Prostate CA

[JesusA (imported)]

For the alternative reading of jsmooth’s question, “would castration prevent prostate cancer?” the answer is an unequivocal MAYBE.

There is a small amount of data that supports a greatly reduced likelihood of prostate cancer, but not an elimination of the possibility. Unless something incredibly unlikely happens that society supports mass castration, we will never have good research data on the topic.

Two lines of reasoning support the greatly reduced incidence:

1) There is some (not very good) data from historical eunuchs. I have found no report of prostate cancer for either Italian castrati or Ottoman eunuchs. (Lack of information is NOT information of lack!) There was at least one study done in the 1920s of Chinese court eunuchs (after the fall of the dynasty and their removal to a Buddhist temple outside Beijing). It looked at a number of eunuchs, some castrated before puberty and some after, and found that their prostate glands were quite small and some nearly impossible to find. The sample size is small and anecdotal evidence is never conclusive.

2) Just as there are nipples on males, there is a prostate homologue on females. The Skene’s paraurethral glands develop from the same fetal structure. Females, as well as castrated males, have some testosterone in their systems produced by the adrenal glands. Cancer of the Skene’s gland is extremely rare, but not unknown. A report of one case in an 88 year old woman by Pongtippan et al. (2004) noted that they had found FIVE earlier cases reported in the medical literature. Not unknown, but extremely rare. There are probably more cases out there, just not in the medical literature.

REFERENCE:

Pongtippan A, Malpica A, Levenback C, Deavers MT, Silva EG. Skene’s gland adenocarcinoma resembling prostatic adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2004; 23: 71-4.

[bobbie (imported)]

Thank you again Jesus for your outstanding wealth of knowledge on the subject.

[ned123 (imported)]

As a prostate cancer survivor, I may have a bit different perspective. As is the case with most people that get a disease like this I spent endless hours researching various aspects of the disease.

One of the best lines I heard was to compare Pc as golf. You have to play it where it lies.

Every person is different and the course of the disease and treatment will vary greatly.

There is so much info on the net that you can come up with whatever you want, but of course the idea is to try and stick to the most credible sources. Im sorry but drinking some exotic fruit juice will not cure Pc. LOL. With that said the idea of castration as a preventive measure is not that realistic. There are many other ways of treating the disease if once discovered. The real key is to get regular PSA and DRE exams once past 40. It is important to understand that androgen suppression (including castration) only works for a limited time. The standard range is about two years. But there are various options with that as well, by cycling ect you can extend the effect. What occurs is that eventualy there will be a few Pc cells that can grow without T. Acutally about 25% of Pc cases are actually estrogen dependent. ( and yes guys we do have estrogen in out bodys) Thus it is possible for you to remove virtually all T and still have Pc cells grow. There is a terrific range of treatment available for Pc and it is growing and changing everyday. Is castration a valid treatment for Pc, of course, but just one of many options. Is castration a realistic prevention for Pc? Not really. Also it is possible to still get Pc even with a low or "normal" PSA.

[raymar2020 (imported)]

I want to chime in on this discussion.

While I have absolutley no prostate issues, I have long been concerned about thew increase in diagnoses and for that reason have tried to stay informed about treatment and options.

Most eunuchs, even those who use supplemental testosterone seem to have little issue with elevated PSA or Prostate cancer. Unless the cancer was present prior to castration, it is unlikely to develop.

There are several major studies at work that challenge the notion that prostate cancer is driven by testosterone, and hopefully in the next few years there will be concrete evidence about the fact or fiction of that assumption.

One study I know of involves a group of men, all from familes that have a high rate of fast growing prostate cancer. The study group was castrated prior to any sign of even elevated PSA. So far no one in that study has any signs of prostate cancer, and all are using a low dose Testosterone therapy.

It will be several more years before that study is published, but the indicator is that some other testicular secretion is responsible for feeding prostate cancer. It may actually be that testosterone in combination with something else triggers the cancer growth.

It is quite true that almost all men will develop prostate cancer if they live long enough. The only exception seems to be eunuchs.

Seems to me that if a man were willing to undergo castration , and limited Testosterone therapy in the hopes of eliminating the risk of prostate cancer, that should be an available option, if there is a family history to support such action.

Of the older men I know who have had prostate cancer, all of them have been castrated. It seems , at least in my experience to be the standard practice. Most of the men I know seem to not have had any major problems from the surgery, and the cancer is at worst signifigantly slowed.

I feel for those who have prostate cancer, and certainly have no desire to diminish their plight, but it is not the death sentence that the media makes it out to be. Proper screening, and medical treatment as needed can make the prostate cancer have at least a normal life expectancy, and in some cases even more.

Raymar