Jake,
Responding responsibly (as a BC patient) to short bits taken from a pathology report is a tough task. Little words and phrases, and the order of words sometimes imparts meaning. Never have my own path reports made only clear, declarative statements; wiggle room seems to be part of my path reports. That said,
Nothing in your post would lead ME to wait a year and see if "there was a recurrence". "Mostly non-invasive" is not comforting at all; neither does the comment, "high grade present".
High grade indicates a greater likelihood of spread than low grade.
Again, it is impossible to draw any conclusion from bits of a pathology report - the sum of all the tests and findings need to be considered in making any decisions on health care - your doctor is the one to bring all the pieces together. Then, you have to decide what you want to do.
Faced with a similar situation, I sought a second opinion from a well regarded medical school hospital with a focus on bladder cancer. Then I changed doctors. For me it was the right decision.
Best,
Jack
