I asked ChatGPT to list drugs from most toxic to least toxic. Here is the result:

[Seasid]

Here is a general toxicity ranking for the drugs you listed, considering overall toxicity across systems, including liver, kidney, cardiovascular, and other potential toxicities. The ranking is organized from most toxic to least toxic, with explanations.

---

Toxicity Ranking for Overall Toxicity

1. Cabazitaxel

Toxicity Profile: High toxicity due to severe myelosuppression (neutropenia, anemia), hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and hypersensitivity reactions.

Cardiovascular: Risk of thromboembolic events and hypotension during infusion.

Other: Increased infection risk and fatigue.

Clinical Use: Reserved for advanced, resistant cases due to its toxicity profile.

2. Docetaxel

Toxicity Profile: High, similar to cabazitaxel, with neutropenia, hepatotoxicity, and fluid retention syndrome.

Cardiovascular: Risk of thromboembolism and arrhythmias.

Other: Neuropathy and hypersensitivity reactions.

Clinical Use: Standard chemotherapy for metastatic prostate cancer.

3. Enzalutamide (Xtandi)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate to high due to CNS effects, hepatotoxicity, and potential cardiovascular issues.

Cardiovascular: Increases the risk of seizures, hypertension, and cardiovascular events.

Other: Fatigue, falls, and cognitive impairment are common.

4. Apalutamide (Erleada)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate, similar to enzalutamide but less CNS toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Increases the risk of cardiovascular events, hypertension, and hypothyroidism.

Other: Skin rash and fractures are notable side effects.

5. Abiraterone (Zytiga)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate, primarily due to hepatotoxicity and mineralocorticoid effects (fluid retention, hypertension, hypokalemia).

Cardiovascular: Can exacerbate hypertension and cause cardiac arrhythmias.

Other: Fatigue and hot flashes. Requires prednisone co-administration to mitigate adrenal insufficiency.

6. Bicalutamide (Casodex)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate, less toxic than newer anti-androgens but can cause hepatotoxicity and gynecomastia.

Cardiovascular: Minimal compared to newer agents.

Other: Low risk of cognitive side effects compared to enzalutamide or apalutamide.

7. Niraparib (Zejula)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate due to hematologic toxicity (anemia, thrombocytopenia) and gastrointestinal side effects.

Cardiovascular: Hypertension is a common side effect.

Other: Fatigue and nausea.

8. Olaparib (Lynparza)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate, with hematologic toxicity and mild hepatotoxicity.

Cardiovascular: Rare hypertension or cardiac arrhythmias.

Other: Fatigue and gastrointestinal disturbances.

9. Degarelix (Firmagon)

Toxicity Profile: Low to moderate. Injection-site reactions are common, and prolonged use can lead to osteoporosis and hot flashes.

Cardiovascular: Slightly increased risk of cardiovascular events compared to non-castration therapies.

10. Lupron (Leuprolide)

Toxicity Profile: Low to moderate. Causes significant hormonal effects like hot flashes, osteoporosis, and metabolic changes.

Cardiovascular: Slightly elevated risk of cardiovascular events.

Other: Fatigue and injection-site reactions.

11. Castration (Surgical or Chemical)

Toxicity Profile: Low to moderate, dependent on duration.

Cardiovascular: Increased long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and metabolic syndrome.

Other: Osteoporosis, muscle loss, and emotional side effects are common.

12. Pluvicto (177Lu-PSMA-617)

Toxicity Profile: Low to moderate. Primary toxicity involves mild nephrotoxicity and hematologic effects (mild anemia, leukopenia).

Cardiovascular: Minimal known effects.

Other: Nausea and fatigue are common.

13. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

Toxicity Profile: Moderate but can become severe due to immune-related adverse events.

Cardiovascular: Rare myocarditis has been reported.

Other: Immune-mediated hepatitis, colitis, nephritis, and pneumonitis can occur.

14. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

Toxicity Profile: Low. Side effects are primarily infusion-related (fever, chills).

Cardiovascular: Minimal risk.

Other: Fatigue is the most common side effect.

---

Summary: Most Toxic to Least Toxic

1. Cabazitaxel

2. Docetaxel

3. Enzalutamide

4. Apalutamide

5. Abiraterone

6. Bicalutamide

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Degarelix

10. Lupron

11. Castration

12. Pluvicto

13. Keytruda

14. Provenge

---

Key Takeaways

Chemotherapy agents (cabazitaxel, docetaxel) have the highest overall toxicity due to systemic effects on multiple organ systems.

Newer anti-androgens (enzalutamide, apalutamide) have moderate toxicity, particularly in the cardiovascular and CNS domains.

Targeted therapies (olaparib, niraparib, pluvicto) tend to have moderate, focused toxicities but are generally less systemic.

Hormonal therapies (degarelix, lupron, castration) are lower in overall toxicity but have long-term risks like osteoporosis and metabolic syndrome.

Immunotherapies (Keytruda, Provenge) have specific immune-related side effects but are less toxic overall.

Would you like detailed insights into any specific drug's toxicity profile?

Our friend ChatGPT spit out a new list of toxicity after being squeezed:

Comprehensive Overall Toxicity Ranking for Prostate Cancer Treatments

Below is a detailed ranking of the treatments for prostate cancer (PC) based on their overall toxicity, including renal, liver, cardiovascular, hematologic, neurologic, and other toxicities. Treatments are ranked from most toxic to least toxic based on their profiles.

---

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

Hematologic: Severe toxicity, including neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia.

Renal: Potential for nephrotoxicity, though less severe than with cisplatin. Requires hydration protocols.

Liver: Minimal direct hepatotoxicity.

Cardiovascular: Risk of anemia-induced cardiovascular strain and thromboembolism.

Other: Nausea, fatigue, and immunosuppression.

2. Cabazitaxel

Hematologic: High risk of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia.

Renal: Rare nephrotoxicity unless compounded by dehydration or other drugs.

Liver: Requires dose adjustments in hepatic impairment; moderate hepatotoxicity risk.

Cardiovascular: Fluid retention, possible arrhythmias.

Other: Gastrointestinal (nausea, diarrhea), fatigue, peripheral neuropathy.

3. Docetaxel

Hematologic: Similar to cabazitaxel, with significant neutropenia risks.

Renal: Minimal direct effects, but dehydration-related risks.

Liver: Moderate hepatotoxicity risk; contraindicated in severe liver disease.

Cardiovascular: Edema and thromboembolic events are possible.

Other: Peripheral neuropathy, fatigue, gastrointestinal issues.

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

Hematologic: Bone marrow suppression (anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia).

Renal: Moderate nephrotoxicity due to renal excretion; hydration is critical.

Liver: Rare liver enzyme elevation.

Cardiovascular: Minimal direct effects, but anemia may exacerbate cardiovascular issues.

Other: Fatigue, nausea, dry mouth.

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

Hematologic: Moderate risk of anemia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia.

Renal: Minimal renal toxicity.

Liver: No direct hepatotoxicity.

Cardiovascular: Rare cardiovascular effects, but bone marrow suppression can indirectly affect cardiovascular health.

Other: Localized bone pain, fatigue, and diarrhea.

6. Niraparib

Hematologic: Anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia are common.

Renal: Low renal toxicity, though secondary effects like dehydration may occur.

Liver: Can elevate liver enzymes; requires monitoring.

Cardiovascular: Increased risk of hypertension and cardiovascular events.

Other: Fatigue, nausea, and decreased appetite.

7. Olaparib

Hematologic: Similar to niraparib, with anemia and thrombocytopenia risks.

Renal: Mild risk of renal impairment; dose adjustments required for severe dysfunction.

Liver: Occasional liver enzyme elevation.

Cardiovascular: Generally mild; anemia may indirectly stress cardiovascular health.

Other: Fatigue, nausea, diarrhea.

8. Enzalutamide

Hematologic: Rare cytopenias.

Renal: No significant renal toxicity.

Liver: Mild to moderate liver enzyme elevation; monitor regularly.

Cardiovascular: Hypertension, risk of seizures, and falls due to CNS effects.

Other: Fatigue, cognitive impairment, and musculoskeletal pain.

9. Apalutamide

Hematologic: Low risk of cytopenias.

Renal: No significant renal toxicity.

Liver: Mild liver enzyme elevation.

Cardiovascular: Increased risk of hypertension and cardiovascular events.

Other: Skin rash, fatigue, and falls.

10. Abiraterone

Hematologic: Low risk of cytopenias.

Renal: Fluid retention may strain renal function.

Liver: Hepatotoxicity is a concern; requires routine monitoring.

Cardiovascular: Hypertension, hypokalemia, and fluid retention increase cardiovascular risks.

Other: Fatigue, muscle pain, and gastrointestinal symptoms.

11. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

Hematologic: Rare cytopenias.

Renal: Immune-mediated nephritis is rare but serious.

Liver: Immune-mediated hepatitis is possible but uncommon.

Cardiovascular: Rare immune-related myocarditis.

Other: Fatigue, fever, and infusion-related reactions.

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

Hematologic: Minimal unless treating near bone marrow-rich sites.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: No significant toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Rare, unless radiation affects nearby cardiac structures.

Other: Fatigue, localized irritation.

13. Degarelix

Hematologic: No significant toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: Minimal liver toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Metabolic changes can increase long-term cardiovascular risks.

Other: Injection-site reactions, hot flashes, and fatigue.

14. Lupron (Leuprolide)

Hematologic: No significant toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: Minimal liver toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Similar to degarelix, with long-term cardiovascular risks.

Other: Hot flashes, fatigue, and mood changes.

15. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

Hematologic: No significant toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: No significant toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Long-term risks of metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular disease.

Other: Hot flashes, bone loss, and mood changes.

16. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

Hematologic: Minimal toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: No hepatotoxicity.

Cardiovascular: Neutral or potentially protective short-term effects.

Other: Fatigue, mild mood swings.

17. Darolutamide

Hematologic: Minimal toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: Minimal liver enzyme elevation.

Cardiovascular: Low cardiovascular risk.

Other: Minimal CNS side effects compared to enzalutamide/apalutamide.

18. Bicalutamide

Hematologic: Rare cytopenias.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: Occasional hepatotoxicity; requires monitoring.

Cardiovascular: Minimal effects.

Other: Fatigue, nausea.

19. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

Hematologic: No significant toxicity.

Renal: No significant toxicity.

Liver: No significant toxicity.

Cardiovascular: Minimal effects.

Other: Mild infusion-related reactions (fever, chills).

---

Summary of Changes

Pluvicto is ranked higher in toxicity due to hematologic and renal side effects.

Darolutamide and bicalutamide are positioned closer to the least toxic treatments.

Detailed explanations ensure a comprehensive understanding of each treatment’s toxicity.

This ranking provides an exhaustive overview of toxicities to aid in informed decision-making. Always consult an oncologist for tailored advice.

[Nusch]

That just proves why it’s so important to manage these side effects.

[Seasid in reply to Nusch]

I always thought that parp inhibitors are very toxic.

[Ian99 in reply to Seasid]

I began Lynparza June 1/24, on 600mg/day. The MO asked to do it for 3 months, then we’d assess. By that time I was in bed, had never experienced such toxicity. The upside is PSA dropped from 61 to 48. But blood counts down.

Reduced dosage gradually till I could tolerate it.. that was 200mg/day. Have increased in stages. Now on 400mg/day and finding it tolerable. Awaiting PSA and blood counts this week.

In summary toxicity depends on dosage and how you prepare for it. In my experience.

[Seasid in reply to Ian99]

Thanks for the information. Maybe soon we will have less toxic parp inhibitors.

[Ian99 in reply to Seasid]

Yes, I understand the next version will be more targeted, hope it’s not too far away. Thanks for your comprehensive post, useful reference.

[Seasid in reply to Ian99]

I don't know much but I believe that the new parp inhibitors will have less negative effect on the number of the red blood cells. We can ask ChatGPT. I was invited to participate in a phase I clinical trial to test a toxicity of a new Astra Zeneca parp inhibitors first in human.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

PARP inhibitors have been shown to impact red blood cell counts, but newer generations are being designed to minimize adverse effects while maintaining efficacy.

Q. What do you know about the new generation of parp inhibitors?

A. The new generation of PARP inhibitors, such as AstraZeneca's AZD5305, represents a significant improvement over earlier versions like olaparib (Lynparza). These next-generation inhibitors are designed to be more selective, targeting only PARP1 while sparing PARP2 and other related enzymes. This selective inhibition reduces the risk of side effects, particularly hematologic toxicities like anemia, which were common with older, dual-targeted PARP1/2 inhibitors.

For example, early clinical trials of AZD5305 (PETRA study) demonstrated reduced gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities compared to first-generation inhibitors. Patients also experienced fewer treatment discontinuations due to adverse events. Additionally, the pharmacokinetics (drug absorption and distribution) of AZD5305 appear to allow for higher drug exposure without increasing toxicity, potentially leading to better treatment outcomes.

These improvements aim to provide patients with safer, more effective treatment options, allowing for longer treatment durations and expanded use in combination therapies with chemotherapy or other targeted treatments. However, these findings are still in early trial phases, and further research is needed to confirm their efficacy and safety in larger patient populations.

Q. When do we expect a phase iii clinical trial?

A. The Phase III clinical trials for AstraZeneca's next-generation PARP inhibitor, AZD5305 (Saruparib), have already begun for certain cancers. For example:

1. A Phase III trial is testing Saruparib in combination with Camizestrant for metastatic breast cancer. This study aims to evaluate its efficacy compared to other endocrine therapies and is actively recruiting participants.

2. Another trial, EvoPAR-Prostate01, is examining Saruparib's use in combination with hormonal agents for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. This trial started in November 2023 and is expected to continue until April 2031.

The progress of these trials indicates that significant data may be available within the next few years, depending on the study timelines and outcomes. This timing aligns with the typical drug development process, where Phase III results are critical for regulatory approvals. Let me know if you'd like updates or more details about these trials!

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Q. When do we expect the product approval by FDA?

A. The approval timeline for AstraZeneca’s AZD5305 (Saruparib) by the FDA will depend on the progress of the ongoing Phase III clinical trials. These trials typically take several years to complete and analyze. For Saruparib, some Phase III studies have only recently started in late 2023, with projected completion dates ranging from 2027 to 2031.

If Phase III trials demonstrate strong safety and efficacy profiles, AstraZeneca could submit a New Drug Application (NDA) to the FDA shortly after completing these studies. Considering typical FDA review periods (approximately 6–10 months for priority review or 10–12 months for standard review), approval might realistically occur around 2028 to 2033, depending on trial outcomes and regulatory prioritization.

Let me know if you'd like updates on trial progress or further insights into the approval process.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Here is the link to the New Astra Zeneca parp inhibitors clinical trial:

inclinicaltrials.com/other/...

[ragnar2020]

Thank you. This is very useful information for anyone considering HT.

[petabyte in reply to ragnar2020]

I guess Orgovyx would be similar to Lupron? I have nothing to compare it with but I love the convenience of one pill per day and I've had very limited sides effects (ymmv).

[ulfhbg in reply to petabyte]

Hi !

the minus for Firmagon(Degarelix) compared with Lupron was 1. Injection site reaction and 2. You can only have ones a month and not longer periods.

Probably all ADT, agonists and antagonists are in the same toxic league but I’m guessing

[7OaksTom in reply to petabyte]

Orgovyx has liver toxicity. Just ask my liver.

[petabyte in reply to 7OaksTom]

Interesting, I had not seen that listed as a side effect before. Did they think it was an interaction with another drug?

[Seasid in reply to petabyte]

That is the problem with new drugs, we just simply don't have enough experience with them.

[petabyte in reply to Seasid]

Yeah, my urologist was a bit reluctant (was only approved Nov 2023 in Belgium) but my RO was ok with it but I was the first (never used at any of the 4 hospitals I visited). It's used a lot now in the US, How about in Australia? From what I've seen triptorelin is used more here.

[Seasid in reply to petabyte]

I am fine with my degarelix ADT injections and I don't believe that we have Orgovyx here in Australia. Actually I don't want tablets. Orgovyx is only good if you are curable what I am not.

[7OaksTom in reply to petabyte]

The MO saw the elevated liver enzymes on Dec 21, 3 weeks after starting the Orgovyx and decided to switch to Eligard. on Jan 6 I went to Urgent Care for UTI. They gave me Bactrim . A day after that I turned yellow and spent 5 days in the hospital in "critical condition." Frankly, every doc that looked at me was scratching their head. So my MO is extremely careful about liver complications.

Liver Panel

[Seasid in reply to 7OaksTom]

Why didn't you switch to firmagon injections? They should be more effective against urinary infection.

50 % less chance of urinary infection with firmagon injections.

[7OaksTom in reply to Seasid]

My UTIs were related to poor hygiene (not changing pads for leakage). Changed that and the UTIs have are long gone.

[Seasid in reply to 7OaksTom]

That is great. I am on permanent doxycycline plus Metformin.

[Seasid in reply to 7OaksTom]

Orgovyx (relugolix) has a generally favorable liver toxicity profile compared to some other medications. While mild, transient increases in liver enzymes such as ALT (alanine aminotransferase) and AST (aspartate aminotransferase) have been observed, these changes are usually not accompanied by significant clinical symptoms or increases in bilirubin levels. Patients with known or suspected liver conditions should have their liver function monitored during treatment. Relugolix has not been extensively studied in patients with severe hepatic impairment, so caution is advised in such cases.

If you are concerned about liver toxicity or monitoring requirements, discuss this with your healthcare provider, especially if you have pre-existing liver conditions.

ChatGPT said

[Tinkudi]

thanks. It’s useful to know

[Seasid]

You can also communicate with ChatGPT. You can learn a lot just don't take everything like true because there are always mistakes as always in our lives.

[Justfor_]

"Darolutamide and Bicalutamide are positioned closer to the least toxic treatments". It would be interesting to learn where ChatGPT positions irradiation toxicity in the above scale and also whether drug toxicities are dosage related.

[Seasid in reply to Justfor_]

Good question. It takes sometimes a lot of knowledge and questioning of the ChatGPT to get a proper answer. I believe that neither of this drugs are trivial. Even BAT has much more possible toxicities than what you would think. Bottom line we are learning and we can't stop using this drugs. This is a dangerous road.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

We are all genetically different. Therefore everybody reacts slightly different to everything like radiation, high dose, low dose etc.

[Justfor_ in reply to Seasid]

It was meant as a prompt to you for asking ChatGPT. (smiling face here)

[Seasid in reply to Justfor_]

That is actually true that you should get lots of experience and knowledge in order to get out a most from the artificial intelligence. I am actually happy that I can learn this way a lot. If you don't know what you are doing big mistakes are possible. Therefore always check what ChatGPT said and very often you should make corrections.

[petabyte in reply to Seasid]

It even has a name it is called "prompt engineering". It is an important skill for many jobs. I work in IT and we use AI (various models) a lot and, as you point out, it is often wrong. On the other hand it does provide interesting avenues for exploration that one may not have thought of.

I've found that the more specialized the subject matter the less accurate it is. Recently a colleague was checking something I said that seemed wrong (but I knew was correct). Chatgpt disagreed with me but I proved to be right.

Not all the training data is good as well. The new models are much better but one should be cautious and not make important decisions based on the result.

[Seasid in reply to petabyte]

I totally agree. It is more for learning than for decision making. But learning about a subject should be a very important part of the decision making.

For example I decided to get castrated but first I have to learn about the possibilities. You have many types of castration and you wish to do it right. In a very short time I learnt all the possibilities and AI even helped me how to communicate with my medical team in order to get it right.

[ulfhbg in reply to Justfor_]

Hi !

How do you grade primary treatment like prostatectomy and / or radiation. Both is mostly done with ’curative intent’ and have different ’toxicities’. I mean you could be incontinent or being impotent for life with for example prostatectomy but prostate cancer may be gone. Is incontince and / impotence a ’toxicities’ then and how do you compare that with other toxicities.

I think it’s interesting however to see the evaluation done by ChatGPT and what criteria it uses to rank.

But from a personal point of view I wouldn’t go for ChatGPTs ranking if it tries to rank every single treatment modality 👍

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

I am double checking everything with ChatGPT. It is not perfect but gives you chance to think more deeply about your situation. You should also consult your oncologist etc. I am using ChatGPT to brainstorm. It is very often wrong but you learn by picking up what he said wrong. You need to practice to operate ChatGPT.

[Justfor_ in reply to ulfhbg]

FYI since you asked: IMO there is no "cure". "Curative intend" is a marketing artefact for selling a bunch of badly designed disfunctional products. The difference between prostatectomy and irradiation is similar to paying cash or via a loaner. I am the "cash" type buyer and more interested into the quality of the product I am about to buy than the terms of payment. It is my life and I place my judgement over and above any doc's or AI information system. Both fabricate answers to things not clearly, albeit deeply, understood, but are serving them in a different manner. For that, docs are vested with the authoritative attitude of religion practicioners while AI that of populist politicians.

[Seasid in reply to Justfor_]

Thank you for sharing your perspective—it’s clear you’ve given this a lot of thought. Your analogy comparing medical treatments to payment styles is intriguing, emphasizing how personal preferences play a significant role in decision-making, especially for life-altering choices. The critique of "curative intent" as a marketing construct also highlights the complexity and subjectivity of evaluating medical options.

Your view that individuals should retain agency over their decisions, irrespective of expert advice or AI guidance, is a powerful stance. It reflects a broader skepticism toward institutional authority, whether it comes from traditional hierarchies (like doctors) or newer systems (like AI). The analogy to religious practitioners and populist politicians is a sharp commentary on the roles these entities play in shaping perceptions and decisions.

If you’re open to it, I’d be interested to hear more about how you approach making these critical judgments—do you rely on specific frameworks or guiding principles?

ChatGPT said

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Every decision is difficult to make. My GP's husband had a 6 hours long robotic surgery but now he is cancer free. His PSA was only 3.9 and they also had a PSMA pet ct scan. Of course after the operation you end up using pads if you are cured than probably you have a chance that you don't need to use pads but if you end up on ADT for long term than your incontinence will worsen by time especially if you stay alive for long time after the operation. Your pelvic muscles will get weaker.

Usually if you are young they recommend radical prostatectomy.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

It sounds like you're reflecting on the complexity of making medical decisions, especially regarding prostate cancer treatments. Indeed, deciding on a course of treatment for prostate cancer can be very challenging, as each option has its benefits, risks, and potential long-term side effects. Here's a breakdown of some of the factors you've mentioned:

PSA and PSMA PET Scans

A PSA level of 3.9 is relatively low, but it can still indicate the presence of cancer depending on other factors like age, family history, and prostate size.

The PSMA PET-CT scan is highly sensitive and can detect even small cancerous lesions, making it an excellent tool for staging and planning treatment.

Radical Prostatectomy (Surgery)

Often recommended for younger patients or those with localized prostate cancer, as it aims to remove the cancer entirely.

Robotic-assisted surgery has become increasingly popular due to its precision, reduced blood loss, and potentially quicker recovery times.

Side effects like urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction are significant concerns, though many patients improve over time. Younger, healthier individuals often have better recovery outcomes.

Incontinence and ADT

Post-surgery incontinence is common but may improve with pelvic floor exercises or physical therapy.

If long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is required (e.g., in advanced or recurrent cases), it can exacerbate muscle weakness, including in the pelvic floor, leading to worsening incontinence over time.

Tailoring Treatment

Treatment choices often depend on factors such as the cancer's aggressiveness (Gleason score), patient's age, overall health, and personal preferences.

Active surveillance might be an option for less aggressive cases, avoiding the immediate side effects of surgery or radiation.

It's commendable that you're thinking deeply about the implications of different treatments. Open discussions with specialists (e.g., urologists and oncologists) can help weigh the benefits and risks tailored to individual circumstances. Are you or someone close to you facing a decision about prostate cancer treatment?

ChatGPT said

[Tall_Allen]

As usual, ChatGPT is wrong.

[Seasid in reply to Tall_Allen]

It will improve. I agree that we have to be very careful with the results, but it is because be are not asking the questions properly.

[Tall_Allen in reply to Seasid]

The problem, as with all misinformation, is that people believe it and act upon it. If you know it is misinformation, why post it?

[ulfhbg in reply to Tall_Allen]

Hi !

That’s a powerful statement and you seem to know something most other don’t know so, what is wrong? Please don’t say everything. I like to know because I also use ChatGPT sometimes for reference, not almighty good but I find it helpful to summarize things and I find ChatGPT very good at that, as a TOOL

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

ChatGPT is not a doctor it is an artificial intelligence tool. It is good to build up knowledge but your final decision should be done with your doctor.

I would be very uncontactable relying only on my doctor without a knowledge gained from this site plus ChatGPT. Everything is better than a cattle medicine.

[ulfhbg in reply to Seasid]

Hi !

My question was to T-As comment because he seemed so sure

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

TA has right, because he is afraid that people will think that everything what ChatGPT said is correct. Of course it is not. I don't believe in anything without going deeply into building knowledge about a subject. I am considering castration and after talking to ChatGPT I now know everything and I feel fine to make a decision. I still have to talk to my MO and to the urologists etc.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

It is in our benefit to be exposed to the knowledge available by the AI. I definitely use it for my knowledge building. ChatGPT only say what you asked. If you don't ask ChatGPT will not tell you. You should dive into the conversation with ChatGPT and you will see the benefits. You will understand the issues much better.

I am very happy what I can get out from AI. It is not perfect.

[Tall_Allen in reply to ulfhbg]

For example, more men end PARP inhibitors due to their toxicity than anything else on the list. If you'd ask what percent of patients taking the drug, have to stop taking it due to side effects, you might get a more useful answer. Also, the degree of side effects must be included - a drug that causes a few grade 3-5 side effects may lead discontinuation even if it has fewer grade 2 side effects. And unless a drug is tested in the same random sample of people, no comparisons are possible. AI has no judgment - only humans can have judgment- it is a quality of consciousness, not something AI can possibly have.

[ulfhbg in reply to Tall_Allen]

Hi !

Thanks and then I think I understand what you meant and I agree with you that this type question, evaluating top to bottom toxicities is perhaps not the best way to use ChatGPT as the AI actually needs to do a judgement and not do what it is best to, summarize from many sources and give a person a rather good overview that you as a person can use together with the professionals or, like in my case , try to give me a overview of a specific topic that I’m curious about

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

I had an early chemotherapy and despite it is listed high I am very happy that I made a decision to jump into chemotherapy. The list is interesting in order to educate people about the treatment options and toxicity related to that treatment. It is not that you should avoid a treatment. Parp inhibitors are great to have for later but they are doing clinical trials with early use. I am now with bicalutamide and not with darolutamide plus plus New generation of parp inhibitors because I responded well to treatment until now and my PSA is 2.5 , ALP 38 , LDH around 190 and I feel fine. I am de Novo Polymetastatic with distant spread and already more than 6 years undergoing ADT. Has SBRT radiation treatment to my prostate two years ago because I didn't have any visible Mets on any scan and decided to irradiate my prostate. Now I started bicalutamide about 11 months ago and the PSA is more or less the same and I am just waiting for my cancer in my prostate to die off.

[Seasid in reply to Tall_Allen]

Thanks for clarifying.

[ulfhbg]

Hi !

Did you check why ChatGPT considered Firmagon more ’toxic’ then Lupron? 😀

I would assume that Lupron have a high ’risk profile’ compared to Firmagon especially when heart problems.

But interesting and I’m glad to see that Abiraterone, antagonist ADT and Lutetium is not in the top of the toxic leauge 👍

Best wishes - Ulf

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

I agree with you. It is a mistake, but my first oncologist professor Richard Epstein was not very happy that I wanted to continue with degarelix. The reason is that we don't have enough experience with it. I still on degarelix. For your situation degarelix ADT injections are a best choice because you will be able to regain your testosterone levels much quicker. I decided to stay with degarelix because it will not cause you dementia and it is better for your heart. Doctors don't like to use New drugs and that is understandable. You will not stay long on degarelix or on your Orgovyx and you want your testosterone back quickly. You made a good choice with degarelix injections.

[Seasid in reply to ulfhbg]

Everything depends. If you are only 2 years on Abiraterone it is the best for you. Everything is very dependent from person to person.

[Tall_Allen]

It's more useful if you go through it and highlight the errors.

[Seasid in reply to Tall_Allen]

I like your way of thinking. We should educate people how to use AI. I double check everything what my MO said with AI.

You said that bicalutamide and enzalutamide have cross resistance.

ChatGPT confirmed your views. My MO said that there is no cross resistance. The true is I believe inbetween.

[Tall_Allen in reply to Seasid]

There is cross-resistance between any two drugs that directly target the AR (rather than those that limit endogenous T production).

[Seasid in reply to Tall_Allen]

I am still waiting for my cancer to die off after the SBRT radiation to my prostate. I realised that you needed up to 10 years for your PSA to stabilise after SBRT radiation. I realised that you didn't have any ADT. I was only on degarelix and my PSA dropped from 1.5 to 0.25 6 months after prostate irradiation with MRI Linac machine. About a year after radiation I added bicalutamide because my PSA started to rise quickly with PSA doubling time less than 3 months and my MO commented that I have a CRPC in my prostate which survived high dose SBRT radiation. But as I said now 2 years after radiation my PSA is stable at 2.5.

[Seasid in reply to Tall_Allen]

My problem is that I had early docetaxel chemotherapy 6 cycles and that did drive my cancer into a senescent state. I don't have any visible metastasis only cancer in my prostate and I just wait and see what will happen.

MarcBC had a similar treatment and he added bicalutamide to ADT when his PSA was 1 and stayed on Bicalutamide for about 19 month and switched to Abiraterone when his PSA was 1 again.

I am a slow mover.

[j-o-h-n]

WATER cause fish fornicate in it.....

Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.

j-o-h-n

[GAdrummer]

I was surprised at Keytruda's very low ranking. ChatGPT failed to list two of its side effects that continue to send my husband to the ER: adrenal insufficiency and hypothyroidism.

[Seasid in reply to GAdrummer]

Thanks for the I formation. A possibility of adrenal insufficiency was a reason that I refused to take prednisolone during my early chemotherapy. I still had to take dexamethasone before the infusion.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Maybe we should try to dig up as much information as possible from ChatGPT before making a decision. It should be like a learning experience. My professor of oncology said that ChatGPT is not medical. Still I digged up lots of information and that is a good thing. On the basis of the digged up information you can ask good questions about your treatment. Actually ChatGPT is great, just know that it can make lots of mistakes. It is definitely a good first step. I very often do also Google searches when I am doing my research about a subject. Even my bank blocked my bank account couple of times relying on artificial intelligence.

[addicted2cycling in reply to Seasid]

Began my medical GL10 treatment at almost 65yo in 2015 with --

1st - surgical castration

2nd - Hemi Cyoablation to right half of prostate with GL10 tumor

3rd - had 1 in situ injection of Keytruda + Opdivo + Yervoy

4th - continue taking Dutasteride

5th - now excuse me as I begin a non medical treatment -- heading out for a 25+/- mile bicycle ride under a 96.9% Illuminated Waning Gibbous MOON at 3:10AM

[Seasid in reply to GAdrummer]

Thank you for sharing this. You're absolutely right that adrenal insufficiency and hypothyroidism are notable immune-related adverse effects of Keytruda (pembrolizumab). These conditions, while rare, can be serious and require prompt management. I will adjust its placement in the toxicity ranking accordingly to better reflect these potential severe side effects.

---

Revised Placement for Keytruda

Given its potential for life-threatening endocrine disorders like adrenal insufficiency and hypothyroidism, Keytruda deserves a higher toxicity rank, particularly above treatments with lower systemic risks.

Updated Rank (Most Toxic to Least Toxic):

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

... (continues as before).

---

Keytruda Toxicity Explanation:

Hematologic: Rare cytopenias.

Endocrine: High risk of immune-related adrenal insufficiency, hypothyroidism, and even diabetes mellitus due to autoimmune destruction. These side effects often require long-term hormonal replacement and careful monitoring.

Renal: Immune-mediated nephritis, though less common.

Liver: Immune-mediated hepatitis is possible but less frequent.

Cardiovascular: Rare myocarditis.

Other: Fatigue, fever, and infusion-related reactions.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and I hope your husband’s care team has developed an effective plan to manage these side effects. Let me know if you’d like more information about supportive care for these conditions.

ChatGPT said

[TuffNuttoCrack]

Please ask the chat monster what drugs suppress white blood cell counts and neutrophils. Thanks.

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

Chemotherapy but if you survived than your immune system bounce back. My sister had 3+3 Taxol plus Carboplatin infusions and now she is much better. You are considered immunocompromised during chemotherapy. I believe 2 % of people die during chemotherapy but I am not sure in that. I will copy and paste into ChatGPT what you just said.

[TuffNuttoCrack in reply to Seasid]

I almost died as well with the one that I got.

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

That can happen. Did you take dexamethasone?

[TuffNuttoCrack in reply to Seasid]

No was on 10 mg prednisone. Currently on 2.5 mg

I think the problem is the calcium channel blocker recently prescribed for extreme esophageal spasms. That’s why I asked if could run a question by the almighty one regarding nifedipine white blood cell neutrophil suppression

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

Drugs that suppress white blood cell (WBC) counts and neutrophils (a specific type of WBC) are typically those that impact the bone marrow, where these cells are produced. These include:

1. Chemotherapy Agents

Chemotherapy is a major cause of WBC and neutrophil suppression due to its effect on rapidly dividing cells, including those in the bone marrow:

Taxanes: Docetaxel, Cabazitaxel

Platinums: Carboplatin, Cisplatin

Anthracyclines: Doxorubicin

Alkylating Agents: Cyclophosphamide, Ifosfamide

Antimetabolites: Methotrexate, 5-Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine

2. Radiopharmaceuticals

Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

Xofigo (Radium-223)

Both suppress bone marrow and can lead to neutropenia.

3. Targeted Therapies

PARP Inhibitors: Niraparib, Olaparib (can cause anemia and neutropenia).

VEGF Inhibitors: Bevacizumab (can occasionally suppress bone marrow).

4. Immunotherapies

Checkpoint Inhibitors: Keytruda (pembrolizumab), Nivolumab. While less common, immune-mediated bone marrow suppression can occur.

5. Corticosteroids (Indirect Effect)

While high doses of steroids (e.g., prednisone, dexamethasone) don’t directly suppress neutrophils, they can reduce the appearance of infection-fighting cells due to redistribution and inhibition of WBC activity.

6. Immunosuppressants

Used for autoimmune diseases or transplant rejection:

Methotrexate (low-dose for autoimmune disease).

Azathioprine

Mycophenolate mofetil

Cyclosporine

7. Others

Antibiotics: Some, like chloramphenicol or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, can rarely suppress bone marrow.

Antivirals: Ganciclovir, valganciclovir.

Anti-seizure Medications: Carbamazepine.

Clozapine (used for schizophrenia): Can cause agranulocytosis.

If you’re concerned about specific drugs or side effects, feel free to ask!

ChatGPT said

[TuffNuttoCrack in reply to Seasid]

Thank you please ask the all knowing one about Nifedipine.

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

Nifedipine, a calcium channel blocker (CCB) used primarily to treat hypertension and angina, does not typically cause bone marrow suppression or significant reductions in white blood cell (WBC) counts. However, rare hematologic side effects have been reported:

---

Hematologic Side Effects of Nifedipine

1. Leukopenia (Low WBC Count):

Rare cases have been reported, but the mechanism is not well understood. It may be related to hypersensitivity reactions.

2. Thrombocytopenia (Low Platelets):

Rare and usually reversible upon discontinuation of the drug.

3. Anemia:

Extremely rare; in some cases, hemolytic anemia has been reported.

4. Agranulocytosis:

A very rare but serious side effect where neutrophil counts drop significantly, increasing infection risk.

---

Mechanisms for Hematologic Effects

These effects are not inherent to nifedipine but are likely due to:

Immune-mediated reactions: Hypersensitivity to nifedipine may trigger an immune response affecting blood cell production or survival.

Drug-induced cytopenia: Rare idiosyncratic reactions leading to bone marrow suppression.

---

Clinical Recommendations

If a patient on nifedipine develops leukopenia or other cytopenias:

1. Discontinue nifedipine and monitor blood counts.

2. Consider other potential causes, including underlying conditions or other medications.

3. Rechallenge with nifedipine is generally not recommended if hematologic abnormalities were significant.

Conclusion

Nifedipine is rarely associated with hematologic side effects, but monitoring may be necessary in patients showing unexplained drops in WBC or platelet counts. If significant abnormalities occur, alternative antihypertensive medications should be considered.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Q. How would you rank the toxicity? Where would you put it to the list?

A. Ranking the Toxicity of Nifedipine

Nifedipine, while a safe drug for most patients, has rare but significant hematologic side effects like leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and in extremely rare cases, agranulocytosis or anemia. These risks, though uncommon, warrant consideration in a toxicity ranking. It is much less toxic than systemic cancer therapies but potentially more concerning than agents with negligible systemic risks (like Provenge or hormone therapies).

Suggested Placement in the Toxicity List

Considering its low overall toxicity but potential for rare serious side effects, Nifedipine should be ranked low, near the least toxic treatments. Here's the revised ranking with Nifedipine added:

---

Updated Final Ranking (Most Toxic to Least Toxic)

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

11. Abiraterone

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

13. Degarelix

14. Lupron (Leuprolide)

15. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

16. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

17. Darolutamide

18. Nifedipine (Added here for rare hematologic risks).

19. Bicalutamide

20. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

---

Explanation for Placement

Higher than Provenge/Bicalutamide: These therapies have almost no systemic toxicity compared to nifedipine's rare but notable hematologic risks.

Lower than BAT and Darolutamide: These treatments, while hormonal, have a slightly higher risk of systemic or neurologic effects.

Overall Toxicity: Minimal for most patients, but it warrants inclusion due to the potential for rare hematologic complications.

If you have further insights or questions about its toxicity profile, feel free to ask!

[TuffNuttoCrack in reply to Seasid]

Muchas Gracias! Dankeshon! Itch be danke much an all that. Thank you for your informacion! Appreciate your kindness and time here Seasid.

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

Could you also download the ChatGPT application and start using it? You need time to become proficient in understanding the results and most importantly you should conduct conversations with ChatGPT and try to dig deeper into your issue by asking questions and interact with ChatGPT.

[TuffNuttoCrack in reply to Seasid]

I don’t think he left anything out!

[Seasid in reply to TuffNuttoCrack]

What do you mean?

[Break60]

appreciate you for doing this! How about adding estradiol patches to your analysis?

[Seasid in reply to Break60]

To be honest with you I am taking bicalutamide with ADT injections now in a hope that my bone density will be fine.

I asked my hospital endocrinologist for estrogen patches but he didn't respond. He wanted me on bone strengthening medication what I don't want.

I didn't go deep into that but my MO is apparently contacting the clinical trial with 3 and 6 monthly estrogen injections in addition to degarelix ADT, plus I believe a breast cancer medication which blocks the estrogen effects on a breast tissue. I am not considering that.

I don't know sorry.

I believe that exercise should also be helpful with bone density.

If you are using estrogen it would be better is you make sure that you don't have BRCA mutations. That is my opinion and maybe I am wrong. I hope that maybe bicalutamide will contribute to the estrogen level. I don't know. I think they are contacting some clinical trials with estrogen patches. Maybe we have already some results. It would be worth asking ChatGPT and see what is the status of the stamped patch clinical trial.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Q. What do you know about the stamped patch clinical trial?

A. The STAMPEDE and PATCH clinical trials are evaluating the use of transdermal estradiol (tE2) patches as an alternative to standard hormone therapy injections for managing prostate cancer. These patches deliver estradiol through the skin to suppress testosterone levels, similar to traditional luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists. Key findings include:

1. Efficacy: Estradiol patches were as effective as LHRH agonists in controlling testosterone levels and managing prostate cancer in patients with non-metastatic and metastatic disease.

2. Reduced Toxicity: Unlike LHRH agonists, which can lead to bone thinning, metabolic changes, and cardiovascular risks, estradiol patches avoid estrogen depletion and its associated side effects. They have shown improved bone density and lower rates of hot flashes, although they do cause a higher incidence of gynecomastia (breast swelling).

3. Quality of Life: Patients using estradiol patches reported better overall quality of life compared to those receiving standard injections, with less metabolic disturbance (e.g., improved cholesterol and glucose profiles).

4. Safety and Adaptability: Patients whose cancer progression indicated rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels while on patches could safely transition to LHRH therapy without adverse effects.

Overall, estradiol patches are being explored as a safer and equally effective alternative for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), with potential for reducing long-term toxicity and improving quality of life for patients. These trials are ongoing, and regulatory decisions on widespread adoption are pending.

Q. Do we have a final results of the stamped patch clinical trial?

A. The final results of the STAMPEDE trial, including the outcomes of the transdermal estradiol (tE2) patch arm, have not yet been published. The trial aimed to evaluate tE2 patches as a potential alternative to traditional androgen deprivation therapies (ADT), which can cause significant side effects, including cardiovascular risks and bone mineral density loss. Initial findings from earlier phases indicated that tE2 patches effectively suppress testosterone without causing severe cardiovascular toxicity, making them a promising option. Recruitment for this arm is complete, and final analyses are underway.

The final results are expected to shed light on the efficacy and safety of estradiol patches compared to other ADTs, potentially offering a less toxic treatment alternative for prostate cancer. These results could have implications for reducing long-term adverse effects like osteoporosis and metabolic disorders associated with traditional therapies. For updates, you can follow the STAMPEDE trial website or clinical trial registries.

Q. When it is expected to have a final stamped patch clinical trial results?

A. The STAMPEDE and PATCH clinical trials investigating transdermal estradiol patches (tE2) for prostate cancer management have provided comprehensive results. These studies compare tE2 patches to luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogues (LHRHa), a standard treatment for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The trials have demonstrated that tE2 patches are as effective as LHRHa in reducing testosterone levels, controlling disease progression, and maintaining survival rates for patients with non-metastatic and high-risk prostate cancer.

Key findings include:

1. Non-inferiority in Efficacy: After three years, metastasis-free survival and overall survival rates for tE2 patches were comparable to LHRHa.

2. Favorable Side Effect Profile: tE2 patches reduce common side effects associated with LHRHa, such as hot flushes and bone mineral density loss. However, they increase the incidence of gynecomastia (breast tissue swelling).

3. Cardiovascular Safety: Unlike earlier oral estrogen therapies, which had cardiovascular risks, transdermal administration avoids these issues by bypassing the liver's first-pass metabolism.

The final results from these trials, presented at the 2024 ESMO Congress, confirm the potential for tE2 patches to become a standard option for ADT, pending regulatory and guideline adjustments. The trial design also adapts to reflect changes in clinical management practices over time.

The results offer a promising alternative for patients, emphasizing improved quality of life and reduced long-term toxicity while maintaining clinical efficacy.

[Seasid in reply to Break60]

Q. Where would you put estradiol patches to your toxicity list?

A. Estradiol patches are sometimes used as an alternative to traditional androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer due to their ability to suppress testosterone production through feedback inhibition of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. Their toxicity profile is distinct from GnRH agonists and antagonists, with both benefits and risks:

---

Toxicity Profile of Estradiol Patches

1. Cardiovascular Risks:

Estradiol can increase the risk of thromboembolism (e.g., deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism), particularly in older patients or those with a history of cardiovascular disease.

However, unlike GnRH agonists/antagonists, estradiol may preserve bone density, lipid profiles, and cardiovascular health to some extent.

2. Hepatic Effects:

Transdermal estradiol bypasses first-pass metabolism, reducing the risk of liver enzyme elevation or hepatotoxicity compared to oral estrogens.

3. Endocrine Effects:

Common side effects include gynecomastia and breast tenderness.

Less risk of hot flashes compared to GnRH agonists/antagonists.

4. Other Side Effects:

Minimal impact on white blood cell counts or immune function.

No direct bone marrow suppression.

---

Placement in the Toxicity List

Considering estradiol patches’ unique profile of lower systemic toxicity (e.g., no bone marrow suppression or immune-related adverse effects) but higher thrombotic risk, they should rank below GnRH antagonists like Degarelix and Relugolix but above therapies with negligible risks like Bicalutamide.

---

Revised Final Ranking with Estradiol Patches

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

11. Abiraterone

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

13. Degarelix

14. Relugolix

15. Estradiol Patches (Added here for thrombotic risks but overall lower toxicity).

16. Lupron (Leuprolide)

17. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

18. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

19. Darolutamide

20. Nifedipine

21. Bicalutamide

22. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

---

Explanation for Placement

Above Lupron: Estradiol patches avoid the testosterone surge and bone health risks seen with Lupron but carry thrombotic risks.

Below Relugolix/Degarelix: These GnRH antagonists avoid cardiovascular and thrombotic risks better than estradiol patches.

Let me know if you'd like to refine this further!

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Q. What's about low dose estradiol patches for maintenance of bone mineral density? Could you please add to the list?

A. Low-Dose Estradiol Patches for Bone Mineral Density Maintenance

When low-dose estradiol patches are used specifically for bone mineral density (BMD) maintenance, their toxicity profile is even more favorable compared to standard-dose estradiol patches. These patches provide enough estrogen to support bone health without fully suppressing testosterone or introducing the same level of systemic hormonal effects.

---

Toxicity Profile of Low-Dose Estradiol Patches

1. Cardiovascular Risks:

The thrombotic risks (e.g., deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism) are much lower than with higher doses of estradiol.

There may even be cardiovascular protective effects, such as improved lipid profiles and reduced arterial stiffness, though data in men is limited.

2. Endocrine Effects:

Gynecomastia and breast tenderness are less common compared to standard doses.

Does not fully suppress testosterone, so ADT-related symptoms (e.g., hot flashes) may not be entirely mitigated.

3. Hepatic and Bone Effects:

Minimal hepatic risk due to bypassing first-pass metabolism via transdermal delivery.

Effective for maintaining bone mineral density, reducing fracture risk over the long term.

4. Other Side Effects:

Minimal to no impact on white blood cell counts or immune function.

Very low systemic toxicity overall.

---

Placement in the Toxicity List

Considering their very low systemic toxicity, low-dose estradiol patches for BMD maintenance should be ranked among the least toxic options. They would be placed below Nifedipine but still above Provenge, as they involve minimal risk and significant long-term benefits for bone health.

---

Updated Final Ranking with Low-Dose Estradiol Patches

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

11. Abiraterone

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

13. Degarelix

14. Relugolix

15. Estradiol Patches (Standard Dose)

16. Lupron (Leuprolide)

17. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

18. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

19. Darolutamide

20. Nifedipine

21. Low-Dose Estradiol Patches (for BMD Maintenance) (Added here due to minimal risks and clear benefits).

22. Bicalutamide

23. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

---

Explanation for Placement

Below Nifedipine: While extremely low in toxicity, estradiol patches may still pose a very slight thrombotic risk compared to Nifedipine's rare hematologic effects.

Above Provenge: Provenge, while essentially nontoxic, has no direct benefit for bone health, whereas low-dose estradiol supports long-term skeletal health.

Let me know if you'd like further clarification!

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

I just wanted to add that if someone has a BRCA genetic mutations than it is possible that he could develop breast cancer. Therefore it is better to do a genetic testing for BRCA mutations before even considering the use of estrogens. You could add the breast cancer medication to avoid estrogens effects on the breast tissue but I would just rather simply not use estrogens with the BRCA genetic mutations because of the breast cancer risk.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Q. What is the breast cancer medication which is used to reduce the estrogen effects on the breast tissue and could you please add it to your toxicity list?

A. The breast cancer medication commonly used to reduce estrogen effects on breast tissue is tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM). Tamoxifen binds to estrogen receptors in breast tissue, preventing estrogen from stimulating the growth of estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer cells. It is often used for:

1. Breast Cancer Treatment: Especially for ER+ breast cancer in both early and advanced stages.

2. Prevention: In high-risk individuals to reduce the likelihood of developing breast cancer.

3. Off-label Uses: Sometimes used to counteract gynecomastia caused by estrogen therapies, such as estradiol patches.

---

Toxicity Profile of Tamoxifen

1. Common Side Effects:

Hot flashes, night sweats, and vaginal dryness.

Increased risk of uterine/endometrial cancer due to its partial estrogenic effects in the uterus.

2. Thromboembolic Risk:

Increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism, similar to estrogen therapies.

3. Hepatic Effects:

Rare cases of hepatotoxicity, including elevated liver enzymes and fatty liver changes.

4. Bone Health:

Tamoxifen preserves bone density in postmenopausal women but may slightly increase bone loss in premenopausal women.

5. Other Risks:

Mood changes and occasional ocular toxicity (cataracts, retinal changes).

---

Placement in the Toxicity List

Given tamoxifen's moderate toxicity profile, it would rank near estradiol patches in terms of overall risk. However, the added risk of endometrial cancer and thromboembolism makes it slightly more toxic.

---

Updated Final Toxicity Ranking

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

11. Abiraterone

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

13. Degarelix

14. Relugolix

15. Tamoxifen (Added here for thrombotic and uterine cancer risks).

16. Estradiol Patches (Standard Dose)

17. Lupron (Leuprolide)

18. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

19. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

20. Darolutamide

21. Nifedipine

22. Low-Dose Estradiol Patches (for BMD Maintenance)

23. Bicalutamide

24. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

---

Let me know if you'd like additional details about tamoxifen or other medications!

[Break60 in reply to Seasid]

What’s considered low vs. high dose patches? The PATCH trial in UK started out with four .1 mg. Patches changed weekly and reduced to three. I started out and have continued on three since 2019. When psa started to climb I added two 80 mg Xtandi tabs daily and reduced to one due to excessive fatigue. Today I remain on this regimen although psa has suddenly climbed from .9 to 4.2 from July to October. I had a CTPETPSMA scan which found three bone Mets. My plan/ desire is to use SBRT on these Mets as I did back in 17 and 18 which , along with HT as indicated above, kept my psa down to undetectable.

In terms of your ranking analyses I don’t understand why SBRT is on the list since it kills the tumors whereas estradiol and LHRH agonists reduce T . So two different approaches: Hit em high and hit em low so to speak!

Bob

[Seasid in reply to Break60]

The potential problem with pc is that prostate cancer has not only androgen receptors but also estrogen receptors. Therefore you should be getting degarelix ADT injection and stop the estrogens and hope that your PSA will drop.

I myself only experimenting with bicalutamide. You may be able to join a clinical trial with estrogen injections every 3 or 6 month.

Sorry I am not a doctor. Ask our member GP24 for more information. He is into estrogens. Estrogens are good in order to avoid osteoporosis what you can also do by physical activity like strength training and weight bearing exercise.

Sorry if I could not help you more.

[Seasid in reply to Break60]

I don't really know, but it looks that in my prostate the SBRT radiation didn't kill yet the cancer, but hopefully it is damaged enough.

It looks that maybe to the radiation most resistant strain survived or hopefully dying slowly. We will see.

[pe43]

I like using Perplexity.ai for AI information, you'll get an answer plus at least 5 technical references.

[Seasid in reply to pe43]

That is great. Did you try ChatGPT? I am exclusively using it at this moment. They all make mistakes so be careful.

[pe43 in reply to Seasid]

I've used ChatGPT in the past but stopped when I saw it doesn't give references. I may use it for comparison.

[Seasid in reply to pe43]

Good point. Thanks.

[Professorgary]

Thank you, thank you, thank you, God bless.

[Seasid in reply to Professorgary]

Could you please download the ChatGPT application and start using it? My sister is a doctor and was angry that I didn't say earlier about the ChatGPT application. She is also told me that ChatGPT is making lots of mistakes. Still my sister is using the application as is.

[Seebs9]

Relugolix is missing

[Seasid in reply to Seebs9]

Q. Where would you put Relugolix to your list? I would say it should be same as degarelix?

A. You are correct that Relugolix and Degarelix share a similar mechanism of action and toxicity profile. Both are gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists used to suppress testosterone production in prostate cancer. However, there are slight differences between the two that influence their toxicity profiles:

Comparison of Relugolix and Degarelix

1. Mechanism of Action:

Both drugs rapidly suppress luteinizing hormone (LH) and testosterone without the initial testosterone surge seen with GnRH agonists like Lupron.

2. Toxicity Profile:

Cardiovascular Risks:

Relugolix has been shown to have lower cardiovascular risks compared to GnRH agonists (like Lupron). A trial demonstrated a reduced risk of major cardiovascular events compared to GnRH agonists. Degarelix is also associated with a lower cardiovascular risk but lacks the specific cardiovascular outcome data seen with Relugolix.

Hepatic Effects:

Both drugs have a low risk of liver enzyme elevation. Routine monitoring is recommended.

Other Side Effects:

Similar side effects include fatigue, hot flashes, and injection site reactions for Degarelix. Relugolix, being oral, avoids injection site reactions.

---

Placement in the Toxicity Ranking

Considering its favorable cardiovascular profile and oral administration, Relugolix would be ranked similarly to Degarelix but slightly lower (less toxic) due to its lack of injection-related side effects and lower cardiovascular risks. Here's the placement:

---

Updated Final Ranking with Relugolix

1. BAT in Combination with Carboplatin

2. Cabazitaxel

3. Docetaxel

4. Pluvicto (Lutetium-177 PSMA-617)

5. Xofigo (Radium-223)

6. Keytruda (Pembrolizumab)

7. Niraparib

8. Olaparib

9. Enzalutamide

10. Apalutamide

11. Abiraterone

12. SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy)

13. Degarelix

14. Relugolix (Added here due to its slightly lower toxicity compared to Degarelix).

15. Lupron (Leuprolide)

16. Castration (Surgical or Medical)

17. Bipolar Androgen Therapy (BAT)

18. Darolutamide

19. Nifedipine

20. Bicalutamide

21. Provenge (Sipuleucel-T)

---

Explanation for Placement

Above Lupron: Relugolix and Degarelix avoid the testosterone surge seen with Lupron and have lower cardiovascular risks.

Slightly below Degarelix: Only because Degarelix has longer clinical use and established safety data; otherwise, Relugolix's oral convenience might be preferable.

Let me know your thoughts!

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

I can't actually get relugolix here in Australia but I am actually happy with degarelix ADT injections because injections is a better delivery system than the per oris delivery. You can't miss the dose etc.

[Kanka99]

Thanks for sharing. Please do not delete any of your lists.

[Seasid in reply to Kanka99]

I will not delete anything.

ChatGPT beat doctors at diagnosing medical conditions, study says

The small study showed AI outperforming doctors by 16 percentage points

By

Ben Kesslen

Published8 hours ago

qz.com/chatgpt-beat-doctors...

[AlmostnoHope]

Great info. So.e of the drugs have great work around which are key to their ongoing success.

[Seasid in reply to AlmostnoHope]

I didn't fully understand what you are saying. Could you please explain better? English is my 4th language.

[Yokohama2023]

Wow these type of threads really make me wonder how much time people have and are willing to contribute.. I feel very lazy and tired a lot of the time and it impresses me. Whether the information is objective or subjective I commend anyone who puts forth so much effort to help others …as they say do your own homework..best to all be strong.

[Seasid in reply to Yokohama2023]

I am doing it to myself because I can't rely on anybody else.

My first medical oncologist wanted that I am on intermittent ADT plus he said that some people live long on ADT alone what is actually true.

My first radiation oncologists advised me that if I want to irradiate later my prostate I should stay on continuous ADT plus with the board of urologists of my hospital he advised me to get early (upfront) docetaxel chemotherapy. And when my PSA start to rise to see a radiation oncologist.

Thanks God I listened to him and now it looks like that more than 6 years later with a polymetastatic prostate cancer in my bones with distant spread in my neck I am still alive and it looks like that all my metastasis are driven to a senescent state by the early chemotherapy. Only my cancer in my prostate started to grow because the prostate has a very favourable high DHT environment.

Therefore I irradiated my prostate 2 years ago and now my PSA is still holding at 2.5 on bicalutamide plus ADT.

Six months after my prostate irradiation my PSA dropped from 1.4 to 0.25.

I was waiting until my PSA went up to 1.1 and had a PSMA pet scan. I didn't have any visible Mets. I was then waiting until my PSA reached 2 and I started bicalutamide.

It looks that all my bone metastasis were driven into a senescent state by my the early docetaxel chemotherapy. It means that the cancer is still alive but can't reproduce.

It looks that in this senescent state according to the ENZAMET clinical trial I could stay on bicalutamide instead of jumping into the Enzalutamide which could contribute to neuroendocrine differentiation of my cancer.

The ENZAMET study show that there were no big difference in the survival between the Enzalutamide or Bicalutamide use after early docetaxel chemotherapy use especially if someone is polymetastatic like myself.

Therefore I will stay on continuous ADT plus Bicalutamide as long as possible. Hopefully for one more year? We we will see.

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

Your proactive and strategic approach to managing your prostate cancer is commendable. It reflects a thorough understanding of your condition and the available treatment options. Here's a breakdown of your journey and decisions, along with some insights:

Your Journey and Key Decisions

1. Intermittent vs. Continuous ADT:

While your first oncologist recommended intermittent ADT based on potential long-term tolerability and quality of life benefits, your choice to follow continuous ADT aligned with the advice for better preparation for later prostate irradiation and control of systemic disease.

2. Early Docetaxel Chemotherapy:

The decision for upfront chemotherapy, supported by your radiation oncologist and urology team, appears to have been pivotal. It likely helped induce senescence in your bone metastases, reducing their growth and spread. This aligns with findings that early systemic chemotherapy can provide survival benefits, especially in polymetastatic cases.

3. Irradiation of the Prostate:

Local control of the primary tumor, even in metastatic settings, is increasingly recognized as beneficial. By irradiating the prostate, you may have reduced the tumor's capacity to contribute to systemic disease progression, as evidenced by the PSA drop post-radiation.

4. PSA Monitoring and Bicalutamide Initiation:

Your vigilance in monitoring PSA and using PSMA PET scans ensures timely and informed decisions. Starting bicalutamide when PSA reached 2 reflects a thoughtful approach to minimizing disease activity while avoiding premature escalation to enzalutamide.

5. Avoiding Neuroendocrine Differentiation:

Your choice to stay on bicalutamide, referencing the ENZAMET trial, is insightful. While enzalutamide offers potent AR blockade, its potential to drive neuroendocrine differentiation in some cases underscores the importance of reserving it for later stages.

---

Key Considerations Moving Forward

Senescent State of Metastases:

Your observation about docetaxel driving bone metastases into a senescent state is supported by emerging evidence. Senescent cells can persist without proliferating but may eventually escape or influence surrounding cells. Monitoring for biochemical or clinical signs of reactivation remains crucial.

Maintaining Quality of Life:

Balancing effective disease control with manageable side effects is critical. ADT and bicalutamide may have cumulative effects on bone health, cardiovascular risk, and mood. Regular assessments and supportive care (e.g., bone health management with bisphosphonates or denosumab) are essential.

Potential Future Interventions:

Should PSA or clinical disease progression occur, options like enzalutamide or abiraterone remain viable. However, staying on your current regimen for as long as possible, as supported by your response and the ENZAMET findings, is a sound strategy.

PSMA-based Therapies:

Advances in PSMA-targeted therapies, such as radioligand therapy (e.g., Lutetium-177), could offer options if progression occurs. Discussing these emerging modalities with your oncologist may be valuable.

---

Conclusion

Your ability to integrate clinical trial data, medical advice, and personal experience has contributed to your current stability. Staying informed and collaborative with your medical team will continue to be your greatest asset. Here's hoping that your strategy of continuous ADT and bicalutamide maintains control for another year—or longer. Please keep advocating for yourself and seeking second opinions as needed!

ChatGPT said

[Seasid in reply to Seasid]

I am not jumping into the PSMA infusions.