Intermittent ADT

[Guest guest]

Is everyone aware of the latest comparison of continuous and intermittent ADT? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120603093539.htmThere seem to be conflicting views on whether those of us on IADT should make a change. What do other people think? The argument for staying on IADT would be that quality of life is improved.Bob

[Guest guest]

Crozier Data Consultancy wrote:

> Is everyone aware of the latest comparison of continuous and

> intermittent ADT?

> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120603093539.htm

>

> There seem to be conflicting views on whether those of us on

> IADT should make a change. What do other people think? The

> argument for staying on IADT would be that quality of life is

> improved.

Bob,

I found that study confusing.  The well known medical oncologists

/ prostate cancer specialists Strum and Liebowitz have both said

that men should be on ADT for one year and reach a very low PSA

value (Liebowitz wanted .05) before trying intermittent therapy.

But the study only kept men on ADT for 7 months and only required

a PSA drop to 4.0 - 80 times greater than Dr. Liebowitz'

protocol.

I won't argue that the study is wrong.  It is based on a large

enough sample of men that we would expect its results to be

valid.  But I'm not sure that the results apply to men who have

had very different intermittent protocols.  It may merely mean

that Strum and Liebowitz are right and that men whose PSA levels

never got very low should not be put on intermittent therapy.

One of the big problems with statistical studies like these is

that, while they may provide statistically valid results, they

don't necessarily come with any useful interpretation.  Why, one

must ask, did earlier studies show at least equal outcomes for

IHT?  Why is this study's outcome different?

Personally, I'd still be inclined to follow an intermittent

therapy program if I could meet the criteria established by Strum

and Liebowitz.  I'd also use all possible light weight therapies

in the " off " periods in order to hold back the rise of PSA.

These might include mediterranean diet, pomegranate extract,

resveratrol, maybe asprin, and probably dutasteride.  And I'd get

back on ADT at some reasonable level (I didn't see what level the

trial used in the article.)

For myself, and recognizing my total lack of qualifications to

advise others, I'd be inclined to say that I'm not sure that I

would forego intermittent therapy as a result of this study.

    Alan

[Guest guest]

Thanks, . That’s really helpful.Bob From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of NowakSent: 12 June 2012 03:08To: ProstateCancerSupport Subject: Re: Intermittent ADT I wrote a personal response to this question on the Advanced Prostate Cancer Blog (www.advancedprostatecancer.net) on June 7. In the post I gave 5 points for my deciding to stay on intermittent therapy despite the recent ASCO presentation. You can read the post at:My Current Personal Take on Intermittent Hormone Therapy for Prostate Cancer Is everyone aware of the latest comparison of continuous and intermittent ADT? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120603093539.htmThere seem to be conflicting views on whether those of us on IADT should make a change. What do other people think? The argument for staying on IADT would be that quality of life is improved.Bob -- T Nowak, MA, MSWDirector for Advocacy and Advanced Prostate Cancer Programs, Malecare Inc. Men Fighting Cancer, TogetherSurvivor - Recurrent Prostate, Thyroid, Melanoma and Renal CancersSpeaker, Advocate and Educatorwww.advancedprostatecancer.net - A blog about advanced and recurrent prostate cancerwww.malecare.org - information and support about prostate cancerhttp://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/advancedprostatecancer/ - an online support group for men and their families diagnosed with advanced and recurrent prostate cancer