Should I add ADT to Salvage Radiation at age 76?

Posted by jablakely @jablakely, Mar 13 11:54am

I just turned 76 years old. My prostate was removed 15 years ago (Gleason was 3+4, grade 2) and I had no trouble until my PSA went from 0.3 to 0.7 in the last 18 months. A Pet scan now shows activity limited to the prostate bed only. My urologist and RO recommend 40 sessions of SRT plus 6 months of ADT. I am considering SRT only.

I am a very vigorous 76: before the pet scan results I booked a week long hiking trip for September in a part of the world I love. From what I see of the statistical benefits of adding ADT, it doesn't seem worth spending my 76th year (and perhaps beyond) suffering the fatigue and other ADT side effects. I am seeing something like a 10-15% better chance of avoiding recurrence with ADT, a 3-6% better chance of avoiding metastasis but at my age, virtually no overall survival benefit.

How would I feel if I refused ADT now and suffered recurrence at age 80 or 85? I suspect I would feel grateful that I thoroughly enjoyed a healthy 76th year.

But the fact that I'm asking for advice on this forum is an indication that I realize the gravity of this decision. Any thoughts, brothers?

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.

Profile picture for melvinw @melvinw

Do you know when your PSA was first detectable (>0.1), what that value was, and how long it took to double that value. The very long time (15 years) to recurrence is in your favor, but the PSA doubling time is important data for making a decision of ADT/no ADT.

Given that you are intermediate risk (3+4) and given your age, I think you are right to explore the question about ADT along with RT. This is a big gray area and your personal life priorities should factor into any final decision along with medical best practices. Find an oncologist that will work with you in that regard. Many oncologists will almost reflexively recommend the ADT+RT route without considering patient priorities (I speak from experience). There are several studies that support that approach, so it is not unreasonable. But there are also docs who will not recommend ADT as part of a salvage therapy until PSA is greater than 0.5. Unfortunately, your PSA has exceeded that threshold, a complicating factor that weighs in favor of ADT.

I do completely agree with heavyphil—when you do RT, hit the pelvic lymph nodes prophylactically.

Last year I had a local recurrence, ten years after a RARP. I was also Gleason 3+4. In my case, a small nodule was detected during a DRE, and my PSA had risen to 0.11 after ten years of being undetectable (< 0.1). PSMA PET scan confirmed that the nodule was cancerous and found no evidence of distant mets. I got opinions from three oncologists. Two recommended IMRT plus at least 6 months ADT, and one (an RO) was fine with just RT. I scoured the medical literature and listened to many video presentations by top docs. In the end, I decided that the risks outweighed the benefits of ADT in my case and did 38 sessions of IMRT without ADT (I turned 73 during treatment). But, I will say that if my PSA would have been 0.7 instead of 0.11, I might have made a different decision. I would have put a lot of thought and questioning into it, all the same.

When I made my decision to forgo ADT, I strongly considered that I have a family history of heart disease, diabetes and dementia. ADT is a documented risk factor for all three of those things. On the other hand, I do not have a family history of PCa. And yes, studies clearly show that ADT works synergistically with RT, and can achieve better outcomes at five years, but when it comes to overall survival, studies are less clear about that. This includes the much heralded SPPORT trial which found no overall survival benefit of adding ADT to RT.

Best wishes moving forward.

Jump to this post

@melvinw
The Lancit description of the SPPORT trial said the following

The results of this randomised trial establish the benefit of adding short-term ADT to PBRT to prevent progression in prostate cancer. To our knowledge, these are the first such findings to show that extending salvage radiotherapy to treat the pelvic lymph nodes when combined with short-term ADT results in meaningful reductions in progression after prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer.

PBRT Is salvage radiation. You can find the full article here.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01790-6/abstract

REPLY
Profile picture for wwsmith @wwsmith

@jeffmarc Looking at the ASCO recommendations, it appears that the need for ADT with salvage radiation is driven primarily from PSA levels at the time of treatment. Whereas the need for ADT with radiation as a primary treatment is affected by numerous factors like Gleason score, Decipher score, intraductal, cribriform, seminal vesicle invasion, EPE or ECE (extraprostatic extensions or extra capsular extensions). The ASCO approach seems a bit simplistic to me to look only at the PSA level of a salvage radiation patient because if such a patient with many previous risk factors (high Gleason, high Decipher, intraductal, etc.) decides early to get salvage radiation treatment while with a low PSA value, ADT would automatically not be prescribed even though it might well be beneficial.

Jump to this post

@wwsmith
That ASCO recommendation for ADT at PSA .5-1.0 is saying “(ADT) for higher-risk cases” I mentioned that in my comments, they may not need ADT since they are not higher risk at 3+4.

REPLY

I had short term ADT Orgovyx as part of my salvage radiation treatment (SRT) at age 73.
I really didn't like it. Really. Primarily a feeling of fatigue, but it can be overcome or "pushed through". And it cleared substantially 4 - 6 mos following treatment.
Not my most fun time.
However, now almost 3 yrs post SRT, my PSA has been < .02 undetectable and I am grateful that I took the ADT.
Best wishes.

REPLY
Profile picture for michaelcharles @michaelcharles

I had short term ADT Orgovyx as part of my salvage radiation treatment (SRT) at age 73.
I really didn't like it. Really. Primarily a feeling of fatigue, but it can be overcome or "pushed through". And it cleared substantially 4 - 6 mos following treatment.
Not my most fun time.
However, now almost 3 yrs post SRT, my PSA has been < .02 undetectable and I am grateful that I took the ADT.
Best wishes.

Jump to this post

@michaelcharles
Hi Michael, would you be so kind to tell me what was your post op pathology report and for how long you were undetectable before you had salvage radiation ? Did they RT your lymph nodes too and how many RT sessions did you have ?
Thanks so much in advance .

REPLY
Profile picture for melvinw @melvinw

Do you know when your PSA was first detectable (>0.1), what that value was, and how long it took to double that value. The very long time (15 years) to recurrence is in your favor, but the PSA doubling time is important data for making a decision of ADT/no ADT.

Given that you are intermediate risk (3+4) and given your age, I think you are right to explore the question about ADT along with RT. This is a big gray area and your personal life priorities should factor into any final decision along with medical best practices. Find an oncologist that will work with you in that regard. Many oncologists will almost reflexively recommend the ADT+RT route without considering patient priorities (I speak from experience). There are several studies that support that approach, so it is not unreasonable. But there are also docs who will not recommend ADT as part of a salvage therapy until PSA is greater than 0.5. Unfortunately, your PSA has exceeded that threshold, a complicating factor that weighs in favor of ADT.

I do completely agree with heavyphil—when you do RT, hit the pelvic lymph nodes prophylactically.

Last year I had a local recurrence, ten years after a RARP. I was also Gleason 3+4. In my case, a small nodule was detected during a DRE, and my PSA had risen to 0.11 after ten years of being undetectable (< 0.1). PSMA PET scan confirmed that the nodule was cancerous and found no evidence of distant mets. I got opinions from three oncologists. Two recommended IMRT plus at least 6 months ADT, and one (an RO) was fine with just RT. I scoured the medical literature and listened to many video presentations by top docs. In the end, I decided that the risks outweighed the benefits of ADT in my case and did 38 sessions of IMRT without ADT (I turned 73 during treatment). But, I will say that if my PSA would have been 0.7 instead of 0.11, I might have made a different decision. I would have put a lot of thought and questioning into it, all the same.

When I made my decision to forgo ADT, I strongly considered that I have a family history of heart disease, diabetes and dementia. ADT is a documented risk factor for all three of those things. On the other hand, I do not have a family history of PCa. And yes, studies clearly show that ADT works synergistically with RT, and can achieve better outcomes at five years, but when it comes to overall survival, studies are less clear about that. This includes the much heralded SPPORT trial which found no overall survival benefit of adding ADT to RT.

Best wishes moving forward.

Jump to this post

A very helpful reply. thank you

REPLY
Profile picture for michaelcharles @michaelcharles

I had short term ADT Orgovyx as part of my salvage radiation treatment (SRT) at age 73.
I really didn't like it. Really. Primarily a feeling of fatigue, but it can be overcome or "pushed through". And it cleared substantially 4 - 6 mos following treatment.
Not my most fun time.
However, now almost 3 yrs post SRT, my PSA has been < .02 undetectable and I am grateful that I took the ADT.
Best wishes.

Jump to this post

@michaelcharles, thank you for your response and frankness of how bad you found ADT to be. If I go ahead with ADT, I'm thinking about Orgovyx. I thought it was supposed to dramatically shorten the the recovery period after treatment. But you're saying it took 4 - 6 months after you stopped taking it to be substantially clear of its side effects?

REPLY
Profile picture for jablakely @jablakely

A very helpful reply. thank you

Jump to this post

@jablakely A couple more things:

1) have you tested your testosterone? I did that as part of my evaluation for relapse. Good to have that baseline.

2) This presentation by Dr Mark Scholz (Prostate Cancer Research Institute) directly addresses some of your questions/concerns. He does ask the question whether is worth it for a guy in his 70s, with intermediate risk, to add ADT to RT for treating a relapse (starts at 6:24 in the video).

REPLY

Yes, but...

I do believe that Orgovyx recovery is a bit quicker than the Lupron injection, based upon my reading here in MCC and the experience of 1 friend.

My SEs dissipated over time after my last pill and I felt pretty much recovered from the ADT by the 4 - 6 month mark.

It seems everyone is different. And everyone's perception is different. I was trying to be encouraging with that time estimate.

My primary message is that I really disliked the ADT, however post tx, I am very glad that I agreed w/ my RO's recommendation to add that to my SRT plan.

Best wishes.

REPLY
Profile picture for michaelcharles @michaelcharles

Yes, but...

I do believe that Orgovyx recovery is a bit quicker than the Lupron injection, based upon my reading here in MCC and the experience of 1 friend.

My SEs dissipated over time after my last pill and I felt pretty much recovered from the ADT by the 4 - 6 month mark.

It seems everyone is different. And everyone's perception is different. I was trying to be encouraging with that time estimate.

My primary message is that I really disliked the ADT, however post tx, I am very glad that I agreed w/ my RO's recommendation to add that to my SRT plan.

Best wishes.

Jump to this post

@michaelcharles
Not sure you Saw this study that compared Orgovyx Testosterone recovery to Lupron

In the HERO study, relugolix demonstrated sustained testosterone suppression superior to that of leuprolide acetate (97% vs 89%; difference 7.9% [95% confidence interval, 4.1–12%; p < 0.001]).

Men (N = 934) were randomized (2:1) to receive relugolix 120 mg orally daily or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 wk for 48 wk.

Overall, 74 of the 137 men in the relugolix cohort recovered to testosterone >280 ng/dl, with a median time to recovery of 86.0 d (95% CI, 65.0–92.0), versus two of the 47 men in the leuprolide cohort, with a median time to recovery of 112.0 d
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588931123002900

REPLY
Profile picture for jeff Marchi @jeffmarc

@michaelcharles
Not sure you Saw this study that compared Orgovyx Testosterone recovery to Lupron

In the HERO study, relugolix demonstrated sustained testosterone suppression superior to that of leuprolide acetate (97% vs 89%; difference 7.9% [95% confidence interval, 4.1–12%; p < 0.001]).

Men (N = 934) were randomized (2:1) to receive relugolix 120 mg orally daily or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 wk for 48 wk.

Overall, 74 of the 137 men in the relugolix cohort recovered to testosterone >280 ng/dl, with a median time to recovery of 86.0 d (95% CI, 65.0–92.0), versus two of the 47 men in the leuprolide cohort, with a median time to recovery of 112.0 d
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588931123002900

Jump to this post

@jeffmarc
Thank you for the Orgovyx information.

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.