Paxton,
When you started this thread you expected you would find the subject difficult to talk about
. As I am reading through it I get the impression that it
was difficult for you, but not in the way you probably expected. Complaining about
the effects of low testosterone -- physical, sexual, cognitive, emotional -- and our fears at having our testosterone taken away, is oddly easy here. That's one of the nearly-unique advantages of this venue -- it gives us a place to complain about
stuff we simply can't talk about
anywhere else. So that's the part I'll bet you found easier than expected. The harder-than-expected part has been getting the other guys to understand what you mean by "collateral ADT".
I get it. By withholding your T supplement your doctors will be allowing you to experience the side effects of a treatment (androgen deprivation) that would not be justified if they proposed to employ it to treat your low-intermediate risk cancer, and like I said, I get it... but there is one slight flaw that has entered your thinking.
When you said...
... "I guess I 'just' have to convince myself that an altered life is better than none at all." ...
... you seemed to be assuming that you would be getting the cancer-fighting goodness of ADT with your "collateral" version. But you're not. At least, if the emerging "Saturation Theory" of the relationship between PCa and T is right, you're not. In order to be effective in suppressing castrate-sensitive prostate cancer you need to drive T levels below 50 ng/dl (ideally below 20) and, while it is possible, I suppose, it doesn't seem likely that your unsupplemented T values will finally level out that low. So you can expect the side effects with, arguably, no disease-control benefit at all.
If we break T levels into three ranges -- castrate, hypogonadial, and normal -- it looks like this:
castrate: Cancer cells
and patient are suppressed and miserable. (advantage: disease control)
hypogonadial: Patient still miserable but cancer cells can grow normally. (advantage: none)
normal: Cancer cells grow normally (no faster than hypo) but patient feels better. (advantage: quality of life)
You've picked a sort of an unfortunate time for a hypogonadial man to be diagnosed with prostate cancer. Medical science seems to be turning a corner on testosterone for men with prostate cancer. All of the recent evidence seems to indicate that we'll make it around the corner successfully and that most of the restrictions on T supplementation for men with all but the highest-risk cancers can be dropped. But the science is still new and conservative doctors are letting their bolder colleagues take the lead.
Assuming that you don't want to spend the rest of your life in that middle category -- the hypogonadial range where the saturation theory suggests neither an advantage in disease control nor in quality of life -- there are a few things that it occurs to me you might try:
Discuss the research with your doctor. The idea here is not to educate your doctor about
medical research but to convince him that you have enough understanding of the risks to allow you to help him make decisions about
your care. Here are a few studies that talk about
the recent reassessments:
Shifting the paradigm of testosterone and prostate cancer: the saturation model and the limits of androgen-dependent growth (Morgentaler, Traish 2009),
A new era of testosterone and prostate cancer: from physiology to clinical implications (Khera, Crawford, Morales, Salonia , Morgentaler 2014), and
Current State of Practice Regarding Testosterone Supplementation Therapy in Men with Prostate Cancer (Kovac, Pan, Lipshultz, Lamb 2015). The last one -- Current State of Practice... -- is a nice full-text review.
Shop for doctors. Like I said, this is a fairly sharp turn for medical science and not all doctors are ready to attempt it. There are doctors out there who
will consider it but you may have to shop around for a doctor who isn't afraid if the tires squeek while he power-drifts around the turn.
Put yourself in a different category. If you look at the review study I linked above (last link) you will see that it breaks down the data into three categories: men on Active Surveillance, men who have had radiation, and men who have had surgery. I have the impression that it is easier to convince one's doctors to consider T supplementation if one's PSA behaves after treatment than it is to convince a doctor to supplement during AS. If you feel strongly about
not wanting to remain permanently hypogonadial, this might be something to talk to your doctors about
as you are making your AS/treatment option decisions.