Heavy question... Cancer while on TRT?

copaseet said:
Heavy question.... has anyone on this forum been diagnosed with cancer while on TRT?.
Click to expand...

Testosterone is not a carcinogen if that is your concern. There is a study that tries to link it to a form of liver cancer, but the results were inconclusive and they were unable to repeat the results. It's estradiol that is a known carcinogen, so if you're thinking you're going to get prostate cancer or something else from being on TRT - just be diligent with your estradiol - and get it anyway, but much later (the vast majority of men get prostate cancer, just not at a point in life that it matters much due to the slow nature of the disease and elderly years involved).

Sorry, I don't have any personal stories for you; but I had just gotten done looking this up for a friend.

IARC said:
Human data

Sex hormones, such as those considered in this monograph, have been and are used extensively in human therapy. When they are used for the treatment of disseminated cancer, such as that of the breast, prostate and endometrium, their effect on tumour growth and the severity of their side-effects are the major considerations. The use of sex hormones in therapy for other conditions (for example, menstrual disorders, climacteric syndrome, pregnancy maintenance, osteoporosis, abnormal protein metabolism, gonadal deficiency) makes the question of carcinogenic hazard more pertinent. With the continuing development of steroid use for the control of conception, the question of possible carcinogenic hazards has become of major importance.

Epidemiological studies to evaluate possible carcinogenic effects of administered oestrogens and progestins in humans suffer from two major difficulties. Firstly, the interval between the commencement of administration and the possible appearance of cancer may be long. Secondly, to detect a small or moderate change in risk, observations on large numbers of subjects are required.

With these reservations in mind, the following conclusions can be made:

1. Intrauterine exposure to diethylstilboestrol - The administration of diethylstilboestrol to women during pregnancy is causally associated with an increased risk of vaginal and cervical clear-cell adenocarcinoma in exposed daughters. Non-neoplastic changes of the female genital tract, including transverse fibrous septae, vaginal adenosis and cervical ectropion, have been observed frequently; non-malignant structural changes in the male reproductive tract have also been reported.

2. Oestrogens administered to adults - The administration of oestrogens (including diethylstilboestrol) to adult women is causally associated with an increased incidence of endometrial cancer. There is also a possibility that the risk of breast cancer is increased by such therapy, but the evidence is not conclusive. There is good evidence that factors which increase or prolong exposure of the uterus to endogenous oestrogens result in an increased risk of developing endometrial cancer. At present, the specific role of endogenous hormones in the development of breast cancer is unclear.

3. Progestins - There are no adequate data in humans to assess whether progestins used as contraceptives (either as pills or as injections) alter the risk of developing cancer.

4. Androgens - Prolonged androgen therapy may be associated with an increased risk of hepatocellular tumours, but the evidence is not conclusive.

5. Oral contraceptives - Oral contraceptive use decreases the risk of benign breast disease. There is no clear evidence that their use alters the risk of breast cancer, although limited data suggest that the preparations may interact with other risk factors (e.g., late age at first pregnancy, presence of benign breast lesions) in the development of the disease. Oral contraceptives may increase the risk of cervical dysplasia and carcinoma in situ after long-term use. Few data are available concerning invasive cancer of the cervix. Sequential oral contraceptives may increase the risk of endometrial cancer, but the evidence is not conclusive.

Long-term use of oral contraceptives markedly increases the relative risk of hepatocellular adenoma. The effect is greater in older women and in those using preparations containing high doses of steroids.

Oral contraceptives may increase the risk of malignant melanoma and of pituitary adenoma and decrease the risk of ovarian cancer, but the available data are inadequate for a proper assessment.
Click to expand...
Source

Note: I had the liver cancer study pulled up, but it was on a different computer I don't have access to right now. You can probably find it though through Google.

Edit: I'm not in any way, shape, or form trying to diminish the experiences others have gone through. An awesome human being that is on this forum has been through cancer and is on TRT - but I'm not going to speak for him. If he wants to reply, he knows I respect him and his experiences.
 
@halfwit..... I see various sources on the internet associating prostate cancer (albeit non conclusively) to TRT treatment.... This is the first I hear of TRT being associated with liver cancer, regardless.... given proper and ongoing bloodwork, can one "see these cancers coming"?, i.e PSA for TRT... or is it just the luck of the draw?
 
The study showing a link between cancer and TRT was a metastudy and not a direct study. Basically, they combed through all the studies on TRT and found how many men in each study who went on TRT got diagnosed with cancer during the study and compared it to how many men each the study who did not go on TRT (the control group, mostly) got diagnosed with cancer during the study. From that, they showed more men who were on TRT got diagnosed with cancer during the study than who were not on TRT.

Since cancer was not part of the original studies, they did not take any cancer prescreening into account for them. Did these men have cancer before they started the studies and only find out because of all the tests done during the studies? Were they smokers? Did they eat known carcinogens? None of that was taken into account. Therefor, the metastudy was completely worthless to show a link between cancer and TRT, even the creators of the metastudy say so. All this study was supposed to accomplish was to see if there was enough reason to do a study to see if there is a link between cancer and TRT, which it did show.

A full, real, controlled study was then done to see if there is actually a link between cancer and TRT and it found there isn't any at all. Your odds of getting cancer from TRT are about the same as you getting cancer from using a computer mouse. Personally, I was surprised to find that men on TRT did not have a LOWER risk of cancer. Putting the body into better shape should reduce your chances of getting various illnesses and diseases...

None of this stopped the ambulance chasers from creating panic with their TV commercials...
 
cybrsage said:
The study showing a link between cancer and TRT was a metastudy and not a direct study. Basically, they combed through all the studies on TRT and found how many men in each study who went on TRT got diagnosed with cancer during the study and compared it to how many men each the study who did not go on TRT (the control group, mostly) got diagnosed with cancer during the study. From that, they showed more men who were on TRT got diagnosed with cancer during the study than who were not on TRT.

Since cancer was not part of the original studies, they did not take any cancer prescreening into account for them. Did these men have cancer before they started the studies and only find out because of all the tests done during the studies? Were they smokers? Did they eat known carcinogens? None of that was taken into account. Therefor, the metastudy was completely worthless to show a link between cancer and TRT, even the creators of the metastudy say so. All this study was supposed to accomplish was to see if there was enough reason to do a study to see if there is a link between cancer and TRT, which it did show.

A full, real, controlled study was then done to see if there is actually a link between cancer and TRT and it found there isn't any at all. Your odds of getting cancer from TRT are about the same as you getting cancer from using a computer mouse. Personally, I was surprised to find that men on TRT did not have a LOWER risk of cancer. Putting the body into better shape should reduce your chances of getting various illnesses and diseases...

None of this stopped the ambulance chasers from creating panic with their TV commercials...
Click to expand...

good stuff..... have there been any studies with regards to the safety of ancillieires... i.e. HCG/Arimidex?
 
copaseet said:
good stuff..... have there been any studies with regards to the safety of ancillieires... i.e. HCG/Arimidex?
Click to expand...

Copaseet, what if I told you that drinking water can give you cancer. Would you stop drinking water? (it really can, it's when there's an unusual bend in the hydrogen oxygen bond, giving it a different angle)

Most studies on HCG are going to be in women (same as adex), and they often include data that is secondary to treatment like aromatization increasing estradiol.

Anyone trying to tell you that it's unsafe is either undereducated or trying to sell you something. Know this: TRT helps you live LONGER, not shorter. :)
 
Association/correlation/linked does NOT equal causation....ever.

If I told you that 10 dudes got testicular cancer and they all happened to have 4 inch dicks, does that mean small penis = ball cancer?

Because that's EXACTLY what the media would assume since they go crazy over association type studies despite them being close to meaningless :)
 
Zilla: everyone knows that guys with 4" cocks get their full cock and balls stuffed into the girl's mouth all at once (one of the benefits). This causes more testicular trauma via molars though which in turn causes more ball cancer.
 
Good info on this thread..... for those on TRT do most of you aim for the high end of the spectrum.... i.e 900 to 1100 ng\dl?
 
though i agree with zilla.. this is something that should be left to your doc to decide with you
 
copaseet said:
Good info on this thread..... for those on TRT do most of you aim for the high end of the spectrum.... i.e 900 to 1100 ng\dl?
Click to expand...

It's more about how you feel to be honest. I happen to feel fantastic between 750-1000ng/dL. Just don't make it about numbers, that will drive you crazy. :)
 
copaseet said:
- how long have you been on? AI/HCG?
Click to expand...

I just hit 6 years (I think?) and yes, I'm on both AI/HCG. I am going to change my AI pretty soon here though as my doctor wants to fight with me over triglycerides (I'm barely outside optimal) - and letrozole does negatively impact lipids.
 
halfwit said:
I just hit 6 years (I think?) and yes, I'm on both AI/HCG. I am going to change my AI pretty soon here though as my doctor wants to fight with me over triglycerides (I'm barely outside optimal) - and letrozole does negatively impact lipids.
Click to expand...

6 years on trt kool now you can change your name to halfuhdozen:nerd:
 
halfwit said:
I just hit 6 years (I think?) and yes, I'm on both AI/HCG. I am going to change my AI pretty soon here though as my doctor wants to fight with me over triglycerides (I'm barely outside optimal) - and letrozole does negatively impact lipids.
Click to expand...

HCG because you still may want to have kids? or you just like to have big balls? :)
 
copaseet said:
HCG because you still may want to have kids? or you just like to have big balls? :)
Click to expand...
No, because I like having a healthy supply of DHEA and pregnenolone; two hormones that tend to dip low when you no longer have any leutinizing hormone (LH) flowing in your bloodstream. :) They both have an impact on mental clarity among other functions. Note: Some guys are apparently sensitive to these, so YMMV. ;)

clman8585 said:
I thought dht causes prostate cancer
Click to expand...
I'll let the study do the talking for me:

Possible Mechanisms of Androgen Influence on Prostate Cancer Development

It is well established that circulating androgens are a central prerequisite for the growth of the normal prostate but the action of androgens on the process of carcinogenesis is not clear.

While we generally relate the male hormone, testosterone, to stimulation of the prostate, we know, more precisely, that the more active metabolite, dihydrotestosterone (DHT), actually stimulates prostatic tissue to a much greater degree. DHT forms through the reduction of testosterone by the enzyme 5-alpha-reductase.13 As with testosterone, the role of DHT in the promotion of prostate cancer is not known. Both testosterone and DHT bind to the same androgen receptor protein, although DHT has a much higher binding affinity14 and results in increased transcription.7,15
....

Conclusion
The effectiveness of testosterone therapy in ameliorating the signs and symptoms of hypogonadism in the aging male will lead to increased implementation of this therapy. There have been multiple attempts to correlate the administration of testosterone to prostate carcinogenesis, but the studies have failed to produce consistent results. Similarly, the studies which attempt to correlate increased testosterone with increased PSA levels have been unconvincing. Nor have the studies been able to link DHT, the more active metabolite of testosterone, to the development of carcinoma. The prevailing opinion is that restoring testosterone levels to physiologic levels offers no increased risk of carcinoma. However, there is little doubt that the studies show a deleterious effect on existing clinical carcinoma of the prostate. With the elimination of the presence of an existing carcinoma of the prostate, through physical examination and laboratory studies, before initiation of testosterone therapy, and the continuous monitoring of the patient throughout therapy, testosterone therapy will prove safe with regard to prostate health.
Click to expand...
Source

Edit: Just wanted to point out Zilla's post above. This is a fine example of how the negative studies came to be in the first place. They saw guys with prostate cancer and were on TRT and made a correlation due to DHT levels and the ability it has to generate prostate tissue in healthy males.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
Incorporating combat sports training into your routine can elevate testosterone levels
Replies
0
Views
315
ilovebenching
I
O
Can I take Steroids with My treatment?
Replies
1
Views
369
Milton
Milton
A
Will Being on Steroids Affect Recovery After Dental Surgery?
Replies
3
Views
738
Kevin434
K
C
48 year old male on TRT adding a supraphysiologic cycle w/ some "PCT"
Replies
0
Views
816
cheroxy
C
J
Any guys in their 40's and 50's still cycling? Need cycle advice while on TRT
Replies
0
Views
1K
JAYBOURBON
J
Back
Top