I watched a video posted by PCRI recently on YouTube. In the video entitled "Treating micro-metastatic disease", Dr Mark Scholz mentioned that undergoing one year of ADT is sufficient post radiation. Thereafter just monitor the PSA for any rise, and use PSMA PET scan to locate any cancer and to radiate whatever spots of cancer that are found.This May I will reach the one year mark of my ADT and seriously considering stopping the ADT because of the side effects... fatigue, muscle loss, forgetfulness, loss of libido, etc.
What do you guys think?
Written by
John347
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Dont stop your ADT. I had radiation and 30 months of ADT. All was ok and the consultant stopped the ADT early (was supposed to run 36 months). After 12 months off ADT my PSA started to rise continuously from 0.04 until above 4 they gave me a psa pet/ct scan which showed widespread mets above and below my diaphragm. Was then given 6 rounds of Docitaxel. If you get that you will think nothing about your ADT. Play it safe. Not worth taking risks you don't need to take.
I’m am very surprised your doc allowed your PSA to rise above 4! Especially since you can get an effective PSMA scan at PSA levels between 0.5 and 1.0. Allowing you PSA to get to 4+ could have contributed greatly to the resulting wide spread Mets.
Im in the UK. Its the NHS guidelines here or it was at that time. Nothing I could do except wait & watch it climb and pray I wouldn't have to wait years to get a scan. Sadly we, in the UK, are all in the same sinking ship.
I Couldn’t stand the ADT so eventually got off after 7 mo and in the sixth month starting taking ivermectin and psa has dropped consistently (1.95 - .65) for over a year now. People are hung up on the ADT but I believe the sooner one can get off the better as you mentioned w the detrimental side effects, especially the one pertaining to the heart. Most of the time ADT only works for 2️⃣ years then the cancer cells find a way to circumvent and come back with a vengeance, more virulent than ever n harder to kill. Amazingly though when they become hormone (castrate) resistant the ivermectin has shown to reverse this and become hormone sensitive again, so for those people that are adamant about using ADT they still can. Really like Dr Scholz and he tries to keep the audience informed w the latest therapies n treatments… good luck as there are many ways to fight this dreaded disease..😊😇😇😎
The way you and others have been misinformed is a good reason to not get info from youtube videos. It is often misinformation that you can't correct because sources are lacking.
The duration of adjuvant ADT depends on the type of radiation and the risk category.
I read the PREDICT trial criteria for participation and it said no bone metastasis. Why do you think they would exclude this? Is it that bone metastasis is too high risk?
When there are bone metastases, it is no longer high risk localized ± pelvic lymph nodes prostate cancer (which is what the PREDICT trial is trying to cure), it is newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer.
For newly diagnosed metastatic PCa, triplet therapy is the standard of care with prostate debulking if there are 3 or fewer bone metastases. Slowing progression is the goal.
I think my son falls into the category of high risk localized pelvic lymph node cancer. Do you have information or a link to the PREDICT trial I can read and send to him? Thanks so much as always.
It was OK until he started talking about recurrent patients about halfway in. At that point he started substituting his own anecdotal experience for trial data. It is pure nonsense that he would never write in a peer-reviewed journal article. It demonstrates why patients should never take advice from youtube videos (unless they are linked to actual trial data). It sounds true, but it is really just poorly reinforced opinion.
Dr Scholz is a well respected oncologist with more than 30 years experience treating prostate cancer patients. I have watched scores of his videos since my diagnosis nearly two years ago and have learnt a lot.It seems he has kept abreast of the latest developments in the field of prostate cancer research. If he were my personal oncologist, should I reject his advice because he is not able to back up his opinion with reference to peer reviewed journal articles?
I have met and like him. But even he can say unsubstantiated misinformation on a video, which is my point. It seems from that video, that he has not kept abreast of the latest developments. He has a very large practice that he expands by marketing to patients and he is not hold a position with a teaching hospital, where he would be required to do innovate research and publish about it. Perhaps he doesn't have time to keep up. I have never seen him present to his peers at ASCO or similar oncologist gatherings. That is where you see the true stars of the field. When you say "well-respected" - by whom? The patients he markets himself to?
"If he were my personal oncologist, should I reject his advice because he is not able to back up his opinion with reference to peer reviewed journal articles?" Yes! The good ones can, and will make clear that when they are trying something experimental, that it is experimental.
Put yourself in an oncologist's shoes for a second. All day you see patients you cannot cure. You probably went into the practice because you are highly empathetic. You see a lot of patients and spouses break out in tears and are very anxious. There is a great temptation to make unfounded claims, to go beyond the science. I think a doctor has to respect his patients enough to trust them with the truth. Videos remove that face-to-face interaction, which is vitally important. One can say anything on a video - no one (but me, apparently) will challenge unfounded assertions.
I don't think what he is proposing to his patients is anything unusual or "experimental". He is merely proposing that after 6 months or 1 year of ADT, the patient should monitor his PSA with blood tests every 3 or 6 months, and if there is a significant rise, to do a PSMA PET scan to locate any mets in the body and to radiate them.
His main concern seems to be maximizing the quality of life of the patients.... while the peer reviewed articles you cited seem to focus on maximizing the length of life of the patients.
You are advocating for a longer duration of ADT of at least 2 years. Ironically this could shorten the life span of the patients....
"Numerous studies have found increased incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, arrhythmia, hypertension, and sudden cardiac death (SCD) in men receiving ADT. Cardiovascular disease is already the second leading cause of death in men with prostate cancer."
I will provide a link for the article where the above quote is taken from below...
What he advocates in that video is replacing hormone therapy with MDT to PSMA-identified metastases. There are no data showing it doesn't harm survival. We know ADT improves survival, and forgoing it is risky.
Certainly, there are QOL and minor health risks to ADT. And these should be discussed with each patient. But to broadly recommend an unproven protocol is unconscionable.
Here is what has been proven to work in recurrent patients:
As you see, it involves hormone therapy intensification for a brief time. Replacing it with his imaginary solution of MDT may cause harm. If a patient wants to do MDT in addition to following a proven protocol, there is no harm.
I tend to agree with you, and specially in USA the PET CT PSMA records are not very long. In the countries wuere it has been routinelly used for the last years, the Doctors are much more confident at reducing ADT periods with frecuent PET scans mnonityoring the development of mets. Actually there is a new trend of trying to use L177 earlier on.
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.
When to start ADT for metastatic disease
PTEN loss is not a determinant of time to castration-resistance following androgen-deprivation therapy in prostate cancer
Supplements for metastatic prostate cancer 
