BOOGEE,
I'll start with what I know something about
-- the side effects. They aren't particularly bad with Avodart. Nothing like the other HT drugs. For men with enlarged prostates Avodart tends to make the prostate shrink. It blocks the action of testosterone on prostate tissue in a rather specific way -- as opposed to, say, Casodex which blocks it more generally and causes lots of hypogonadal side effects. It also tends to make men with thinning hair regrow some of the hair they lost and for balder men it gives them some scraggly fuzz. It generally has fewer sexual side effects than other hormone therapy drugs but something like one guy in twenty will report a loss of libido. I was one of those unlucky five percent and I used to hate my Avodart back before I was diagnosed with prostate cancer, These days I have to conserve my pharmaceutical animus because there are soooo many drugs to hate now that I simply can't be bothered hating my Avodart any more. It would take a princess-and-the-pea level of sensitivity to even notice the side effects of Avodart while on Luron (except, maybe for the hair thing.)
As to whether or not Avodart helps prevent/delay recurrence after primary treatment for PCa I dunno. There's a lovely theory that it ought to help. Here is a paper that you won't be able to read that will tell you all about
it:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3177006/But, as to that theory working out in practice... The results are sketchy and contradictory. Here are a couple of studies that suggest it does help:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23176897www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20800512and one that found it a bit of a wash -- neither good nor bad:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19091347And here is a study from a few years ago where Avodart crashed and burned during their phase II trials for preventing prostate cancer:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23334943I should point out that that phase II study had some flaws and the interpretations of that study are all over the map. My medical oncologist thinks that Avodart got a bum rap. The study shows that men on Avodart for a long time had fewer cancers overall but that they had
more aggressive, high-Gleason cancers. My oncologist thinks that Avodart shrinks prostates and low-Gleason cancers but not high-Gleason cancers which means that, given a collection of men with a mix of cancers Avodart will increase the probability that the high-grade cancers will be
detected on biopsy which doesn't necessarily mean that there are more high-Gleason cancers total, just that they are needles in smaller haystacks in easier to find.
Lots of doctors think that the evidence for a role for Avodart in ADT is too thin to rely on. Others (including my MO) think that the theory is fairly compelling and there haven't been any studies that found big problems with it so why not use it?