I can't help with the Trelstar, but . . .

My uro and med oncs said they would tend to believe hypersensitive PSA DT
and V *IF* the data looked "clean", i.e., clear trends without too much
noise or bounce in the data. Jagged plots and it's back to nothing more than
an early warning system. IOW, if the hairs line up like ducks, they may be
usable ducks. I presume this was an opinion, not a fact, but we're sure
going to keep watching mine with a hypersensitive "microscope" quarterly,
especially considering my attitude towards preemptive (early) ADT.

Last I read, there have been just two IADT periods clinically tested: 9
months and 28 months. 9 did not "work", 28 did. The downside? After 28 month
many people don't recover from some of their nastier SES, and the benefit is
arguably marginal anyway. Tests are under way for IADT periods between 9 and
28 months. Maybe some of those tests are completed, providing your 12-month
criteria?

It's not clear to me how a different LHRH (ADT1) drug would help wsith the
SEs, since the SEs are primarily due to the testosterone deprivation, not
the drugs used to achieve it. LHRH drugs including triptorelin are often
listed and lumped together in discussions of ADT-induced osteoporosis. I
gather the usual bone-preserving/restoring drugs and other measures are not
working for you? That's a serious concern to me, since my sports can get
pretty rough-and-tumble at times (I broke two ribs last July and incurred a
shoulder separation a year ago -- they lit up on my CT). If I had a bone
density problem I'd be a formless bag of bone meal. ;-)

Crap. Now I can't get the song, "Telestar" out of my mind.
That's OK.

I.P.