Good, and Safe, Results Tied to Oral ... - Fight Prostate Ca...

Fight Prostate Cancer

2,802 members1,032 posts

Good, and Safe, Results Tied to Oral Testosterone in Men With Deficiency - Meta-analysis should spur more research on newer formulations(?)

cujoe profile image
11 Replies

Good, and Safe, Results Tied to Oral Testosterone in Men With Deficiency — Meta-analysis should spur more research on newer formulations, researcher says - by Sophie Putka, Enterprise & Investigative Writer, MedPage Today October 30, 2022

medpagetoday.com/meetingcov...

As most of the commentary by PCa patients using T-supplementation for BAT or QOL says that they avoid orals, I wonder what those currently using patches, gels, and injectables have to say about this research. It seems the orals have been reformulated for more gradual uptake. (Of course, no PCa patients were included in any of the studies.)

**************************

MIAMI -- Oral testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) seemed safe and effective in men with testosterone deficiency, according to a meta-analysis.

Among nine studies that looked at changes in serum total testosterone, only men with testosterone deficiency who took an oral agent -- predominantly testosterone undecanoate -- saw a significant increase in total testosterone, with a mean change of 1.25 ng/mL (95% CI 0.22-2.29), reported Jake A. Miller, MD, of the University of California Irvine.

And in eight studies that recorded adverse effects, there was no statistically significant change in risk in patients taking oral testosterone versus placebo, with a risk ratio of -0.03 (95% CI -0.08 to 0.03), he said at the Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) annual meeting.

Miller told MedPage Today that testosterone undecanoate was "not necessarily something that's new. I just think that, unfortunately, it [oral testosterone in general] got stigmatized very early on, as far as its use, and now we're starting to see that with the new formulation, we're challenging some of those concerns."

Earlier forms of oral testosterone, such as methyltestosterone, carried higher risks for liver toxicity, hypertension, and prostate enlargement because of its rapid metabolism. As a result, "multiple guidelines...essentially made a hard line to say 'Do not use oral testosterone for these patients, just use injection, just use gel, just use intranasal'," as these formulations are absorbed less rapidly, Miller said.

Three forms of oral undecanoate testosterone are currently FDA approved (Jatenzo, Tlando and Kyzatrex), and these could offer an alternative for patients who can't use injectable, gel-based, or intranasal TRT.

The nine studies that compared oral testosterone to placebo had 606 patients and were done from 1989-2019, while the eight studies of adverse effects had 849 patients. The majority of patients were adult males with diagnosed testosterone deficiency, according to Miller. The meta-analysis excluded women and transgender patients who were taking oral testosterone, because these patients tended to take more than one form of testosterone.

Two studies reported very high incidences of adverse effects for both placebo and control groups, while five reported very low incidences of adverse effects for both groups. Miller said that was because of different criteria for what qualified as an adverse effect.

He said that "despite having some of this new data available, when they [guidelines] discuss oral testosterone, it's clear based on the resources that they are only reviewing the data from the 1970s population, and excluding the more recent stuff. What we're hoping to achieve with our paper is to say 'Maybe we should start to re-evaluate now the new work [data] coming out.'"

*************************************

Thanks in advance to any T-users who respond.

Stay S & W, Ciao - K9

Written by
cujoe profile image
cujoe
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Read more about...
11 Replies
MateoBeach profile image
MateoBeach

Thanks cujoe. Two things: The mean (average) increase in testosterone levels reported was just 1.25 ng/ml. That is equal to 12.5 ng/dL as would be reported in the USA. That is a very small, almost trivial increase and would not correct significant hypogonadism. And to be useful for BAT therapies we need to go from castrate <50 ng/dL up to 1200 or 1500 ng/dL. The link to the original abstract of the meta-analysis no longer works so I cannot assess doses used.

One FDA approved oral preparation of testosterone undecanoate is the brand Jatenzo. Dosing range recommended ranges from a starting dose of 237 mg twice daily up to 396 mg twice daily. Oral absorption/bioavailability is estimated around 25%. So the maximum dose would provide around 200mg testosterone per day. That should actually be sufficient even for BAT.

They get around (or bypass) the problem of hepatic metabolism by a unique method of absorption: It is formulated to combine with lipoproteins in the gut and be taken up by lymphatics rather than via portal circulation to the liver. Interesting. That only leaves the issue of cost. GoodRx (discounter for USA) reports: The lowest GoodRx price for the most common version of Jatenzo (60 tabelets of 237 mg) is around $943.33, 18% off the average retail price of $1,152.02. Yipes!

cujoe profile image
cujoe in reply to MateoBeach

MB - thanks for the feedback. You might want to ck that ng/mL to ng/dL conversion. But even at the correct number of 125ng/dL, it is not going to provide the sort of boost to T that most are looking for, esp. for BAT. In his response to your reply, smurtaw seems to have discovered a method of getting it done at a more than respectable price. Many heads = better strategies. Ciao - K9

MateoBeach profile image
MateoBeach in reply to cujoe

Yes, Smurtaw corrected my error in the units conversion 125 not 12.5! And he has the Pricing dialed-in. So the oral undecanuate preparation is actually a reasonable option with rapid clearance to help end a High-T BAT cycle sharply to transition to a castrate cycle. That is what we want, not a slow decline. Topical T gels is the other option to accomplish that within a few days.

BTW, hope tests show bicalutamide working for you. Fine choice as long as it works. PSA will be telling.

cujoe profile image
cujoe in reply to MateoBeach

MB - 14 days of bical mono got me the results I wanted (50% PSA reduction), so I am going to go for another 2 week dosage and restest PSA again. I will then switch to reduced dosage (as yet undetermined) to shoot for a stable PSA level at or below "undetectable" <0.1. The other lab results were also positive with a new T high of 683, Free T now up closer to the 2% of total target, and E2 back up closer to 20 target. (after inexplicably dropping to 12ish range @ both 30 days before AND after the 2 mos of Luron??)

Lower PSA with no hit to T or QOL is good deal for now. Excellent visit with jdm3 & crew with a morning +4 mile walk/jog/run by the boys and a 11 mile concurrent bike ride by the girl. All is well with both of them - and with clear morning skies they will be headed back North tomorrow.

Tomorrow I'll start getting packed for my assist with a family member's knee replacement that will be done next Monday. At least I get central heat/air, on-demand hot showers, and a full kitchen for a change. Two weeks min & maybe longer commitment. Doc says she will go home same day as surgery and no in-home PT?? Times have really changed.

Hope all remains good with you, your mate, and moniker K9. As one K9 to another, Y'all keep it safe and well. Later On . . . Ciao -K9 Terror

NPfisherman profile image
NPfisherman in reply to cujoe

Great news K9,Glad things are working out so far. Safe travels. The family is lucky to have such a great guy.

Fish 🐠

cujoe profile image
cujoe in reply to NPfisherman

They put me up when I'm in town for doc appts and have taken care of their now 75-year old "Baby Brother" for most of my life, so it's partly about looking out for those who have generously looked after me - and also about what families should be best at. I think you've done some similar family outreaches yourself this year. We all hopefully come to realize that adage about the more we give, the more we get back.

NPfisherman profile image
NPfisherman in reply to cujoe

Yes, my brother and I are off to Cleveland Clinic in a few weeks. Surgery later in the month. May he dodge the bullet.

cujoe profile image
cujoe in reply to NPfisherman

I'm sure CC will give him a much better outcome than my friend up North that apparently didn't dodge the bullet and got RT buckshot to his bladder. Center of Excellence at least increases our odds of good-to-better-to-best outcomes. Your bother has a fine knowledgeable advocate in his NP brother. Best of luck to him for the surgery and to you for the assist.

NPfisherman profile image
NPfisherman in reply to cujoe

K9 Terror,

Thanks.. He already has a great surgeon with over 2,000 RPs. He will have a single arm robotic surgery going through the bladder. New procedure. The Science is Coming, and so fast ..make the jump to light speed...

DonP

NPfisherman profile image
NPfisherman in reply to cujoe

K9 Enemy of the State,

Forgot to mention that the new surgery only requires Foley catheter for 4 days...decrease risk of UTI, less discomfort, faster recovery, and a happier insurance company. How sweet it is !!!

Fish 🐠

cujoe profile image
cujoe

Thanks for sharing the detailed breakout of your costs, drugs used, and specific/overall costs. This is very useful info for anyone interested in self-directed BAT or T-boost for QOL. Your rigor of research and its application is admirable. There are many of us interested in your approach(es) and wish you great success as a pioneering N=1 PCa patient.

Ciao - K9 terror

You may also like...

[i][b]How Prostate Cancer May Begin - ScienceDaily, September 21, 2022[/b][/i]

excerpt from the MedPage Today article summarizes the issue and the suggestion for using a more...