What are the current thoughts for ADT and prostate SBRT for low-Intermediate risk patients?

Although I have no strong bias regarding ADT for low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients receiving SBRT, the growing volume of retrospective data in the same setting with HDR brachytherapy suggests that ADT is not needed. With HDR (either monotherapy or boost), I do not use ADT for intermediate-risk patients except in patients with >75% of biopsy sites are tumor bearing, with clinical T2c disease (relatively uncommon), or perhaps patients with all 3 intermediate-risk features, although th...

Its hard to argue for ADT + SBRT in "low-intermediate" risk (do you mean "favorable-intermediate"???) when this same cohort of patients has evidence supporting active surveillance and/or behavior like low-risk patients.

Just to be clear, I am using the MSKCC definition of no primary Gleason pattern 4, fewer then 50% cores positive, and no more than 1 intermediate risk feature. I personally have no qualm about using SBRT as a treatment without ADT in a favorable intermediate risk, but I am genera...