Thank you Rotate for the reply regarding total testosterone (TT) and PSA levels.

I agree with your trepidation to participate in a Gleason 9 clinical trial without using ADT. Gosh...Gleason 9 is a serious and scary classification. Gleason 9 treatment typically uses all available tools to fight the cancer. As much as I hate the awful side effects of ADT, I acknowledge ADT has been viewed as necessary to fight anything more aggressive than Gleason 3+4=7 cancer.

When you enrolled in your clinical trial, do you recall the reason(s) the trial's director or leader provided for why their team believed the "no ADT needed for Gleason 9" trial had a decent likelihood of success? For example:
- Does the trial use some sort of improved technology whereby ADT is thought to no longer be needed?
- Does the trial use something else (e.g., maybe repurposed drugs, maybe higher radiation doses, perhaps a different way to administer drugs or radiation) for which it believes enduring ADT is not needed?

I suspect there is an underlying reason to support the trial's "no ADT needed for Gleason 9" hypothesis. I'm not smart enough to speculate on what that might be, but I bet it can be found. Seems implausible for an institution or medical equipment vendor to invest their money in a trial without a reason to believe a better outcome can be achieved.

I'd recommend investigating/seeking the reason supporting the trial's purpose. Then I'd run the reason through some different A.I. programs. For what it's worth, I'm a fan of Perplexity.AI Pro (costs $20 for a monthly subscription) which I use frequently. At a minimum the A.I. programs will give you some independent feedback and references to the scientific articles used in the A.I.'s analysis.