ASTRO: Brain Metastases Common in Ovarian Cancer
Brain metastases commonly develop among patients with ovarian cancer, and do so rapidly in those with advanced disease, a retrospective review found.
In a study of 78 women with ovarian cancer who developed one or more brain metastases, 50% developed a single metastasis, according to Sewit Teckie, MD, and colleagues from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
In addition to that group, another 19% of patients were found to have two or three metastases on initial diagnosis, 23% had four or more, and 8% already had leptomeningeal disease, Teckie told MedPage Today during a poster session at the annual meeting of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO).
The patients were treated at the cancer center between 1983 and 2010. Their median age was 54.8 and 88% had stage III/IV disease.
The location of the metastases was the cerebral hemisphere in 56%, the cerebellum in 15%, and both in 28%.
Median overall survival was 62.3 months (95% CI 51.2 to 73.3).
The median time after diagnosis to the detection of brain metastasis was 71.1 months in patients with early-stage disease and 38.3 months when disease was diagnosed at stage III/IV.
Median follow-up for the entire cohort was eight months, and for the six patients still alive at the time of this analysis, median follow-up was 15 months.
Among all patients who developed the metastases, median subsequent survival was 8.9 months (95% CI 5.5 to 15.3), with a median survival of 14 months (95% CI 7.7 to 27.9) specifically in those who had only one metastasis.
A total of 92% of patients received whole- or partial-brain radiation therapy or stereotactic radiosurgery for their metastatic disease, while 49% had surgical treatment.
Most of those who had surgery had only one brain metastasis.
A total of 25 patients who underwent surgery also had postoperative radiation, and 15 required salvage radiation after local treatment was unsuccessful.
On multivariate analysis, these factors were associated with poor survival:
Karnofsky performance status ≥70, HR 0.35 (P=0.004)
Uncontrolled primary tumor, HR 1.81 (P=0.03)
Four or more brain metastases, HR 2.73 (P=0.002)
Leptomeningeal disease, HR 3.34 (P=0.01)
Among 33 of 39 patients for whom follow-up imaging was available, progressive or recurrent metastatic disease had occurred and 20.5% had developed leptomeningeal disease.
Six of those patients had an initial partial or complete response to radiotherapy, but two had later recurrences.
Median survival after radiation therapy for leptomeningeal disease was four months, although one patient remained alive after one year.
"More cases of leptomeningeal disease are being reported. These patients did better than patients usually do," Teckie said. "We knew leptomeningeal disease was a poor predictor, but this has not previously been analyzed statistically," she added.
In general, although brain metastases occur earlier in advanced ovarian cancer, if only one metastasis is present, stereotactic radiosurgery or surgery plus radiation therapy can provide a durable response and improve survival for some patients, she concluded.
Primary source: American Society for Radiation Oncology ASTRO 2011; Abstract 2568.
Source reference: Teckie S, et al "Predictors of survival in ovarian cancer brain metastases" ASTRO 2011; Abstract 2568.
Comments
-
taxane dissemination
In stem cell research, anti-cancer treatments often effectively shrink the size of tumors, but some might have the opposite effect, actually expanding the small population of cancer stem cells that then are capable of metastasizing.
Using the CellSearch System technique that quantifies circulating tumor cells, scientists had shown that chemotherapy with Taxol causes a massive release of cells into the circulation, while at the same time reducing the size of the tumor, explaining that complete pathologic responses (tumor shrinkage) do not correlate well with improvements in survival.
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are cancer cells that have detached from solid tumors and entered the blood stream. This can begin the process of metastasis, the most life-threatening aspect of cancer. To metastasize, or spread cancer to other sites in the body, CTCs travel through the blood and can take root in another tissue or organ.
Even before the advent of the CellSearch technique, which was the "holy cow" moment about the dissemination after taxane-based chemotherapy, it had been observed in various cell-death assays, that there was an increase in the number of metabolic activity of mitochondria of the surviving cells from taxane therapy, even in cases where the majority of the cells are being killed by taxanes.
It may indeed give clincial response (tumor shrinkage), sometimes impressive, however, these are mostly short-lived and relapses after a response to taxanes are often dramatic.
Taxol actually causes cancer cell microtentacles (or extensions of the plasma membrane of cancer clles) to grow longer and allows tumor cells to reattach faster, appear to play a key role in how cancers spread to distant locations in the body.0 -
what's a person to do?gdpawel said:taxane dissemination
In stem cell research, anti-cancer treatments often effectively shrink the size of tumors, but some might have the opposite effect, actually expanding the small population of cancer stem cells that then are capable of metastasizing.
Using the CellSearch System technique that quantifies circulating tumor cells, scientists had shown that chemotherapy with Taxol causes a massive release of cells into the circulation, while at the same time reducing the size of the tumor, explaining that complete pathologic responses (tumor shrinkage) do not correlate well with improvements in survival.
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are cancer cells that have detached from solid tumors and entered the blood stream. This can begin the process of metastasis, the most life-threatening aspect of cancer. To metastasize, or spread cancer to other sites in the body, CTCs travel through the blood and can take root in another tissue or organ.
Even before the advent of the CellSearch technique, which was the "holy cow" moment about the dissemination after taxane-based chemotherapy, it had been observed in various cell-death assays, that there was an increase in the number of metabolic activity of mitochondria of the surviving cells from taxane therapy, even in cases where the majority of the cells are being killed by taxanes.
It may indeed give clincial response (tumor shrinkage), sometimes impressive, however, these are mostly short-lived and relapses after a response to taxanes are often dramatic.
Taxol actually causes cancer cell microtentacles (or extensions of the plasma membrane of cancer clles) to grow longer and allows tumor cells to reattach faster, appear to play a key role in how cancers spread to distant locations in the body.
So with taxol being so ominous, what are the scientists suggesting for treatment? Are other chemos better/safer or does this cast a shadow on all chemotherapy?
This is reminiscent of other things that are originally claimed to be safe and later we are warned that the food or drug is carcinogenic.0 -
thanks for sharinggdpawel said:taxane dissemination
In stem cell research, anti-cancer treatments often effectively shrink the size of tumors, but some might have the opposite effect, actually expanding the small population of cancer stem cells that then are capable of metastasizing.
Using the CellSearch System technique that quantifies circulating tumor cells, scientists had shown that chemotherapy with Taxol causes a massive release of cells into the circulation, while at the same time reducing the size of the tumor, explaining that complete pathologic responses (tumor shrinkage) do not correlate well with improvements in survival.
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are cancer cells that have detached from solid tumors and entered the blood stream. This can begin the process of metastasis, the most life-threatening aspect of cancer. To metastasize, or spread cancer to other sites in the body, CTCs travel through the blood and can take root in another tissue or organ.
Even before the advent of the CellSearch technique, which was the "holy cow" moment about the dissemination after taxane-based chemotherapy, it had been observed in various cell-death assays, that there was an increase in the number of metabolic activity of mitochondria of the surviving cells from taxane therapy, even in cases where the majority of the cells are being killed by taxanes.
It may indeed give clincial response (tumor shrinkage), sometimes impressive, however, these are mostly short-lived and relapses after a response to taxanes are often dramatic.
Taxol actually causes cancer cell microtentacles (or extensions of the plasma membrane of cancer clles) to grow longer and allows tumor cells to reattach faster, appear to play a key role in how cancers spread to distant locations in the body.
Thank you for responding to Claudia's request. Having lots of information helps us all to make informed decisions about our health care. Hard to tell what is the right decision isn't it? Kind of like being a Monday morning quarterback. Except it is our lives we are talking about, not a game. I decided when diagnosed to to to what is consider one of the top cancer treatment centers in the world. I don't regret it. I did what they told me to do. Glad to report that it turned out well for me so far.
Again thanks for sharing. Your concern is appreciated.0 -
tumor gonenorma2 said:thanks for sharing
Thank you for responding to Claudia's request. Having lots of information helps us all to make informed decisions about our health care. Hard to tell what is the right decision isn't it? Kind of like being a Monday morning quarterback. Except it is our lives we are talking about, not a game. I decided when diagnosed to to to what is consider one of the top cancer treatment centers in the world. I don't regret it. I did what they told me to do. Glad to report that it turned out well for me so far.
Again thanks for sharing. Your concern is appreciated.
What if the taxol is not used for tumor shrinkage, if the tumor has already been removed? The report above is for taxol being used for tumor shrinkage.
You know, we all do what we can do and have done, and information like this about how horrible taxol is, OVER AND OVER AGAIN...........sigh.
We are not stupid women and undertook our various treatments using the best information available from the best resources we could find. Like Norma, I decided that the Hopkins doctors, gynecological pathologists, tissue assay company........all gave me the best information that was out there. I felt very fortunate that the top hospital in the country, and also a top cancer center, was accessible for me.0 -
important question for gdJoAnnDK said:tumor gone
What if the taxol is not used for tumor shrinkage, if the tumor has already been removed? The report above is for taxol being used for tumor shrinkage.
You know, we all do what we can do and have done, and information like this about how horrible taxol is, OVER AND OVER AGAIN...........sigh.
We are not stupid women and undertook our various treatments using the best information available from the best resources we could find. Like Norma, I decided that the Hopkins doctors, gynecological pathologists, tissue assay company........all gave me the best information that was out there. I felt very fortunate that the top hospital in the country, and also a top cancer center, was accessible for me.
I re-read the info you posted - "In a study of 78 women with ovarian cancer who developed one or more brain metastases, 50% developed a single metastasis, according to Sewit Teckie, MD, and colleagues from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
......In addition to that group, another 19% of patients were found to have two or three metastases on initial diagnosis, 23% had four or more, and 8% already had leptomeningeal disease"
The stats talk about the patients that developed mets but failed to mention what percentage this was of total women treated with taxol. Did I miss that? And please share what your motivation for posting this is - to inform or to scare? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mary Ann0 -
I am at a loss to understand
I am at a loss to understand the tone of a couple of replies to Greg's post.
Greg's sharing information. What other motivation would he have? What does he gain by scaring any of us?
I have always believed that what I know can save me, and what I don't know can kill me. People sharing information is always welcome, even when I disagree with the opinions or citations. On the other hand, I don't understand why some people react to information they don't like by questioning the motive of the person sharing that information or being defensive. Greg is not saying anyone of us is stupid. Meanwhile, there are those patients who unquestioningly follow whatever their doctors tell them to do, which is not always the right thing to do. So, having more information, regardless of how unsettling it maybe is, in balance, is a better thing - unless one is dealing with a quack trying to sell something. Greg is citing legitimate information - legitimate study conducted by legitimate researchers.
Please do not disincentivize people sharing information by second guessing their motives or being sarcastic or defensive because you don't like that information. Challenge if you have contrary data points, but don't dismiss with semi personal attacks and sarcasm. It lowers the quality of the discussion we have on this forum.
PS there was another post about taxol's toxicity and its role in metastasis by another poster. Between that and this by Greg, it does give me a food for thought - that is, taxol as a maintenance drug (as is the case for some patients) may not be the best idea. I am glad that some posters including Greg brought this to our attention.0 -
Throwing caution to the wind?daisy366 said:important question for gd
I re-read the info you posted - "In a study of 78 women with ovarian cancer who developed one or more brain metastases, 50% developed a single metastasis, according to Sewit Teckie, MD, and colleagues from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
......In addition to that group, another 19% of patients were found to have two or three metastases on initial diagnosis, 23% had four or more, and 8% already had leptomeningeal disease"
The stats talk about the patients that developed mets but failed to mention what percentage this was of total women treated with taxol. Did I miss that? And please share what your motivation for posting this is - to inform or to scare? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mary Ann
There have been a number of studies over the last fifteen years about taxane dissemination. The very first reference I found of this was a NCI observational study in 1995 that reported experience in their clinic where recurrent systemic disease occurred in all patients for which they received dose-intense Paclitaxel (Taxol) therapy. Brain metastasis was the only site of disease recurrence.
It has been stated that ovarian metastasis to the brain has been rare. Indeed, until 1994, brain metastasis was a rare complication of ovarian cancer with only 67 well-documented cases in medical literature. A multi-institutional study of 4027 ovarian cancer patients over 30 years identified only 32 cases while an autopsy study of ovarian cancer reported an incidence of 0.9%.
In the last decade, the incidence of central nervous system (CNS) metastasis has increased. The ASTRO study is one of the first to come out about the commonality of brain metastases in ovarian cancer. The word "scare" is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps not throwing caution to the wind? Should ovarian cancer patients be receiving periodic brain MRIs?
GOG's own Dr. David Alberts was quoted in a book: "There are 22 drugs that are FDA approved for ovarian cancer and it is absolute chaos, certainly in the second-line treatment of these patients, to determine what drug should be used. I can assure you that physicians are not infallible in this situation....If patients were given the opportunity to really understand what the options were, there is no question that they would want to be treated according to the best knowledge that existed for them on the basis of their tumor."0 -
Throwing caution to the wind?daisy366 said:important question for gd
I re-read the info you posted - "In a study of 78 women with ovarian cancer who developed one or more brain metastases, 50% developed a single metastasis, according to Sewit Teckie, MD, and colleagues from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
......In addition to that group, another 19% of patients were found to have two or three metastases on initial diagnosis, 23% had four or more, and 8% already had leptomeningeal disease"
The stats talk about the patients that developed mets but failed to mention what percentage this was of total women treated with taxol. Did I miss that? And please share what your motivation for posting this is - to inform or to scare? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mary Ann
There have been a number of studies over the last fifteen years about taxane dissemination. The very first reference I found of this was a NCI observational study in 1995 that reported experience in their clinic where recurrent systemic disease occurred in all patients for which they received dose-intense Paclitaxel (Taxol) therapy. Brain metastasis was the only site of disease recurrence.
It has been stated that ovarian metastasis to the brain has been rare. Indeed, until 1994, brain metastasis was a rare complication of ovarian cancer with only 67 well-documented cases in medical literature. A multi-institutional study of 4027 ovarian cancer patients over 30 years identified only 32 cases while an autopsy study of ovarian cancer reported an incidence of 0.9%.
In the last decade, the incidence of central nervous system (CNS) metastasis has increased. The ASTRO study is one of the first to come out about the commonality of brain metastases in ovarian cancer. The word "scare" is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps not throwing caution to the wind? Should ovarian cancer patients be receiving periodic brain MRIs?
GOG's own Dr. David Alberts was quoted in a book: "There are 22 drugs that are FDA approved for ovarian cancer and it is absolute chaos, certainly in the second-line treatment of these patients, to determine what drug should be used. I can assure you that physicians are not infallible in this situation....If patients were given the opportunity to really understand what the options were, there is no question that they would want to be treated according to the best knowledge that existed for them on the basis of their tumor."0 -
What is wrong with CSN website software?gdpawel said:Throwing caution to the wind?
There have been a number of studies over the last fifteen years about taxane dissemination. The very first reference I found of this was a NCI observational study in 1995 that reported experience in their clinic where recurrent systemic disease occurred in all patients for which they received dose-intense Paclitaxel (Taxol) therapy. Brain metastasis was the only site of disease recurrence.
It has been stated that ovarian metastasis to the brain has been rare. Indeed, until 1994, brain metastasis was a rare complication of ovarian cancer with only 67 well-documented cases in medical literature. A multi-institutional study of 4027 ovarian cancer patients over 30 years identified only 32 cases while an autopsy study of ovarian cancer reported an incidence of 0.9%.
In the last decade, the incidence of central nervous system (CNS) metastasis has increased. The ASTRO study is one of the first to come out about the commonality of brain metastases in ovarian cancer. The word "scare" is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps not throwing caution to the wind? Should ovarian cancer patients be receiving periodic brain MRIs?
GOG's own Dr. David Alberts was quoted in a book: "There are 22 drugs that are FDA approved for ovarian cancer and it is absolute chaos, certainly in the second-line treatment of these patients, to determine what drug should be used. I can assure you that physicians are not infallible in this situation....If patients were given the opportunity to really understand what the options were, there is no question that they would want to be treated according to the best knowledge that existed for them on the basis of their tumor."
At times it runs like it's on its last leg, then it pulses out numerous replies. And you can't delete its mistakes. Anybody have a solution to CSN's website software mistakes?0 -
greg and optimistevertheoptimist said:I am at a loss to understand
I am at a loss to understand the tone of a couple of replies to Greg's post.
Greg's sharing information. What other motivation would he have? What does he gain by scaring any of us?
I have always believed that what I know can save me, and what I don't know can kill me. People sharing information is always welcome, even when I disagree with the opinions or citations. On the other hand, I don't understand why some people react to information they don't like by questioning the motive of the person sharing that information or being defensive. Greg is not saying anyone of us is stupid. Meanwhile, there are those patients who unquestioningly follow whatever their doctors tell them to do, which is not always the right thing to do. So, having more information, regardless of how unsettling it maybe is, in balance, is a better thing - unless one is dealing with a quack trying to sell something. Greg is citing legitimate information - legitimate study conducted by legitimate researchers.
Please do not disincentivize people sharing information by second guessing their motives or being sarcastic or defensive because you don't like that information. Challenge if you have contrary data points, but don't dismiss with semi personal attacks and sarcasm. It lowers the quality of the discussion we have on this forum.
PS there was another post about taxol's toxicity and its role in metastasis by another poster. Between that and this by Greg, it does give me a food for thought - that is, taxol as a maintenance drug (as is the case for some patients) may not be the best idea. I am glad that some posters including Greg brought this to our attention.
I'm Not interested in fighting here. and I did not intend to be sarcastic, defensive, or attacking - if you took my comments that way. I think motivation is important. I appreciate all valid information.
I still would like to know percentage of women who had mets - did I miss this???0 -
Taxol, the good newsevertheoptimist said:I am at a loss to understand
I am at a loss to understand the tone of a couple of replies to Greg's post.
Greg's sharing information. What other motivation would he have? What does he gain by scaring any of us?
I have always believed that what I know can save me, and what I don't know can kill me. People sharing information is always welcome, even when I disagree with the opinions or citations. On the other hand, I don't understand why some people react to information they don't like by questioning the motive of the person sharing that information or being defensive. Greg is not saying anyone of us is stupid. Meanwhile, there are those patients who unquestioningly follow whatever their doctors tell them to do, which is not always the right thing to do. So, having more information, regardless of how unsettling it maybe is, in balance, is a better thing - unless one is dealing with a quack trying to sell something. Greg is citing legitimate information - legitimate study conducted by legitimate researchers.
Please do not disincentivize people sharing information by second guessing their motives or being sarcastic or defensive because you don't like that information. Challenge if you have contrary data points, but don't dismiss with semi personal attacks and sarcasm. It lowers the quality of the discussion we have on this forum.
PS there was another post about taxol's toxicity and its role in metastasis by another poster. Between that and this by Greg, it does give me a food for thought - that is, taxol as a maintenance drug (as is the case for some patients) may not be the best idea. I am glad that some posters including Greg brought this to our attention.
The Good. If you read the entire article, you will understand that this information is information that will help you not only tolerate Taxol better, but have it be BOTH LESS TOXIC AND MORE EFFECTIVE. I have posted this article before and for some reason, most miss that this article conveys good news for those taking Taxol.
I am trying to help you have a more favorable outcome.
We all need to get well by using whatever means works, that's works, for us as individuals. This infomration could help Taxol work better.
Because Taxol is the main chemo agent used for uterine cancer, it is good to know all one can about it.
Taxol appears to be highly effective in those cancers that are ER/PR +, but not nearly as effective for those cancers like uterine papillary serous carcinoma, which is ER/PR-.
The following article talks of how to make Taxol more effective-AND LESSEN ITS TOXICITY-- for those taking it over time usually after recurring by using turmeric (curcumin).
The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E. Price, Ph.D.
I AM ADDING TO THIS BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT THE GIST OF THE INFO WAS CLEAR SO:They are talking about taxol and breast cancer, but they are talking about taxol, which I do believe can initially be very effective in treating non pap serous endo cancers.Then they go on to discuss -TaXOL USED OVER TIME:
They say: Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis.But and here's the good news-talking about curcumin(an ingredient in easily obtainable turmeric): researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. It mentions that curcumin lessens the toxicity of taxol by specifically breaking the dose into more manageable size, thus giving cancer less of a target to respond to negatively.Article further states:
In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effects.and this:Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy.I had read this before in regard to the combo.Honestly, what's not to love about this news.So, all in all, I read this as very good news potentially. I am sure that other universities will be picking up on this and adding their research findings either in support or not. But basically it could potentially help those with recurrences have a far better response to Taxol.Anyone wishing further information or critique would be well advised to contact the original researchers or M.D.Anderson directly for current status, it is not my study, I'm just putting it out there.
TRULY HOPE SOME OF YOU BRING THE INFO TO THE ATTENTION OF YOUR DOCTORS. BEST WISHES TO YOU ALLTHE ABOVE EDITS WERE ADDED ON SEPT 30, 2011-since it appears that some are highly sensitive to edits.
THE ARTICLE:
Early Study Shows Spice Stunts Deadly Spread To Lungs
ScienceDaily (Oct. 16, 2005) — HOUSTON - Curcumin, the main ingredient of turmeric and the compound that gives curry its mustard-yellow color, inhibits metastasis to the lungs of mice with breast cancer, report researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. [My comments: I do think this is worth reading. Talks of turmerics beneficial use in conjunction with Taxol. the spaces in the article were put there by me so it would be easier to see why you might be interested, everything else in the same. I thought I had posted this but didn't see it anywhere. Might be something to bring to the attention of your doctors.]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study, to be published in the Oct. 15 issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research, reports that the spice appears to shut down a protein active in the spread of breast cancer to a major target for metastasis.Though the study results are early, researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis. Curcumin suppresses this response, making it impossible for the cancer to spread.In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effect.Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy."We are excited about the results of the study and the possible implications for taking the findings into the clinic in the next several years," says Bharat Aggarwal, Ph.D., professor of cancer medicine in M. D. Anderson's Department of Experimental Therapeutics. "At this time, advanced breast cancer is a difficult foe to fight with few proven treatments available after surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy."Taxol is currently used as the front-line chemotherapeutic agent in breast cancers, but because the drug frequently induces drug resistance after prolonged use, it is not effective in treating metastatic breast cancer, says Aggarwal.Researchers studied 60 mice with breast cancer, which were randomly assigned to one of four groups: control group, Taxol only, curcumin only and the combination of Taxol and curcumin. After the tumors grew to 10 mm (about the size of a pea), they were surgically removed, and the mice were fed a powdered curcumin diet.Macroscopic lung metastasis, or metastasis that is visible to the naked eye, was seen in 96 percent of the mice in the control group. Treatment using Taxol alone only "modestly reduced" the incidence of metastases, while the group using curcumin alone and curcumin plus Taxol "significantly reduced" both the incidence and numbers of visible lung metastases. Microscopic metastasis, or metastasis that is visible only when using a microscope, was found in the lungs of 28 percent of mice treated with the combination of curcumin and Taxol, and there was no macroscopic disease present. The micrometastases present consisted of only a few cells, suggesting that the combination inhibited the growth of breast cancer tumor cells that were in the lung before the tumors were removed. In a previous study published in the Aug. 15 issue of the journal Cancer, M. D. Anderson researchers found that when the nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB) (a powerful protein known to promote the inflammatory response necessary to cause breast cancer to spread) is shut down, cancer strains are unable to grow and cells are pushed to commit suicide. The mechanism in this curcumin study works the same way. Taxol activated the NF-kB in breast cancer cells, while curcumin stopped this activation by blocking the protein known as "IKK" that switched on the NF-kB, demonstrating how curcumin and Taxol work against one another. Taxol produced the inflammatory response, triggering metastasis, and curcumin suppressed it, causing cell death. Extracted from the roots of the curcuma longa plant, curcumin is a member of the ginger family. While it is not used in conventional medicine, it is widely prescribed in Indian medicine as a potent remedy for liver disorders, rheumatism, diabetic wounds, runny nose, cough and sinusitis. Traditional Chinese medicine uses curcumin as a treatment for diseases associated with abdominal pain, and it is used in ancient Hindu medicine as a treatment for sprains and swelling. According to the American Cancer Society, the chance of a woman having invasive breast cancer sometime during her life is one in eight. About 211,240 women in the United States will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in 2005, and approximately 40,410 women will die from the disease this year.###The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E.
Price, Ph.D.
So, there's that.0 -
greg and optimistevertheoptimist said:I am at a loss to understand
I am at a loss to understand the tone of a couple of replies to Greg's post.
Greg's sharing information. What other motivation would he have? What does he gain by scaring any of us?
I have always believed that what I know can save me, and what I don't know can kill me. People sharing information is always welcome, even when I disagree with the opinions or citations. On the other hand, I don't understand why some people react to information they don't like by questioning the motive of the person sharing that information or being defensive. Greg is not saying anyone of us is stupid. Meanwhile, there are those patients who unquestioningly follow whatever their doctors tell them to do, which is not always the right thing to do. So, having more information, regardless of how unsettling it maybe is, in balance, is a better thing - unless one is dealing with a quack trying to sell something. Greg is citing legitimate information - legitimate study conducted by legitimate researchers.
Please do not disincentivize people sharing information by second guessing their motives or being sarcastic or defensive because you don't like that information. Challenge if you have contrary data points, but don't dismiss with semi personal attacks and sarcasm. It lowers the quality of the discussion we have on this forum.
PS there was another post about taxol's toxicity and its role in metastasis by another poster. Between that and this by Greg, it does give me a food for thought - that is, taxol as a maintenance drug (as is the case for some patients) may not be the best idea. I am glad that some posters including Greg brought this to our attention.
I'm Not interested in fighting here.0 -
Claudia~california_artist said:Taxol, the good news
The Good. If you read the entire article, you will understand that this information is information that will help you not only tolerate Taxol better, but have it be BOTH LESS TOXIC AND MORE EFFECTIVE. I have posted this article before and for some reason, most miss that this article conveys good news for those taking Taxol.
I am trying to help you have a more favorable outcome.
We all need to get well by using whatever means works, that's works, for us as individuals. This infomration could help Taxol work better.
Because Taxol is the main chemo agent used for uterine cancer, it is good to know all one can about it.
Taxol appears to be highly effective in those cancers that are ER/PR +, but not nearly as effective for those cancers like uterine papillary serous carcinoma, which is ER/PR-.
The following article talks of how to make Taxol more effective-AND LESSEN ITS TOXICITY-- for those taking it over time usually after recurring by using turmeric (curcumin).
The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E. Price, Ph.D.
I AM ADDING TO THIS BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT THE GIST OF THE INFO WAS CLEAR SO:They are talking about taxol and breast cancer, but they are talking about taxol, which I do believe can initially be very effective in treating non pap serous endo cancers.Then they go on to discuss -TaXOL USED OVER TIME:
They say: Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis.But and here's the good news-talking about curcumin(an ingredient in easily obtainable turmeric): researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. It mentions that curcumin lessens the toxicity of taxol by specifically breaking the dose into more manageable size, thus giving cancer less of a target to respond to negatively.Article further states:
In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effects.and this:Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy.I had read this before in regard to the combo.Honestly, what's not to love about this news.So, all in all, I read this as very good news potentially. I am sure that other universities will be picking up on this and adding their research findings either in support or not. But basically it could potentially help those with recurrences have a far better response to Taxol.Anyone wishing further information or critique would be well advised to contact the original researchers or M.D.Anderson directly for current status, it is not my study, I'm just putting it out there.
TRULY HOPE SOME OF YOU BRING THE INFO TO THE ATTENTION OF YOUR DOCTORS. BEST WISHES TO YOU ALLTHE ABOVE EDITS WERE ADDED ON SEPT 30, 2011-since it appears that some are highly sensitive to edits.
THE ARTICLE:
Early Study Shows Spice Stunts Deadly Spread To Lungs
ScienceDaily (Oct. 16, 2005) — HOUSTON - Curcumin, the main ingredient of turmeric and the compound that gives curry its mustard-yellow color, inhibits metastasis to the lungs of mice with breast cancer, report researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. [My comments: I do think this is worth reading. Talks of turmerics beneficial use in conjunction with Taxol. the spaces in the article were put there by me so it would be easier to see why you might be interested, everything else in the same. I thought I had posted this but didn't see it anywhere. Might be something to bring to the attention of your doctors.]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study, to be published in the Oct. 15 issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research, reports that the spice appears to shut down a protein active in the spread of breast cancer to a major target for metastasis.Though the study results are early, researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis. Curcumin suppresses this response, making it impossible for the cancer to spread.In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effect.Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy."We are excited about the results of the study and the possible implications for taking the findings into the clinic in the next several years," says Bharat Aggarwal, Ph.D., professor of cancer medicine in M. D. Anderson's Department of Experimental Therapeutics. "At this time, advanced breast cancer is a difficult foe to fight with few proven treatments available after surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy."Taxol is currently used as the front-line chemotherapeutic agent in breast cancers, but because the drug frequently induces drug resistance after prolonged use, it is not effective in treating metastatic breast cancer, says Aggarwal.Researchers studied 60 mice with breast cancer, which were randomly assigned to one of four groups: control group, Taxol only, curcumin only and the combination of Taxol and curcumin. After the tumors grew to 10 mm (about the size of a pea), they were surgically removed, and the mice were fed a powdered curcumin diet.Macroscopic lung metastasis, or metastasis that is visible to the naked eye, was seen in 96 percent of the mice in the control group. Treatment using Taxol alone only "modestly reduced" the incidence of metastases, while the group using curcumin alone and curcumin plus Taxol "significantly reduced" both the incidence and numbers of visible lung metastases. Microscopic metastasis, or metastasis that is visible only when using a microscope, was found in the lungs of 28 percent of mice treated with the combination of curcumin and Taxol, and there was no macroscopic disease present. The micrometastases present consisted of only a few cells, suggesting that the combination inhibited the growth of breast cancer tumor cells that were in the lung before the tumors were removed. In a previous study published in the Aug. 15 issue of the journal Cancer, M. D. Anderson researchers found that when the nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB) (a powerful protein known to promote the inflammatory response necessary to cause breast cancer to spread) is shut down, cancer strains are unable to grow and cells are pushed to commit suicide. The mechanism in this curcumin study works the same way. Taxol activated the NF-kB in breast cancer cells, while curcumin stopped this activation by blocking the protein known as "IKK" that switched on the NF-kB, demonstrating how curcumin and Taxol work against one another. Taxol produced the inflammatory response, triggering metastasis, and curcumin suppressed it, causing cell death. Extracted from the roots of the curcuma longa plant, curcumin is a member of the ginger family. While it is not used in conventional medicine, it is widely prescribed in Indian medicine as a potent remedy for liver disorders, rheumatism, diabetic wounds, runny nose, cough and sinusitis. Traditional Chinese medicine uses curcumin as a treatment for diseases associated with abdominal pain, and it is used in ancient Hindu medicine as a treatment for sprains and swelling. According to the American Cancer Society, the chance of a woman having invasive breast cancer sometime during her life is one in eight. About 211,240 women in the United States will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in 2005, and approximately 40,410 women will die from the disease this year.###The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E.
Price, Ph.D.
So, there's that.
FYI Greg's wife I think is or was an ovarian cancer patient. He has learned much from the years of being her caregiver. I had posted something on another part of this site and we exchanged emails as to how I know about him.
I just learn to take information and read it and if it's beneficial take it in and if not delete it and go on. Not everything we read is relevant to our particular case.
Hugs,
Jan0 -
Brain metsjazzy1 said:Claudia~
FYI Greg's wife I think is or was an ovarian cancer patient. He has learned much from the years of being her caregiver. I had posted something on another part of this site and we exchanged emails as to how I know about him.
I just learn to take information and read it and if it's beneficial take it in and if not delete it and go on. Not everything we read is relevant to our particular case.
Hugs,
Jan
I have discussed brain mets with my doc and getting scan of brain. He replied that unless a person has lung mets, they would not have brain mets. How true is that?0 -
Taxol, the not so good newscalifornia_artist said:Taxol, the good news
The Good. If you read the entire article, you will understand that this information is information that will help you not only tolerate Taxol better, but have it be BOTH LESS TOXIC AND MORE EFFECTIVE. I have posted this article before and for some reason, most miss that this article conveys good news for those taking Taxol.
I am trying to help you have a more favorable outcome.
We all need to get well by using whatever means works, that's works, for us as individuals. This infomration could help Taxol work better.
Because Taxol is the main chemo agent used for uterine cancer, it is good to know all one can about it.
Taxol appears to be highly effective in those cancers that are ER/PR +, but not nearly as effective for those cancers like uterine papillary serous carcinoma, which is ER/PR-.
The following article talks of how to make Taxol more effective-AND LESSEN ITS TOXICITY-- for those taking it over time usually after recurring by using turmeric (curcumin).
The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E. Price, Ph.D.
I AM ADDING TO THIS BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT THE GIST OF THE INFO WAS CLEAR SO:They are talking about taxol and breast cancer, but they are talking about taxol, which I do believe can initially be very effective in treating non pap serous endo cancers.Then they go on to discuss -TaXOL USED OVER TIME:
They say: Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis.But and here's the good news-talking about curcumin(an ingredient in easily obtainable turmeric): researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. It mentions that curcumin lessens the toxicity of taxol by specifically breaking the dose into more manageable size, thus giving cancer less of a target to respond to negatively.Article further states:
In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effects.and this:Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy.I had read this before in regard to the combo.Honestly, what's not to love about this news.So, all in all, I read this as very good news potentially. I am sure that other universities will be picking up on this and adding their research findings either in support or not. But basically it could potentially help those with recurrences have a far better response to Taxol.Anyone wishing further information or critique would be well advised to contact the original researchers or M.D.Anderson directly for current status, it is not my study, I'm just putting it out there.
TRULY HOPE SOME OF YOU BRING THE INFO TO THE ATTENTION OF YOUR DOCTORS. BEST WISHES TO YOU ALLTHE ABOVE EDITS WERE ADDED ON SEPT 30, 2011-since it appears that some are highly sensitive to edits.
THE ARTICLE:
Early Study Shows Spice Stunts Deadly Spread To Lungs
ScienceDaily (Oct. 16, 2005) — HOUSTON - Curcumin, the main ingredient of turmeric and the compound that gives curry its mustard-yellow color, inhibits metastasis to the lungs of mice with breast cancer, report researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. [My comments: I do think this is worth reading. Talks of turmerics beneficial use in conjunction with Taxol. the spaces in the article were put there by me so it would be easier to see why you might be interested, everything else in the same. I thought I had posted this but didn't see it anywhere. Might be something to bring to the attention of your doctors.]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study, to be published in the Oct. 15 issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research, reports that the spice appears to shut down a protein active in the spread of breast cancer to a major target for metastasis.Though the study results are early, researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (Taxol TM ), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time. Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis. Curcumin suppresses this response, making it impossible for the cancer to spread.In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effect.Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy."We are excited about the results of the study and the possible implications for taking the findings into the clinic in the next several years," says Bharat Aggarwal, Ph.D., professor of cancer medicine in M. D. Anderson's Department of Experimental Therapeutics. "At this time, advanced breast cancer is a difficult foe to fight with few proven treatments available after surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy."Taxol is currently used as the front-line chemotherapeutic agent in breast cancers, but because the drug frequently induces drug resistance after prolonged use, it is not effective in treating metastatic breast cancer, says Aggarwal.Researchers studied 60 mice with breast cancer, which were randomly assigned to one of four groups: control group, Taxol only, curcumin only and the combination of Taxol and curcumin. After the tumors grew to 10 mm (about the size of a pea), they were surgically removed, and the mice were fed a powdered curcumin diet.Macroscopic lung metastasis, or metastasis that is visible to the naked eye, was seen in 96 percent of the mice in the control group. Treatment using Taxol alone only "modestly reduced" the incidence of metastases, while the group using curcumin alone and curcumin plus Taxol "significantly reduced" both the incidence and numbers of visible lung metastases. Microscopic metastasis, or metastasis that is visible only when using a microscope, was found in the lungs of 28 percent of mice treated with the combination of curcumin and Taxol, and there was no macroscopic disease present. The micrometastases present consisted of only a few cells, suggesting that the combination inhibited the growth of breast cancer tumor cells that were in the lung before the tumors were removed. In a previous study published in the Aug. 15 issue of the journal Cancer, M. D. Anderson researchers found that when the nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB) (a powerful protein known to promote the inflammatory response necessary to cause breast cancer to spread) is shut down, cancer strains are unable to grow and cells are pushed to commit suicide. The mechanism in this curcumin study works the same way. Taxol activated the NF-kB in breast cancer cells, while curcumin stopped this activation by blocking the protein known as "IKK" that switched on the NF-kB, demonstrating how curcumin and Taxol work against one another. Taxol produced the inflammatory response, triggering metastasis, and curcumin suppressed it, causing cell death. Extracted from the roots of the curcuma longa plant, curcumin is a member of the ginger family. While it is not used in conventional medicine, it is widely prescribed in Indian medicine as a potent remedy for liver disorders, rheumatism, diabetic wounds, runny nose, cough and sinusitis. Traditional Chinese medicine uses curcumin as a treatment for diseases associated with abdominal pain, and it is used in ancient Hindu medicine as a treatment for sprains and swelling. According to the American Cancer Society, the chance of a woman having invasive breast cancer sometime during her life is one in eight. About 211,240 women in the United States will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in 2005, and approximately 40,410 women will die from the disease this year.###The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E.
Price, Ph.D.
So, there's that.
The relationship of cancer and inflammation is very interesting. Inflammation is present before and during the life of a cancer. In cancer, inflammation is a pathological process characterized by injury or destruction of tissues caused by a variety of cellular (cancer) and chemical (chemotherapy) reactions. It is usually manifested by typical signs of pain, heat, redness, swelling, and loss of function. Inflammation can be caused by bacterial, viral, or carcinomic means.
Taxol has a cancer-promoting risk. It increases fivefold the production of Interleukin - 8 (IL-8), a cellular communication molecule that initiates the growth of new blood vessels to feed a growing cancer. IL-8 is under the control of an inflammatory regulating protein called nuclear factor-kappa Beta (NF-kB). When NF-kB is enhanced, it increases the production of IL-8, and thus Taxol fails to stop the growth of new blood vessels that feed a growing cancer, failing to prevent recurrence.
Taxol is but one of a group of drugs that has this unwanted side-effect of activating NF-kB. Other drugs in this group include Doxorubicin, 5-Fluorouracil, Cisplatin, VP-16 (Etoposide), ARA-C, and Methotrexate. Patients with high inflammatory markers during chemotherapy are at higher risk for recurrence, and thus need to more closely monitor and modulate their NF-kB expression after the chemotherapy ends.
The ASTRO study has pointed out the increase incidence of ovarian brain metastases, not the underlying causes. While cell function analysis has observed an increase in the number of metabolic activity of mitochondria of the surviving cells from taxane therapy, even in cases where the majority of the cells are being killed by taxanes, Taxol actually causes cancer cell microtentacles (or extensions of the plasma membrane of cancer cells) to grow longer and allows tumor cells to reattach faster, appearing to paly a key role in how cancers spread to distant locations in the body.
In stem cell research, anti-cancer treatments often effectively shrink the size of tumors, but some might have the opposite effect, actually expanding the small population of cancer stem cells that then are capable of metastasizing.
These circulating cells would explain the lack of overall survival advantage for partially successful treatment. If anything, I would guess that the surviving cells would be more disregulated and therefore tougher and more aggressive, and perhaps, since they no longer have to compete with the less aggressive and easier to kill cells for nutrients or “lebensraum,” all of the now even more rapidly expanding clone of tough-guy cells would be more likely to invade, metastasize, and generally wreak havoc.
This might also explain the higher rates of metabolism among the remaining cells, along with the fact that these cells might be working feverishly to repair damage done by the chemotherapy drugs – especially taxanes, in which the putative mechanism is to lock in place the mitotic spindle and thereby prevent cell division.0 -
Chemo-Resistancegdpawel said:Taxol, the not so good news
The relationship of cancer and inflammation is very interesting. Inflammation is present before and during the life of a cancer. In cancer, inflammation is a pathological process characterized by injury or destruction of tissues caused by a variety of cellular (cancer) and chemical (chemotherapy) reactions. It is usually manifested by typical signs of pain, heat, redness, swelling, and loss of function. Inflammation can be caused by bacterial, viral, or carcinomic means.
Taxol has a cancer-promoting risk. It increases fivefold the production of Interleukin - 8 (IL-8), a cellular communication molecule that initiates the growth of new blood vessels to feed a growing cancer. IL-8 is under the control of an inflammatory regulating protein called nuclear factor-kappa Beta (NF-kB). When NF-kB is enhanced, it increases the production of IL-8, and thus Taxol fails to stop the growth of new blood vessels that feed a growing cancer, failing to prevent recurrence.
Taxol is but one of a group of drugs that has this unwanted side-effect of activating NF-kB. Other drugs in this group include Doxorubicin, 5-Fluorouracil, Cisplatin, VP-16 (Etoposide), ARA-C, and Methotrexate. Patients with high inflammatory markers during chemotherapy are at higher risk for recurrence, and thus need to more closely monitor and modulate their NF-kB expression after the chemotherapy ends.
The ASTRO study has pointed out the increase incidence of ovarian brain metastases, not the underlying causes. While cell function analysis has observed an increase in the number of metabolic activity of mitochondria of the surviving cells from taxane therapy, even in cases where the majority of the cells are being killed by taxanes, Taxol actually causes cancer cell microtentacles (or extensions of the plasma membrane of cancer cells) to grow longer and allows tumor cells to reattach faster, appearing to paly a key role in how cancers spread to distant locations in the body.
In stem cell research, anti-cancer treatments often effectively shrink the size of tumors, but some might have the opposite effect, actually expanding the small population of cancer stem cells that then are capable of metastasizing.
These circulating cells would explain the lack of overall survival advantage for partially successful treatment. If anything, I would guess that the surviving cells would be more disregulated and therefore tougher and more aggressive, and perhaps, since they no longer have to compete with the less aggressive and easier to kill cells for nutrients or “lebensraum,” all of the now even more rapidly expanding clone of tough-guy cells would be more likely to invade, metastasize, and generally wreak havoc.
This might also explain the higher rates of metabolism among the remaining cells, along with the fact that these cells might be working feverishly to repair damage done by the chemotherapy drugs – especially taxanes, in which the putative mechanism is to lock in place the mitotic spindle and thereby prevent cell division.
Thanks for your information.
In Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients, Dr. Russell Blaylock likewise warns that if a first series of chemotherapy treatments doesn't "knock out" the cancer cells (as opposed to merely a tumor), the cells that survive gain strength and become doubly aggressive, making it ever harder for subsequent chemo to gain a lasting remission.
He laments the lack of studies that show what happens when a really healthy diet is the ONLY follow-up treatment, following debulking surgery, rather than chemo or radiation. As his specialty is neurosurgery, he is especially good on what substances tend to promote brain metastasis, by the way. Even glutamate--helpful in some circumstances--he warns may exacerbate the presence of any developing brain tumor. On the subject of taxol per se, he is duly cautionary, while advising several supplements that he believes mitigate many of its horrific effects; indeed, he advises his own patients NOT to proceed with chemo "on schedule," but to take a few weeks first to fortify their systems with vitamins and supplements that, his research shows, can protect the body against taxol's assaults.
I am especially interested in the "inflammatory markers" that you noted to be significant during the course of chemo in intimating likelihood of recurrence. The blood tests my "top cancer cancer" routinely ordered measured very little (least of all my vitamin B12, or D, or zinc levels, all important to health status!) and not even my fibrogen levels. The only inflammatory marker I was aware of was CRP--and because Dr. Keith Block considers this an impportant marker, I kept an eye on it during chemo; it was always less than .01--which is where Block wanted to see it.
On the other hand, I believe CRP is more descriptive of propensity for heart conditions than general inflammation--and with a major checkup due in two weeks, wonder what other "markers" I should ask my "major treatment center" to check.
Final postscript: Even my FERRITIN levels were never checked for nine months!!! But because my hemoglobin was very low, I was blithely told my the chemo nurse to "have a juicy burger or steak" and even "to start taking slow-release IRON.
Only a test my by INTERNIST, demanded by me, revealed that though hemoglobin was low, it was NOT because of low iron; in fact, my iron was way too HIGH, never a good marker for cancer patients. (It's probably high because I had two blood transfusions but they were too careless to check my ferritin levels afterwards.) Had I followed the nurse's advice, I'd be in even worse shape. The only way to get the iron levels down, from what I've read, are to donate blood once a week for a few months or to chelate it out ... and avoid iron-rich foods.
So thank you for your posts, whether they bring good or bad news--and please let us know what marker of inflammation we should be tested for.
Appreciatively,
Rosey R0 -
Janjazzy1 said:Claudia~
FYI Greg's wife I think is or was an ovarian cancer patient. He has learned much from the years of being her caregiver. I had posted something on another part of this site and we exchanged emails as to how I know about him.
I just learn to take information and read it and if it's beneficial take it in and if not delete it and go on. Not everything we read is relevant to our particular case.
Hugs,
Jan
I couldn't agree more. Take it or leave it, it's nice when there is an "it" to consider or choose not to consider.
Kisses,
claudia0 -
Rosey,RoseyR said:Chemo-Resistance
Thanks for your information.
In Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients, Dr. Russell Blaylock likewise warns that if a first series of chemotherapy treatments doesn't "knock out" the cancer cells (as opposed to merely a tumor), the cells that survive gain strength and become doubly aggressive, making it ever harder for subsequent chemo to gain a lasting remission.
He laments the lack of studies that show what happens when a really healthy diet is the ONLY follow-up treatment, following debulking surgery, rather than chemo or radiation. As his specialty is neurosurgery, he is especially good on what substances tend to promote brain metastasis, by the way. Even glutamate--helpful in some circumstances--he warns may exacerbate the presence of any developing brain tumor. On the subject of taxol per se, he is duly cautionary, while advising several supplements that he believes mitigate many of its horrific effects; indeed, he advises his own patients NOT to proceed with chemo "on schedule," but to take a few weeks first to fortify their systems with vitamins and supplements that, his research shows, can protect the body against taxol's assaults.
I am especially interested in the "inflammatory markers" that you noted to be significant during the course of chemo in intimating likelihood of recurrence. The blood tests my "top cancer cancer" routinely ordered measured very little (least of all my vitamin B12, or D, or zinc levels, all important to health status!) and not even my fibrogen levels. The only inflammatory marker I was aware of was CRP--and because Dr. Keith Block considers this an impportant marker, I kept an eye on it during chemo; it was always less than .01--which is where Block wanted to see it.
On the other hand, I believe CRP is more descriptive of propensity for heart conditions than general inflammation--and with a major checkup due in two weeks, wonder what other "markers" I should ask my "major treatment center" to check.
Final postscript: Even my FERRITIN levels were never checked for nine months!!! But because my hemoglobin was very low, I was blithely told my the chemo nurse to "have a juicy burger or steak" and even "to start taking slow-release IRON.
Only a test my by INTERNIST, demanded by me, revealed that though hemoglobin was low, it was NOT because of low iron; in fact, my iron was way too HIGH, never a good marker for cancer patients. (It's probably high because I had two blood transfusions but they were too careless to check my ferritin levels afterwards.) Had I followed the nurse's advice, I'd be in even worse shape. The only way to get the iron levels down, from what I've read, are to donate blood once a week for a few months or to chelate it out ... and avoid iron-rich foods.
So thank you for your posts, whether they bring good or bad news--and please let us know what marker of inflammation we should be tested for.
Appreciatively,
Rosey R
Hey, so, I've been wanting to give blood for the purpose of reducing both iron, copper and random cancer cell burden, but was told because I had cancer, I could not donate blood. Do you have a way to donate that might help me on this score. There are iron binding foods that could help lessen your iron levels. Tea will bind with iron rich foods if you take it at the same time you are eating that food. I assume you do not eat meat.
I've read that both cilantro and apples act as chelation agents.
Anyone have any thoughts on why taxol is not given at a reduced rate with shorter intervals inbetween?0 -
Normanorma2 said:thanks for sharing
Thank you for responding to Claudia's request. Having lots of information helps us all to make informed decisions about our health care. Hard to tell what is the right decision isn't it? Kind of like being a Monday morning quarterback. Except it is our lives we are talking about, not a game. I decided when diagnosed to to to what is consider one of the top cancer treatment centers in the world. I don't regret it. I did what they told me to do. Glad to report that it turned out well for me so far.
Again thanks for sharing. Your concern is appreciated.
What you said is very true. You obviously made the correct decision for you. And I am very happy about that because I do really like you.
Also, on another note.
New information is never a criticism of what a person has or hasn't done. As I said before, I never consider that if someone is talking about chemo or radiation's benefits that they are saying I am a failure because i didn't do either. They are just talking about something that is of interest to them, and usually I'll read it, because I will most likely learn something.
About the posts/threads, one could consider it like a science newspaper and a person can choose to read those articles that are of interest to them and ignore those that they already are familiar with or no longer need to learn more about. But for the uninitiated and those new to all this, it's good to have as many things as possible to consider and talk over with their doctor. The more questions we ask our doctors, the more they become aware that we know more than they might think we do, and this might make them keep up on the latest changes in treatments more vigilantly.
I consider myself someone who reports the news. I don't make it, but if it seems relevant, I'll report on it. Take it leave it, I don't care. But at least I feel I've done my job by putting it out there. Fair enough? A reporter does not report because they think the person reading it is stupid, actually, it's just the opposite. I figure they are smart and will be happy to have new information to consider.
Hope this discussion gives someone a benefit they might not have had before they read this thread.
Not everyone will benefit.
But some might, and that is the entire point--in its entirety(sp?)0 -
gdpawelgdpawel said:What is wrong with CSN website software?
At times it runs like it's on its last leg, then it pulses out numerous replies. And you can't delete its mistakes. Anybody have a solution to CSN's website software mistakes?
You can contact them on top to see if they can delete the extra posts. Thanks for posting.
claudia0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.9K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 398 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 794 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 63 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 540 Sarcoma
- 734 Skin Cancer
- 654 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.9K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards