New study below.
Of little relevance to us, but it's interesting that:
"There was a 2% decrease in the odds of adverse pathology for each month of statin use among the men who progressed to radical prostatectomy while on active surveillance".
-Patrick
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/309...
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019 Apr 17. doi: 10.1038/s41391-019-0147-0. [Epub ahead of print]
Assessing the relationship between statin use and oncologic outcomes among men electing active surveillance for localized prostate cancer.
Nyame YA1, Wilkins L2, Greene DJ2, Ganesan V2, Dai C2, Almassi N2, Stephenson AJ2, Gong M2, Berglund R2, Klein EA2.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
This study aims to assess the effect of statin therapy on outcomes among men managed with active surveillance.
METHODS:
This is a retrospective cohort study evaluating 635 men managed with active surveillance from 2005 to 2015 at a large, academic medical center. The primary endpoints of analyses are disease reclassification (i.e., change in volume or grade of cancer on subsequent biopsies after diagnosis), progression to definitive therapy with curative intent (i.e., surgery or radiotherapy), and surveillance failure-defined as the development of either biochemical failure after definitive therapy, metastases, or prostate cancer-specific mortality-among statin and non-statin users. Secondary analyses were performed to assess the effect of statin use on outcomes among men who progressed to definitive treatment.
RESULTS:
Three hundred fifty-six (56.1%) patients in the cohort were on statin therapy at the initiation of surveillance. The median age was 66.7 and 63.3 years among statin and non-statin users, respectively. On univariate analysis, there were no differences in the rates of disease reclassification, progression to definitive treatment, and surveillance failure between the statin and non-statin users in the cohort (all p > 0.05). There was no difference in the rate of biochemical failure among men who progressed to definitive therapy when stratified by statin use (p = 0.89). Pathologic data were available for 105 men who progressed to radical prostatectomy while on surveillance at our institution. Duration of statin use (months) was inversely correlated with adverse pathology for radical prostatectomy on both univariate (OR: 0.99; 95% CI 0.98, 0.99; p = 0.03) and multivariate analysis (OR: 0.98; 95% CI 0.97, 0.99; p = 0.02).
CONCLUSION:
Statin use was not associated with any clinical benefit with regard to disease reclassification, progression to definitive treatment, or surveillance failure among men selecting active surveillance at our institution. There was a 2% decrease in the odds of adverse pathology for each month of statin use among the men who progressed to radical prostatectomy while on active surveillance, but it is unclear at this time if this association has any durable impact on surveillance outcomes among men with favorable risk prostate cancer.
PMID: 30996285 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-019-0147-0
Asking for my dad!!
Estrogen patch to improve quality of life
THIS IS NOT GOOD over 40 Liver Lesions 
