Can PCa cause ED?

I know the treatments, both surgery and radiation, can impair erectile
function. But I'm wondering if untreated PCa can also.

The reason I ask this is that I was exploring the origination of nitric
oxide in our bodies. I came across this website,
http://www.life-enhancement.com/arti...ate.asp?ID=938.

It stated:

Now, another major mechanism of decreased production of nitric oxide
has been reported: an increase in the arginase pathway for the use of
arginine. Recent studies have reported increases in arginase in
conditions including reperfusion injury,3 asthma,4,5 psoriasis,6
arthritis,7 and human breast cancer.8 (Since arginase II is highly
expressed in the prostate, it would be interesting to see whether there
is increased expression in prostate cancer.) The increased arginase
decreases arginine availability to be converted to nitric oxide, as
well as increasing ornithine that can be converted into polyamines,
procellular proliferation factors.6

Does anyone have any ideas on this?

Thanks,

John

JohnHace wrote:
> I know the treatments, both surgery and radiation, can impair erectile
> function. But I'm wondering if untreated PCa can also.
>
> > Does anyone have any ideas on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John



Dear John--

According to Dr. Scardino if not treated the cancer will eventually
spread to the erectile nerves and produce the same result.

According toThe Prostate Book, (page 269.)

If left untreated, pca can cause ED and much worse, not only by growing
directly into the nerves that lie close to the prostate but also by
requiring further treatment --radiation or hormone therapy -- that can
cause loss of erections and (in the case of hormones) decreasee libido
as well.

Good luck,


Leah

callalily wrote:
>
> According to Dr. Scardino if not treated the cancer will eventually
> spread to the erectile nerves and produce the same result.
>

Yes, Leah, that is Scardino's opinion. But in Strum's book in appendix
4.3 he says that Walsh found the nerve bundles are 4.9 mm away from the
capsule. Most extra capsular penetration only goes out to 2 mm, then it
heads up toward the seminal vesticles. In a study of more than 500 men,
Walsh found positive margins near the nerve bundles in only 2% of the
path reports. This leads me to believe that it is rare that the nerve
bundles are involved in the cancer.

Dr. Myers also said, "a paper from the Mayo clinic in the journal
Cancer showed that in 99% of the cases, the cancer has spread less than
5 millimeters (about a quarter of an inch) from the prostate capsule."

I guess I'm just wondering if, anecdotally, others on this list felt
that they were losing potentcy from the PCa and not the treatment.

Thanks,

John

"JohnHace" <johnh@amcoex.com> wrote in message
news:1162588985.496212.309460@f16g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> ...
> Does anyone have any ideas on this?
> ...

This sounds to me like one of those speculations about which
it is impossible to even make an educated guess. I would
think someone has to do a bunch of studies to find out if
nitric acid is reduced in prostate cancer patients, when and
by how much, and to what extent, if any, that reduction
contributes to ED.

Sex is so much a psychological process that I think that
just knowing that one has cancer is, all by itself, something
that is likely to interfere with one's sex life. Growing older
doesn't help either. So it's impossible to disentangle the
various factors without a real empirical study.

Alan

JohnHace wrote:
> I know the treatments, both surgery and radiation, can impair erectile
> function. But I'm wondering if untreated PCa can also.

I agree with alan that this would be an extremely difficult question to
study. Certainly, if the cancer progresses, it will eventually have to
be treated with hormone therapy, in which case impotence will very ikely
become moot. When the cancer becomes hormone independent, presumably
few men are going to be concerned about impotence.

Also, your trying to draw conclusions from what you find in various
places about how far and in what direction the cancer spreads is not
likely to lead you anywhere. You should keep in mind that without
adequate training, which none of us here have, reasoning about such
hypotheticals is bound to omit important facts and understandings and is
not likely to yield reliable conclusions. Presumably Scardino knows all
the facts you dredged up but still thinks that untreated prostate cancer
can affect the nervess controlling erections. My inclination would be
to accept what he says unless some other competent authority explicitly
disagrees.

>
> The reason I ask this is that I was exploring the origination of nitric
> oxide in our bodies. I came across this website,
> http://www.life-enhancement.com/arti...ate.asp?ID=938.
>
> It stated:
>
> Now, another major mechanism of decreased production of nitric oxide
> has been reported: an increase in the arginase pathway for the use of
> arginine. Recent studies have reported increases in arginase in
> conditions including reperfusion injury,3 asthma,4,5 psoriasis,6
> arthritis,7 and human breast cancer.8 (Since arginase II is highly
> expressed in the prostate, it would be interesting to see whether there
> is increased expression in prostate cancer.) The increased arginase
> decreases arginine availability to be converted to nitric oxide, as
> well as increasing ornithine that can be converted into polyamines,
> procellular proliferation factors.6
>
> Does anyone have any ideas on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>

Leonard Evens wrote:
> JohnHace wrote:
>> I know the treatments, both surgery and radiation, can impair erectile
>> function. But I'm wondering if untreated PCa can also.
>
> I agree with alan that this would be an extremely difficult question to
> study.

What am I missing? Won't PC -- a disease which erodes
ever-expanding regions of our urinary and reproductive system including
erectile hardware and software -- at some point impair if not altogether
destroy those systems and functions?

I.P.

"I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddaboutit@noway.nohow> wrote in message
news:9tv3h.9671$s14.1895@newsfe05.lga...
: Leonard Evens wrote:
: > JohnHace wrote:
: >> I know the treatments, both surgery and radiation, can impair erectile
: >> function. But I'm wondering if untreated PCa can also.
: >
: > I agree with alan that this would be an extremely difficult question to
: > study.
:
: What am I missing? Won't PC -- a disease which erodes
: ever-expanding regions of our urinary and reproductive system including
: erectile hardware and software -- at some point impair if not altogether
: destroy those systems and functions?
:
: I.P.

I don't think you've missed a thing, my friend, and your logic sounds
perfectly reasonable to me. In my own case, and due to my own negligence, I
waited until my PSA and a trusted urologist dictated surgery, pronto.
Before that time I had almost totally lost interest in sexual relations with
my beloved wife and could hardly function, anyway. I put it down to age
(70+) and BPH. Now I no longer think that was entirely the case.

(Follow up: Surgery, HRT, and external beam radiation has lowered the PSA to
an undetectable level but I've lost everything else.)

Ken Bland

I think we are getting away from the original question. Maybe I didn't
phrase it clearly.

I was wondering what is the likelyhood that PC that is completely
contained within the prostate (no nerve involvement) could cause a
reduction in erectile function. As the article points out, arginase II
is highly expressed in the prostate and that may increase with PC. The
increased arginase decreases arginine availability to be converted to
nitric oxide, which is necessary for erections.

As Alan pointed out, "Sex is so much a psychological process that I
think that just knowing that one has cancer is, all by itself,
something that is likely to interfere with one's sex life." I agree.
But what if you didn't know?

In other words, do any of you remember your erectile function
diminishing before you were diagnosed?

Mine was. In fact, the only reason I went to get a physical was because
my doctor required it before he would give me a prescription for
Vitamin V. It was that PSA test that rocked my world.

John

JohnHace wrote:

> In other words, do any of you remember your erectile function
> diminishing before you were diagnosed?

I was slowing down but definitely not impaired prior to diagnosis at
57.

The defining event was that 1st Lupron shot, or more precisely, 2 or 3
weeks afterward, after the testosterone flare had faded.

Prior to the shot, I was usually good to go, perhaps not like when I
was 30 but "pretty darn good".

After the Lupron, the seeding, and the IMRT, life is an 8 on a scale of
10.

Not terrific but serviceable.

-kh

Justin Case wrote:
> "I.P. Freely" wrote
> :
> : What am I missing? Won't PC -- a disease which erodes
> : ever-expanding regions of our urinary and reproductive system including
> : erectile hardware and software -- at some point impair if not altogether
> : destroy those systems and functions?

>
> I don't think you've missed a thing, my friend, and your logic sounds
> perfectly reasonable to me. In my own case, and due to my own negligence, I
> waited until my PSA and a trusted urologist dictated surgery, pronto.
> Before that time I had almost totally lost interest in sexual relations with
> my beloved wife and could hardly function, anyway. I put it down to age
> (70+) and BPH. Now I no longer think that was entirely the case.
>
> (Follow up: Surgery, HRT, and external beam radiation has lowered the PSA to
> an undetectable level but I've lost everything else.)

Don't presume your delay destroyed your sex life. My uro onc said that
although my PC probably began at least a decade ago (it was diagnosed in
'04 with PSA around 1.2 in '00), it is an unlikely culprit in my ED
which got noticeable (couldn't always finish the job) in the mid-90s, my
early 50s, despite very minor, if any, BPH.

But age? Tell that to the guys who still enjoy sex into their '80s . . .
both of them.

I.P.

JohnHace wrote:
> I think we are getting away from the original question. Maybe I didn't
> phrase it clearly.
>
> I was wondering what is the likelyhood that PC that is completely
> contained within the prostate (no nerve involvement) could cause a
> reduction in erectile function. As the article points out, arginase II
> is highly expressed in the prostate and that may increase with PC. The
> increased arginase decreases arginine availability to be converted to
> nitric oxide, which is necessary for erections.
>
> As Alan pointed out, "Sex is so much a psychological process that I
> think that just knowing that one has cancer is, all by itself,
> something that is likely to interfere with one's sex life." I agree.
> But what if you didn't know?
>
> In other words, do any of you remember your erectile function
> diminishing before you were diagnosed?

Erectile function diminishes with age in any case. Few of us, if any,
had the kind of erections at 65 that we had when we were 16. But
except for that, I had no problems whatsoever before my RP, and that
includes the period between the biopsy and the operation.

Personally, I doubt that prostate cancer when contained within the
prostate gland can cause ED. Also, there are so many things that can
cause ED that are more likely that attributing it to the cancer would
seem a long shot.

>
> Mine was. In fact, the only reason I went to get a physical was because
> my doctor required it before he would give me a prescription for
> Vitamin V. It was that PSA test that rocked my world.
>
> John
>

"I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddaboutit@noway.nohow> wrote
[snip - no pun intended]
> But age? Tell that to the guys who still enjoy sex into their '80s . . .
> both of them.
>
> I.P.

Not with each other, one hopes, lest we unleash another storm of
God-will-smite-them e-mails.

Alex

Alex wrote:
> "I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddaboutit@noway.nohow> wrote
> [snip - no pun intended]
>> But age? Tell that to the guys who still enjoy sex into their '80s . . .
>> both of them.
>>
>> I.P.
>
> Not with each other, one hopes, lest we unleash another storm of
> God-will-smite-them e-mails.

LOL. Heck, at that age they've earned the right to consenting donkeys
AFAIC.

I.P.

"Leonard Evens" <len@math.northwestern.edu> wrote in message
news:lc2dnbKrrZ2hUdLYnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@comcast.com. ..

> Erectile function diminishes with age in any case. Few of us, if any,
> had the kind of erections at 65 that we had when we were 16.

I didn't have the kind of erections at 45 that I had at 16! I had to find
somewhere else to hang my wardrobe.





--
PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06, 6/06
PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA <0.04
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Steve Kramer wrote:
>
>
> I didn't have the kind of erections at 45 that I had at 16! I had to find
> somewhere else to hang my wardrobe.
>

LOL. But I've seen some real solid "hangers" courtesy of trimix. I'm
sure you could hav3 hunt your clothes on there plus your wooden
tie-rack.

LFC
>
>

> --
>