Getting a Second Opinion for Prostate Cancer From India

There is no real comparison — they serve different purposes. Orchidectomy is chosen for metastatic (stage 4) disease, such as a patient with multiple spinal metastases who cannot walk. Radical prostatectomy is chosen for patients whose expected lifespan is more than 10 years, who are fit for surgery, and who have organ-confined, locally advanced, or oligometastatic disease (one or two spots on PSMA PET). Orchidectomy is simply a form of androgen deprivation — nowadays we hardly do it routinely because injectable or oral androgen deprivation therapy is available; it's now used mainly for stage 4 disease.

On Doppler ultrasound, chronic prostatitis typically shows uniformly increased vascularity across the whole prostate, whereas prostate cancer shows increased vascularity at one specific point, such as a nodule. However, we don't rely on ultrasound alone to distinguish the two — it comes down to clinical judgement, PSA value, and age, since chronic prostatitis is a disease of younger, sexually active men in their 40s to early 50s, while prostate cancer is a disease of old age; I would be hesitant to diagnose chronic prostatitis in a 60-65 year old with a PSA of 10 and urinary symptoms — that points toward BPH with a suspicion of prostate cancer to rule out. On tumour lysis syndrome: yes, it can happen with any treatment — radiotherapy or chemotherapy — in any tumour, most often solid tumours; it is not specific to prostate cancer.

Yes, that's correct. Orchidectomy is a cost-effective, one-time procedure, and increasingly patients in developing countries are also getting health insurance that covers the ongoing medications, so when it comes to overall treatment, orchidectomy can even be considered superior in efficacy compared to injectable treatment, and there's no harm in doing it. However, losing a testicle is a point of real psychological impact for a man, so if a patient can afford it or the treatment is available, I would suggest androgen deprivation therapy via injections or medication as preferable — orchidectomy remains a well-suited procedure specifically for patients with stage 4 disease.

What you're describing is the androgen depletion syndrome — you have abolished testosterone, so the patient develops post-menopausal-type symptoms. In our practice, for patients who have undergone androgen deprivation, we educate them not to panic, start gabapentin and sometimes an anti-anxiety medication, and for central obesity and related issues advise calcium and vitamin D supplements, a high-protein, low-fat diet, regular exercise, and sunlight exposure, since bones become fragile and there is increased risk of coronary artery disease and hypertension. We sometimes also use denosumab if the patient is very incapacitated by hot flashes and sweating. You did the right thing for your patient — surgical castration is the most practical option where injectable androgen analogues or antagonists aren't reliably available.

False positivity of PSA is very common, so I would follow this patient regularly, first checking for infection. I would repeat the PSA after 6 weeks — if the high PSA was due to infection, a course of antibiotics should show a downward trend by then; if it doesn't trend down, you should have a high suspicion of prostate cancer. You can also check the free-to-total PSA ratio — if it's less than 25%, that supports the diagnosis. If the DRE is normal and there's no biopsy facility, you can follow the patient for a year and check PSA velocity — if it goes beyond 0.75 per year, refer to a centre with TRUS-guided biopsy or MRI facilities. With a PSA of 10-20, there is roughly a 10-30% chance of harbouring prostate cancer, so this should be investigated further rather than dismissed.

Referring doctors can share case files and reports through a structured pathway, sometimes called an online OPD or connect clinic model, so the case can be reviewed remotely by the treating team in India.

Referring doctors first assess whether a case meets the complexity criteria that warrant specialist input before relevant reports are shared for remote review.

A video consultation can be arranged between the specialist in India and the patient, with the local doctor invited to join, so the patient benefits from combined expertise without needing to travel unnecessarily.

It allows patients to access expert guidance before committing to travel, helping ensure a visit is genuinely warranted while the local doctor remains involved in ongoing care.