Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
Piers I have come round to that way of thinking having started this game "just wanting it out".
I am starting to form the option that if salvage RT is going to work it will do so regardless of HRT.
There is a prolific American doctor on Youtube, who has a lot of videos relating to all matters PCa. In one of them, he says "just wanting it out is absolutely the right decision for most cancers. PCa is not one of them, due to collateral damage considerations"
Before surgery, I consulted with a number of surgeons to gauge their opinion and was quite surprised by the lack of consideration given by some of them to QoL. One of the leading surgeons had (and may still have) the comment on his website "you don't actually need a prostate, unless you want to have children". Righty ho.
I am sceptical about ADT. I think there is plenty of research that points to it offering the greatest chance of a cure. But at what cost?
Always one for cynicism, I am also aware that two years of ADT puts you at least two years down the road before you find out whether EBRT has worked, by which time the onco involved is probably long forgotten!
I am wary about a temptation to make the data fit my preferred course of action. However, my view is increasingly that PCa is under diagnosed and over treated. With that in mind, and given my previous choices, it seems sensible to me that accepting a level of risk, in return for the fewest side effects, is the way to go.
I recognise that, if I take a super conservative course of action, I may put myself in a position of playing whack-a-mole with PCa for the rest of my life. But then, I don't know how long my life is going to be, and there are plenty of factors that may make it a relatively short one. Maintaining a good QoL is therefore of paramount importance.
I am seeing another onco in ten days and, providing he is happy to play ball, I am going to go for treating the visible recurrence only, no ADT.