try and get all of the cancer removed before it reached the prostate margin.  Had I been older then they might have erred towards recommending something less invasive with - to be blunt - a greater likelihood that I would be towards end of life before the cancer became a more significant problem.  In the end I opted for the surgery on the basis that I was probably fit enough to make a ‘full’ recovery and it had the most likely best outcome for a longer period of time.  Obviously that’s just one perspective but 2+ years on I’m still comfortable with the decision.

I hope everything works out okay. Best wishes

User
Posted 29 Aug 2026 at 00:21

Thanks Julian for taking the time to reply! You’re right, the news was shocking but as you say, it’s early and he’s lucky to have these options in front of him. I think we’re so used to taking advice from medical professionals that it’s hard when the choice is suddenly with you. 

The PI-RADs was a 4 and I believe there were 6/17 cores that came back as problematic, all within the left side I think.

You raise a good point about the worry never fully going away. Thank you for your thoughts on the focal therapy. 

I  wish you all the best with your active surveillance. 

Lucy

 

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
Hello Lucy - I understand your concerns, and it's always shocking at first to get the news, but your dad is clearly at a very early stage on this journey, and prostate cancer is generally regarded as slow-growing and in his case has been picked-up erarly so please do together take your time to decide on which route to take.

Your dad is much younger than I was (aged 74) when diagnosed, also with Gleason 3+4, and his PSA level at 4 is very low so certainly no rush to make decisions.

Gleason 3+4 is regarded as favourable intermediate PCa. I would ask what his MRI scan showed, ie PI-RADS or Likert score was? How many cores in the biopsy were taken and how many contained cancer? A Gleason score of 3+4 means that the majority of the cancer seen is pattern 3 which is very slow-growing, if at all.

The question is, how much pattern 4 is contained? If this is less than 5% then, as in my own case, this is generally regarded as 3+3 so active surveillance could come into the mix, although I appreciate at your dad's age and life expectancy he would prefer treatment. However, and sorry if this sounds pessimistic or alarmist, those who have undergone treatment need to be monitored for many years afterwards because of the risk of recurrance so the worry never really goes away anyway.

The usual NHS treatments are RT (with unpleasant HT for months), brachatherapy or radical prostacetomy, all of which have pretty ugly long-term side effects.

You mentioned focal therapy (HIFU, cryotherapy or in some situations nano-knife) and he is indeed fortunate to get an NHS rereferral as it's mostly only available privately for patients with insurance or self-paying many thousands. I certainly wouldn't rule it out as the side-effects are much less severe than the other options and it's usually done as a day case.

I checked this out thoroughly for myself and found I was eligible and it would be my treatment of choice if my own cancer changed after over four years on active surveillance. It's true that HIFU is relatively new, although statistics over 20 years or so have proved it's success. The only proviso is that it sometimes, in a minority of cases, it needs to be repeated which isn't generally a problem.

Hope that's helpful and with all good wishes, Julian

User
Posted 29 Aug 2026 at 00:34

You’re right to raise those points about the removal of the prostate. It’s quite crazy to think that it’s removal can still cause reoccurrence but I suppose the chances are lower.

Interestingly while radiotherapy was offered as an option it was clear that this is not what they were recommending, mainly due to the long term impacts. They said that in his age and health position, it would be better as a second line of defence.

Thank you for your focal insights. There certainly seems to be lots of options.  I’ll take a look at the toolkit

Great news on the remission! I hope all remains well.  

Lucy 

 

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Lucy,
The risk of biochemical failure after Prostatectomy is about 25% to 40%. This varies depending on the grade, position and extent of an individual's case, the skill of the surgeon and to a lesser extent whether there are other factors, such as the surgeon causing some cancer cells to break away during removal of the Prostate leading to seeding. So Prostatectomy is not necessarily an end to treatment.

You make no reference to radiotherapy, this being the usual alternative offered, so there must be some reason for this, I would think.

I had HIFU, in my case as a salvage treatment for failed Radiotherapy, although it can be given as a primary treatment. It took two sessions to put me into remission, which I still am. A couple or so hours after my second HIFU, I was driven 200+ miles home. It's a very easy procedure with milder side effects than Prostatectomy, so lower risk of incontinence or Erectile Dysfunction. (The latter in my case had suffered due to the Radiotherapy). Where the HIFU probe cannot reach to focus on the tumour, Cryotherapy is the usual alternative, although Nanoknife, Irreversible Electroporation, is a more recent treatment that can be used more widely in the Prostate. The objective with Focal Treatment, is to treat only significant tumour(s) preferably, but not essentially, on one side of the Prostate so the Prostate retains as much function as possible. Where Focal is not successful, Radiotherapy or Prostatectomy can be done after it.

Dad has been diagnosed at any early stage so he can take his time in considering his options. He may find it helpful to take a look at 'The Tool Kit' https://shop.prostatecanceruk.org/our-publications/all-publications/tool-kit?limit=100&_ga=2.206109653.795867346.1564408880-1013787081.1564408880

 

Whichever, treatment is given - they all have their pros and cons - the man will be monitored for years to come by way of PSA and MRI at increasingly longer intervals.

User
Posted 29 Aug 2026 at 14:08

Thanks Edward,

I am reassured that you chose surgery and that you’re comfortable with your decision. It sounds like a very similar scenario. Do you have any tips or advice that you’d give to someone going through the operation? 

All the best,

Lucy 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Hello Lucy,

My starting point was very similar to that of your Dad’s.  Aged 56, quite healthy, no symptoms, PSA 6.5, T2c N0, Gleason 4+3 (spoiler alert, after surgery this was reassessed at 4+5 with cribiform pattern).

My discussion with the oncologist was really around my age and that I ought to be hoping for at least another 25+ years of healthy active life so with, what was then 4+3, some type of treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, etc) was going to be needed at some point. The strong advice was that given that the cancer was still contained within the prostate I had a ‘window of opportunity’ to try and get all of the cancer removed before it reached the prostate margin.  Had I been older then they might have erred towards recommending something less invasive with - to be blunt - a greater likelihood that I would be towards end of life before the cancer became a more significant problem.  In the end I opted for the surgery on the basis that I was probably fit enough to make a ‘full’ recovery and it had the most likely best outcome for a longer period of time.  Obviously that’s just one perspective but 2+ years on I’m still comfortable with the decision.

I hope everything works out okay. Best wishes

User
Posted 30 Aug 2026 at 16:23

I don’t have the wider knowledge of others on this site so I can only speak from my own experience which would be for your dada to get as fit as possible before the surgery and to start the pelvic floor exercises asap.  They are a bit of a pain but they do work (or at least did for me).  

User
Posted 30 Aug 2026 at 16:55

Edwardshepherd husband didn't have a RP. He is on HT and finished RT in July. He's doing very well at present.

Various strategies! 

However the one thing he has been consistently doing is his pelvic floor exercises. We both use the NHS Squeezy app. It's brilliant. A one off fee of 4.95 but that's all.  It can also help with ED. He does 4 a day .

I have no idea why professionals don't push this more. It is 10x more motivating than a few paper sheets they give you.  After he has finished RT he does sometimes need to rush to the loo but he feels it is a big help. 

User
Posted 05 Sep 2026 at 08:16

I am from Yorkshire and recently had focal therapy by Nanoknife in London aged 55.

My cancer, PSA 7.5, Gleason 3+3, right side anterior. After a few years of active surveillance the PSA was progressing (+0.8/year) and the tumour was quite large at 12 mm, so it was decided it was better to take some action.

I chose focal therapy. I wanted to take some action, but ideally to avoid the side effects that could come with more radical treatment.

I was aware that longer term outcomes were less well understood, however for Nanoknife, at 5 years, about 75% of men require no further treatment, 15% have had a second round of Nanoknife, and 10% have moved on to surgery or radiotherapy. It has also been shown that there are no additional risks - i.e. outcomes are not measurably worse for men who have focal therapy. Even with surgery, there is a percentage chance of recurrence. No method is perfect, and anyone diagnosed with prostate cancer likely faces a lifetime of monitoring. 

I had Nanoknife back in February. My PSA fell from 7.5 to 0.9 and is currently stable (it doesn't fall to nothing because I still have a prostate). I have no incontinence and erections are good. My only side effect is I now have dry orgasms. I will be monitored with 3 monthly PSA and annual MRI, moving to 6 monthly PSA and biannual MRI.

I appreciate that I may later need further treatment, but there is no treatment for prostate cancer that can guarantee this won't happen (my Dad had surgery when he was 60, and has later had to have radiotherapy, hormone therapy, and chemotherapy) I am happy to have high quality of life for now.

I was really pleased to be referred to the focal therapy clinic and feel grateful for the treatment and care I received. The prostate teams in London are amongst the very best in the world, and at no point did I feel that focal therapy was being 'pushed' on me.  The treatments (HIFU for posterior tumours or Nanoknife for anterior) are available on the NHS, as long as you meet the criteria, and there is currently a big push to roll them out more widely.

Finally, prostate cancer is a very variable disease - every case is different and people must make their own decisions, but I would say that with a PSA of 4 and Gleason 7 diagnosis, your Dad is in the good position that he will almost certainly survive his cancer for 10 years+, and there are very many options available to him.

 

Edited by member 05 Sep 2026 at 08:22  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 05 Sep 2026 at 10:05

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
I am from Yorkshire and recently had focal therapy by Nanoknife in London aged 55.

Hello, mate.

Thanks for that excellent post. We don't seem to have may lads on here that have experience of high focused treatments. If you don't mind, I'll copy it and paste it in future conversations about this type of subject.

It seems to me, although a lot of the 'top men' and more specialised treatments are based in London, that the north is gradually catching up. Recently research is/was being done in Leeds.

The PART study is exploring a new approach called Partial Ablation, which only treats the affected side of the prostate. By using advanced techniques such as High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) and Irreversible Electroporation (IRE or NanoKnife), the trial aims to determine whether this method can effectively treat cancer while better preserving normal continence and sexual function. Researchers think that Partial Ablation will lead to fewer side effects compared to traditional radical treatments.

https://www.leedsth.nhs.uk/news/groundbreaking-prostate-cancer-trial-commences-at-leeds-teaching-hospitals-nhs-trust/

 

 
Forum Jump  
©2026 Prostate Cancer UK