> ...
> The latest study does not include any information about whether taking
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Alex
>> ...
>> The latest study does not include any information about whether taking
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> Alan
Alan, thanks for the cautionary advice. I am indeed watching the PCa
carefully. I see an oncologist 4 times a year and get color doppler
ultrasounds twice a year. I am fully prepared to grab a taxi to the nearest
DaVinci machine if the cancer starts acting up. (I'm not a good candidate
for radiation.) But for the moment, the cancer seems to be content to remain
indolent.
I was diagnosed with a PSA of 6.2 and a Gleason of 6 (3+3) almost exactly
three years ago. Since then the PSA actually trended down, even before I
started taking Proscar, into the range of 4.5 to 3.3. Of course since
starting Proscar it has dropped further. Last test was two months ago, with
PSA at 1.5.
My onc favors Proscar over Avodart because he thinks it has fewer side
effect, even though those for Avodart usually are mild. (A small risk of
gynocomasty, or enlarging of the breast, in about one man out of 14 --
easily prevented with one treatment with radiation across the chest.) And
because Proscar/finesteride is available as a generic, it is much cheaper
than Avodart. I pay $10 a month at Costco, which is probably less than I
spend on the mouthful of supplements I gag down daily.
Alex
Alan Meyer - 27 May 2008 22:07 GMT
> ...
> Alan, thanks for the cautionary advice. I am indeed watching the PCa
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> candidate for radiation.) But for the moment, the cancer seems to be
> content to remain indolent.
Sounds like you're on top of it.
> I was diagnosed with a PSA of 6.2 and a Gleason of 6 (3+3) almost exactly
> three years ago. Since then the PSA actually trended down, even before I
> started taking Proscar, into the range of 4.5 to 3.3. Of course since
> starting Proscar it has dropped further. Last test was two months ago,
> with PSA at 1.5.
Excellent!
> My onc favors Proscar over Avodart because he thinks it has fewer side
> effect, even though those for Avodart usually are mild. (A small risk of
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> than Avodart. I pay $10 a month at Costco, which is probably less than I
> spend on the mouthful of supplements I gag down daily.
I saw a web page recently comparing the two drugs:
http://www.anagen.net/glaxo7.htm
It doesn't say who paid for the study, but I suspect it was the makers of
Avodart - since they (Glaxo Smith Kline) are most often quoted in the
references. The study claimed some small differences in the two products,
but I'm not at all sure they were significant and, if Glaxo paid for the
study, I'm not even sure they were real.
Alan