"After cross-over, PSA was reduced by more than 30% in 36% of those who had Xtandi-second vs only in 4% of those who had Zytiga-second"
If I had known about this info earlier, we would have gone with Zytiga first instead of Xtandi. Will it help to switch to Zytiga now? My father is at 3 years point, which is the average time many progress to hormone resistance. I have been reading to get an idea of what he can do after Xtandi. There're several options but I have doubt that they are suitable for a 90 years old.
Written by
TN1932
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
BAT, an experimental therapy, has some success in extending the usefulness of Xtandi. A doctor at Johns Hopkins may be willing to treat him per protocol.
Thank you TA for your quick response. I'll take time to go thru the info you provided. So there's no point to do any change now, is there? BAT is the top option on my mind after doing some researches. I couldn't find any doctor specializes in BAT in Southern California. Hopefully, the doctor at Johns Hopkins allows telephone or over the web appointment. Very excited about the second option you mentioned. You have no idea how gratefull I am to have you with your immense knowlege on this forum.
There are some probably unconstitutional laws about out-of-state telemedicine in many states. It may be a good idea when calling Johns Hopkins to lie and say you are visiting Maryland. They won't check your ISP.
"The second-generation antiandrogen, enzalutamide, demonstrated full or partial activation of eight mutant variants, while the structurally distinct and most recently approved darolutamide demonstrated significant activation in only one mutant at concentrations up to 25 µM [21], which identifies a sequencing opportunity for this drug in men with progressive CRPC with a gain-of-function mutation in the AR under selective pressure of first-line ARPIs."
Does it mean Darolutamide can be tried after Xtandi? or is it better to replace Xtandi with Darolutamide before becoming resistant?
Or just say you are in NJ - they won't check your ISP. It's a stupid law, and is probably unconstitutional (because of the commerce clause) if it is ever challenged.
My reply was meant to be more for the general audience than you. Many people don’t have a second home in Jersey that allows them to just go there to be within the service sphere of whatever doctor they’re trying to conduct business with.
EXPRESSVPN worked with Netflix last time I tried it, but it’s been a while since I tried.
Or just use Google, it’s not rocket science, they were able to find this site after all. Most VPNs are just plug and play by downloading an app, and will work for most situations where they’re not trying to rip off a movie streaming service.
Seems silly to outright dismiss it as an option because you aren’t sure users here can figure it out.
The gatekeepers are usually people with little technical expertise or initiative to check ISP. They only ask because it says to ask on some form they were given. Patients don't care and doctors don't care if it is in state.
Coincidentally, it was a doctor at MSK who thought it was a good idea to just lie about it. All parties benefit, so who would sue? That's been the problem in challenging the law- only those in-state who are harmed by it have standing. He shared this legal brief with me:
But who would enforce or challenge that? The state would never know. No one in any state gov't agency monitors telemedicine calls. Doctors make money, so there is nothing to motivate them to find out if the patient is in state. What would they do, report themselves? Patients are the ones seeking the visit, so they would never report it.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.