Uncertain Result

At the end of the 35th cycle of pomalidomide, IgG is up 15% to 1300 mg/dL, and M-spike is up 9% to 1.3 g/dL from the end of the previous cycle. Further, lambda light chains are up a little with kappa chains down. The markers are consistent, all pointing to an increase in actual tumor burden.

But maybe not. I had a bad cold with fever for most of the four weeks preceding this blood draw, and then also got my "high dose" flu shot. Either of those insults could have caused IgG to go up, the "good" immunoglobulins responding to the threats. Also, M-spike had been at 1.3 two months before, so it's just back to where it had been. As always, I'll be wondering what next month's tests will bring.

Neutrophils were up this time, well into the normal range, probably in response to those same two threats. We get the CBC at the local Stillwater clinic the afternoon before the Mayo Clinic visit, because my neutrophils are much higher in the afternoon, but I suspect they would also have been well above the threshhold of 1.0 K/uL in the morning at Mayo on this occasion.

Calcium is up because I took my usual supplements. Often I skip calcium tablets for a day or two before the Mayo blood draw, to avoid this slightly-high reading. It will be down next month, if I remember to skip calcium.

Flu Shot:

I got mine at the local clinic, and learned afterward that there are two dosages: (1) Normal dose for adults, and (2) "High dose" for seniors 65 and older, four times the strength, which is the shot I received. In discussing this later at Mayo Clinic, it appears that the CDC has given very little guidance about the use of this high-dose shot. Should a senior be given that shot even if he/she has a compromised immune system? If so, what about an adult under 65 with a compromised immune system? Apparently, doctors are left to make this decision themselves with no help from the CDC.

Some Current Test Results:

Test		Aug 24		Sep 23		Oct 20		Nov 18		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.1		1.2		1.1		1.2		Best tumor measure?
IgG mg/dL		1100		1070		1130		1300		Best tumor measure?
L FLC mg/dL		2.79		2.58		2.78		2.92		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		10.1		10.0		10.0		10.3		Below 10.2 is OK
Creat mg/dL		1.3		0.9		1.0		0.9		Kidney, OK
HGB g/dL		15.7		15.8		14.9		15.0		Hemoglobin, OK
RBC M/uL		4.39		4.43		4.31		4.26		Red cells, marginal
WBC K/uL		4.4		4.2		4.3		5.9		White cells, OK
ANC K/uL		1.41		1.60		2.14		2.30		Neutrophils, normal!

Related Links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Somewhat technical. Best with a wide browser window.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

Banana Man and Minnesota Don (right) near the finish of the Route 66 Tulsa Marathon. Banana Man is a Team In Training (TNT) runner, raising money for the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, which supports myeloma research too. Banana Man had run another marathon the DAY BEFORE, or else I would never have seen him after the start.

Pomalidomide Rocks

At least for me it does. I've been on a study of Celgene's pomalidomide (CC-4047) for 34 complete cycles now, and it has kept my myeloma stable for all of that time. At first I took it with "low-dose" dexamethasone (DEX), and after two years graduated to pomalidomide alone (actually with aspirin and acyclovir). M-spike and IgG dropped quickly in the first three months, and for more than two years IgG has been about a third of the starting value with M-spike tracking appropriately.

"Pomalidomide" is the drug's generic name, while CC-4047 is a code name for the same drug in drug trials. Someday it may have the brand name "Actimid," when it is available for sale. I hope that happens soon, because it's good stuff and people are dying right and left.

I think this is publishable news: Mayo Clinic will soon open a new arm of the CC-4047 study. Entrance criteria were not established when I was there on Oct 20, but one objective is to make it available to more people who need it, so I suspect the entrance criteria will be fairly wide.

Cycle 34 Test Results:

At the end of the previous cycle, my IgG was down a little and M-spike was up. This time, IgG is up a little and M-Spike is back down. I suppose that's the definition of "stable" for us myelomiacs, because these tests do have some error tolerance and our blood varies too. Other markers, like lambda light chains, calcium, and some of the CBC blood counts are virtually unchanged. No problem - a boring visit -:) Let's have lots more of those!

Neutrophils were a bit of a surprise, though. The study requires at least 1000 of those tiny critters per microliter of blood, or else the pomalidomide has to be stopped until neutrophils climb above that mark again. Sometimes mine have been below 1000, so we've chosen to switch to 1:00 pm blood draws, taken the day before the Mayo visit, because my neutrophil counts are reliably higher in the afternoon. This time, though, the afternoon count was 2100, actually well into the "normal" range, and another count the next morning at Mayo also showed 2100. Why? Maybe because I have a miserable cold, and those little buggers are an essential part of the battle that's going on. They have been recruited and they are rallying!

Mayo, Dr KDS:

• I have a pain in the index finger of the left hand - can't quite localize it though. Could it be myeloma? Answer: Probably not - myeloma usually attacks larger targets with more marrow.
• I changed my diet this month to reduce the amount of simple sugar. This means no cookies or other sweets, and less fruit. Since the myeloma didn't change much, I believe this experiment was a failure and will go back to the higher-fruit diet.
• I also had more constipation than usual this month. It's a known side effect of pomalidomide, but we agreed that the increase was probably due to the reduction of fruit in the diet.
• An afternoon blood draw produces a neutrophil count about 50% higher than does a morning draw, for me. Dr KDS tried that with another patient, though, and it didn't work. We're all different.

Some Current Test Results:

Test		Jul 29		Aug 24		Sep 23		Oct 20		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.1		1.1		1.2		1.1		Best tumor measure?
IgG mg/dL		1160		1100		1070		1130		Best tumor measure?
L FLC mg/dL		1.86		2.79		2.58		2.78		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		9.9		10.1		10.0		10.0		Below 10.2 is OK
Creat mg/dL		1.0		1.3		0.9		1.0		Kidney, OK
HGB g/dL		14.0		15.7		15.8		14.9		Hemoglobin, OK
RBC M/uL		4.16		4.39		4.43		4.31		Red cells, marginal
WBC K/uL		2.8		4.4		4.2		4.3		White cells, OK
ANC K/uL		0.93		1.41		1.60		2.14		Neutrophils, normal!

Related Links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Somewhat technical. Best with a wide browser window.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

Cell-phone photo along a local running trail. I love Minnesota in the fall!

US 52 Was Under Water

We three drive down US 52 from the east side of St Paul to Rochester once every 28 days for my checkup at Mayo Clinic. It's the shortest, fastest route. Usually we get up at 3:50 am, take an hour to shower and get ready, then 90 uneventful minutes later I'm in line for my 6:30 am blood draw. We knew that Thursday would be different, because of the heavy rain, but we didn't know how different. A check of MNDOT's Traffic Conditions Website showed that US 52 was closed, so we went another way - no fun driving in "driving" rain, but US 61 & 63 were open and it took us only about a half hour longer. Heading back, that MNDOT web site said that US 52 was open again, so we started out that way. Just a few miles south of Pine Island, though, we found water rushing across the four-lane highway. Some vehicles were crossing it, but some were not and we turned around. Police were conspicuously absent. At 5 pm the local news said that US 52 was closed right where we encountered the water.

We later discovered that the city of Pine Island had in fact become an island, though it normally is not.

IgG versus M-Spike:

IgG is a measure of ALL Immunoglobulin G proteins, good and bad, where M-Spike is a measure of just those Immunoglobulin G proteins that are monoclonal, the bad ones, all exactly the same. Medically, M-Spike can never be higher than IgG. Thursday my IgG was 1070 mg/dL, but M-Spike was 1200 mg/dL (1.2 g/dL). Not possible. I hate that! I was feeling pretty good about another "stable" result until that M-Spike came bombing in.

I asked Dr KDS about this impossibility - which number is most likely to be wrong? She wasn't sure, but assured me (paraphrasing here) that she has seen this before, because both tests have an error tolerance, but that she was NOT worried. Further, I'm still stable and, as always, let's see what next month brings.

Sigh. I fret about this stuff, and was hoping for a fret-free 28 days. I've been on the pomalidomide (CC-4047) study for 33 complete cycles now, and it has done a fine job of keeping me stable. Nevertheless, I know that the ride will end some day and I will need to take a different course of drugs that may have much worse side effects. So I'm always wondering if that time is near and hoping that it isn't.

For now, though, I'm going to try to convince myself that the M-Spike number is wrong. There is nothing in the other cancer markers to suggest an increase in tumor burden. Calcium is fine, kidneys are fine, liver is fine, and light chains are not much changed. In fact, an IgG measurement of 1070 mg/dL is actually a decrease of 3% from August and 8% from July. We'll go with that.

Carfilzomib:

Mayo Clinic will soon start a trial of this brand-new drug. Carfilzomib is a proteasome inhibitor, like Velcade, at least as effective but much less likely to cause painful neuropathy. Furthermore, it can be effective in patients for whom Velcade has failed. I blogged about it here. I'm not sure what it will take to qualify for the trial, but if you go to Mayo you might ask about it.

Velcade:

I am not a medical doctor, so you shouldn't believe anything that I say. Nevertheless: If you are offered twice-weekly Velcade as a treatment, just say NO. Twice-weekly infusion is still the official, approved regimen, even though several studies have shown that once-weekly infusion is much less likely to cause painful neuropathy in most patients. In addition, there can be a threshhold effect: if a patient on twice-weekly infusions does develop neuropathy, switching to once-weekly may not help the neuropathy much. Once you get the neuropathy it's yours to keep, and any amount of Velcade will reactivate it. A patient who starts out with once-weekly infusions, however, is much less likely to develop serious neuropathy in the first place. If your doctor insists on starting out with the official twice-weekly protocol, change doctors. No kidding. Velcade is an excellent drug, but it's useless if the neuropathy prevents you from taking it.

Some current test results:

Test		Jun 29		Jul 29		Aug 24		Sep 23		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.0		1.1		1.1		1.2		Best tumor measure?
IgG mg/dL		1120		1160		1100		1070		Best tumor measure?
L FLC mg/dL		1.74		1.86		2.79		2.58		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		9.9		9.9		10.1		10.0		Below 10.2 is OK
Creat mg/dL		1.2		1.0		1.3		0.9		Kidney, OK
HGB g/dL		14.5		14.0		15.7		15.8		Hemoglobin, OK
RBC M/uL		4.30		4.16		4.39		4.43		Red cells, OK
WBC K/uL		3.4		2.8		4.4		4.2		White cells, OK
ANC K/uL		1.09		0.93		1.41		1.60		Neutrophils, low

Related links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Somewhat technical. Best with a wide browser window.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

Afternoon Delight

Neutrophil Count:

I'm still taking pomalidomide (CC-4047), participating in a trial of that new drug. It has kept my tumor burden low and stable for two and a half years, but in the last half year it has also suppressed my neutrophils enough that they tend to fall below the cutoff of 1000 cells per microliter (1.0 K/uL). In each prior case we have drawn the initial (failing) blood sample in the morning. But in another blood draw in the afternoon, usually a few days later, the count was always plenty high, sometimes almost double the morning count. In the meantime, though, there was a question whether I should get the pomalidomide pills or not, and more than once the treatment actually slipped a few days.

So this time we finally got smart and did the blood draw (CBC with differential) the AFTERNOON BEFORE the Mayo visit, at the local clinic. I ran up and down a few flights of stairs first, as usual, trying to work up a little adrenaline to chase some neutrophils out of their hiding places. The clinic did a very professional job, running the CBC and manual differential so quickly that I had the printout in my hot fist less than an hour later. It showed a neutrophil count of 1400, so I went to Mayo the next morning, August 24, knowing that there would be no drama about the neutrophil count and the pomalidomide. A saving of money, time, and stress. Whew.

IgG dropped about 5% this time, from 1160 to 1100 mg/dL, which is good. M-spike, however, remained the same at 1.1 g/dL (1100 mg/dL), which is technically impossible. M-spike measures the BAD (monoclonal) portion of immunoglobulin G, whereas IgG measures the total of both good and bad. They cannot be equal unless the good portion is zero, which is quite unlikely. Both measurements have tolerances, however, especially M-spike, and I suspect that they just happened to lean toward one another this time. In any case the result is either stable or down a little, which is good. Lambda light chains are up quite a bit, but so are Kappa light chains and the ratio is virtually unchanged. I'm happy - on to Cycle 33!

Supplements:

I hate taking supplements. I admit it. I take a LOT of them, but I have to make myself do it. This time my 7-day pill minder ran out on the same day that the cycle started, and I didn't fill it right away. When it's empty, I don't take any supplements, and for ten days I just didn't take the time to fill those little plastic boxes, though I religiously took the pomalidomide. When I did fill the boxes again, I cut back the number of different supplements significantly. I dropped the curcumin, feverfew, flaxseed oil, pancreatic enzymes, resveratrol, bromelain, milk thistle, and half of the CoQ-10 (ubiquinol). Later I put one or two of those back - the current supplement regimen is here.

Results of the supplement holiday:

• Tumor burden: Nothing happened, at least nothing bad. I conclude that those dropped supplements have not contributed to the myeloma treatment.
• Neuropathy: It did seem to get a little worse. Previously, I felt some numbness in the right thumb and the left pinkie finger. Now, though, I feel it in both thumbs, both pinkies, and both index fingers. In addition, the backs of both hands feel a little numb. I think that my feet are a little more numb too, athough I haven't tested them as carefully. PLEASE NOTE: My neuropathy is insignificant compared with what many people feel. I'm not complaining about it (much); the important point is that the neuropathy did seem to get worse during the ten days with no supplements and has not improved since resuming them.
• A bodily function unique to males actually seemed to improve during the ten days without supplements. Is there one particular supplement that I am still taking which tends to suppress that function? More research is indicated.

Some current test results:

Test		May 27		Jun 29		Jul 29		Aug 24		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.1		1.0		1.1		1.1		Best tumor measure
IgG mg/dL		1110		1120		1160		1100		Good tumor measure
L FLC mg/dL		2.58		1.74		1.86		2.79		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		9.9		9.9		9.9		10.1		Below 10.2 is best
Creat mg/dL		1.3		1.2		1.0		1.3		Kidney, normal
HGB g/dL		14.7		14.5		14.0		15.7		Hemoglobin, good
RBC M/uL		4.36		4.30		4.16		4.39		Red cells, low
WBC K/uL		3.6		3.4		2.8		4.4		White cells, OK
ANC K/uL		0.92		1.09		0.93		1.41		Neutrophils, low

Related links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Somewhat technical. Best with a wide browser window.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

That's canned salmon a'la Sweet Pea. Big strawberries, small plate.

Race Myeloma Awareness

A verrrry bad pun - "raise" myeloma awareness - get it?

Myeloma patient Keith May and the IMF have entered a racecar design called "The Survivor" in a contest called Sponsafier. The winning entry will be built as a full sized car, showcased at a NASCAR race, and your votes can help push us across the finish line.

This will raise awareness of myeloma, the International Myeloma Foundation, the great work being done to change the course of myeloma, and the work that still needs to be done. Here's what you can do:

Just take 30 seconds every day until August 28, click nascar.myeloma.org, wait for the screen to develop, and simply click the “vote” button. You don't have to log on or enter ANY information. For extra credit, you can do this with every computer that you have available, every day.

“The Survivor” is one of several hundred entries in the Sponsafier contest. Some are just artistic designs and some like Keith’s support a cause. Now we all have the opportunity to support Keith, myeloma awareness, and the IMF by voting every day for the next 11 days, and by asking your friends, families, and colleagues to vote too.

The messages on the car are simple: “Beat myeloma to the finish line,” and simply “Beat Cancer.” What better way to get there than by racing? Click nascar.myeloma.org.

Neutrophils and Dermatology

On Thursday, July 29, I visited Mayo Clinic to assess Cycle 31 of pomalidomide (CC-4047). Still stable. IgG was up about 3.5%, and M-spike went from 1.0 to 1.1 g/dL. But we've been here before. In February, IgG was a little bit higher than it was Thursday, and M-spike was 1.1 just last May. The numbers may have a slight upward trend, but they do seem to bounce around on their way up. I'll not worry this time. Maybe next time.

Neutrophils:

My neutrophil count was 930 cells per microliter, just below the threshhold. They won't give me a new bottle of 28 pomalidomide capsules for the next cycle until neutrophils go above 1000.

Therefore, we scheduled another CBC (with differential) for the afternoon, because my neutrophil count seems to follows a circadian rhythm, rising through the morning into the afternoon. In all but one of the previous four cycles I have needed a second CBC, and in each case the second neutrophil count was comfortably above 1000. In all of those cases the second count was taken on a later day, in the afternoon.

This time, though, the second count was done the same day, in the same Mayo Clinic lab. By Thursday afternoon, neutrophils had jumped 63%, from 930 at 9:00 am to 1520 at 1:00 pm. Furthermore, the total white cell count also jumped up from its all-time low of 2.8 up to 3.8.

I knew that physical exertion could increase neutrophils, so before the 9:00 am blood draw I jogged a half mile, walked up and down six flights of stairs, and did 30 pushups. If that helped, it wasn't enough. Dr Lacy informed me, though, that it's really adrenaline that flushes the neutrophils into the blood stream. I asked if a good scare would do as well as exercise, and she thought it would. Anyway, for the second blood draw, I ran a few very short, high-intensity sprints and ran full speed up two flights of stairs. I really don't know if that helped either - maybe the increase is all due to normal circadian rhythm.

Next time, I'll get the CBC drawn the afternoon of the DAY BEFORE the Mayo Clinic visit, at a local clinic. This is OK with Dr L, and may solve the problem of unnecessary duplicate neutrophil counts.

Dermatology:

At the last visit, I asked Dr L about a bump on my forehead, wondering if it was any kind of skin cancer. She didn't think so, but scheduled a "dermatology consult" for this visit. Well, at Mayo Clinic that's more than a cursory peek at one spot. I was asked to put on a hospital gown (the kind that opens in the back, of course), and the doctor checked most of my skin, even those parts that are almost always in the shade.

He was not at all interested in the little forehead patch that brought me in, but he saw several "pre-cancerous" spots on my forehead and zapped them very quickly and efficiently with a little can of freezing spray. He said that about one in a hundred of those spots can become malignant. He asked about a spot on a knuckle, and I told him that it was a bruise (I knew when it happened), but he nonetheless zapped that one too.

I asked him about the skin on my arms, which is now so thin and weak that I can't even use band-aids on it. I know that it has been thinned by age and by steroids, but he said the big culprit is sun damage. We discussed sun screen (use a good one, such as the Vanicream that Mayo Store sells), and hours of the day - he suggested 10:00 to 3:00 I think, but I would go another hour in the afternoon, 10:00 am to 4:00 pm, daylight savings time. That's a three-hour window each side of high noon, sun time.

We asked if there was a way to repair the damaged skin. He said that Retin-A has been tried by some, but he wasn't impressed by the result. Retin-A can make skin even MORE sensitive to the sun, and has other significant side effects, so I'll stay away from it but probably will be more careful to use sunscreen.

The doctor said that if any of the frozen spots became open sores, I should just use vaseline on them. We asked about Neosporin, because I've had such excellent results treating other cuts and scrapes. He replied that they recommended Neosporin in the past, but eventually discovered that about a third of people are allergic to it. So far no problem with my treated spots, but if there is a problem I'll use Neosporin anyway because I don't seem to be allergic.

Some current test results:

Test		Apr 29		May 27		Jun 29		Jul 29		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.0		1.1		1.0		1.1		Best tumor measure
IgG mg/dL		1010		1110		1120		1160		Good tumor measure
L FLC mg/dL		2.41		2.58		1.74		1.86		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		9.7		9.9		9.9		9.9		Below 10.2 is best
Creat mg/dL		1.3		1.3		1.2		1.0		Kidney, normal
HGB g/dL		14.1		14.7		14.5		14.0		Hemoglobin, barely OK
RBC M/uL		4.21		4.36		4.30		4.16		Red cells, low
WBC K/uL		3.3		3.6		3.4		2.8		White cells, LOW!
ANC K/uL		0.73		0.92		1.09		0.93		Neutrophils, LOW!

Related links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Somewhat technical. Best with a wide browser window.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

That's the oatmeal, right in front on top.

Stable Again

Tuesday, June 29, was the end of Cycle 30 of my participation in the trial of pomalidomide (CC-4047). I'm pretty happy to be on that trial, because neither the myeloma nor the drugs have substantially impacted my lifestyle, let alone threatened my life. If you just ignore the fact that I have cancer (?) I'm a lucky guy, and I feel that way.

IgG and M-spike:

This time IgG was virtually unchanged, and M-spike actually went down from 1.1 to 1.0 g/dL. It makes me wonder if last month's M-spike result was off just a bit. That can happen, with M-spike especially. I wish IgG was down too, but maybe next month.

Lambda free light chains were down a lot, but Kappa chains were too, so the ratio improved only slightly - and I really don't know what these numbers mean in my case anyway.

Neutrophils:

Neutrophils remain dodgy. Last time they were 920 (little critters per microliter), below the cutoff, but this time they were 1090, just above. When they are below 1000 I am supposed to hold the pomalidomide until they come back up above, lest I fall prey to an opportunistic infection. Neutrophils are a key component of the very-complex immune system, and a low count (neutropenia) is dangerous. The good news, in my opinion, is that neutrophils seem stable. At first, after discontinuing dexamethasone (DEX), they headed downhill for a few cycles, but that decline may have stopped. I do make every effort to increase the count before each blood draw by exercising, which is supposed to force some of the neutrophils out of muscles into the blood stream. This time I jogged a half mile, pumped 30 pushups, walked up and down six flights of stairs, and did leg stretches. This is apparently a "legal" tactic, but I don't know if it helps. What DOES help, I'm quite sure, is to wait until afternoon for the blood draw, because neutrophils are naturally higher then. I'm trying to get my appointments scheduled for the afternoon instead of the morning.

Discussion with Dr L:

• I have a funny-looking spot on my forehead that a dermatologist will check out at the next visit. It's not melanoma, but she can't rule out some other skin cancer.
• I had heard someone in our support group say that her doctor told her to wear a medical bracelet saying "irradiated blood only." If I understood correctly, Dr L said that the risk is that a few white cells in the transfused blood could cause graft-versus-host disease, which the irradiation can prevent.
• I asked if Mayo Clinic makes it a practice to inform new patients of the existence of support groups. She said that was specific to the doctor and also to the patient. She believes that some new patients are simply not ready to hear the kind of information that is shared at support groups, though others might be.
• Dr L estimated that perhaps a third of the patients who entered the pomalidomide trial in my cohort are still in the trial. I didn't ask, but I assume that the drug has stopped working for most of those who have left the trial.
• A similar pomalidomide study is currently open and recruiting more patients again, with a slightly different study objective.

Some current test results:

Test		Apr 01		Apr 29		May 27		Jun 29		Remarks
M-spike g/dL		1.0		1.0		1.1		1.0		Best tumor measure
IgG mg/dL		1070		1010		1110		1120		Variation is normal
L FLC mg/dL		1.82		2.41		2.58		1.74		L Free light chains
Calcium mg/dL		9.8		9.7		9.9		9.9		Below 10.2 is best
Creat mg/dL		1.2		1.3		1.3		1.2		Kidney, normal
HGB g/dL		14.6		14.1		14.7		14.5		Hemoglobin, normal
RBC M/uL		4.39		4.21		4.36		4.30		Red cells, normal
WBC K/uL		3.3		3.3		3.6		3.4		White cells, low
ANC K/uL		0.94		0.73		0.92		1.09		Neutrophils, LOW!

Related links:

My Myeloma		A discussion of my myeloma, not very technical.
My Treatment History		Not technical.
My Test Charts		Graphic displays of several key test results over time.
My Test Result Table		Best with a wide browser window. Somewhat technical.
My Supplement Regimen		With links to where I buy them.

Nice gluten-free chef salad lunch at a local restaurant:

Vitamin D with Calcium Reduces Cancer Risk in Women

John A Milner, PhD, Chief of the Nutritional Science Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention at the National Cancer Institute presented a talk on vitamin D supplementation at the recent meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Chicago. He stated that current guidelines suggest 400 IU of vitamin D, possibly more for the elderly, up to 600. He also noted that too much vitamin D can be toxic, e.g. 50,000 IU daily for a long time, but that there is probably a safe range between those.

He cited the 2007 data from a Creighton University four-year study of 1179 healthy women aged 59-73, all from rural Nebraska. Subjects took 1400-1500 mg calcium and 1100 IU vitamin D daily, and the study was designed to assess the effect on bone health. In a secondary analysis of the results, researchers found that subjects taking the supplements had almost a 75% reduction in the risk of cancer, all cancers.

Dr Milner noted that the study did not have a "vitamin D only" arm, so there was no way to assess the value of taking vitamin D supplements alone. The NIH is funding further research. Further, he cautioned that other studies have shown that too much vitamin D actually increases the risk of some specific cancers. He also believes that this is a very individual issue, and that additional research will help doctors understand just who might benefit from supplementation and who might not.

I have been taking 1200 mg calcium and 2000 - 5000 IU vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) daily for several years now. I don't plan to change, but I may have my vitamin D level measured and then see. From his talk, it appeared that the risk of breast cancer and other diseases started to increase as the blood serum concentation of vitamin D reached 60 to 100 nanomoles/L (24 to 40 ng/mL).

This may be the last ASCO post. I'm out of subjects. Back to regular stuff.


Dinner aboard the Amtrak Empire Builder, Chicago to the Twin Cities, slightly blurred by the motion of the train:

ASCO Presentation: Selenium and Vitamin E Do Not Prevent Prostate Cancer

The government-funded Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) included 36,000 men, each having a PSA of 4 or less, at many different medical centers, for 5.5 years, and cost $100 million dollars. The men took selenized yeast and vitamin E, or a placebo. Eight percent were smokers. Now seven years later, there is no evidence of a reduced risk of ANY cancer, especially prostate cancer, which the researchers expected would be reduced.

Other studies had suggested a benefit, and researchers don't know why it didn't appear. The presenter, Eric Klein MD, suggested that we may need to take a more comprehensive approach, evaluating the benefit of whole foods instead of discrete nutrients. He pointed to a rat study showing a benefit from tomato powder where there was no benefit from lycopene, the studied nutrient. Maybe a single nutrient only helps people who have a deficiency in that nutrient.

He closed by suggesting that such disappointing results might make it difficult to get another $100 million for the next study!


That's quiche in the middle. Sort of. Good stuff.

Three More Drugs at ASCO

Several speakers at the ASCO conference mentioned carfilzomib and pomalidomide as the most-promising new drugs in our futures. I posted about those here. At least three other new drugs also show promise: (1) Elotuzumab, (2) Denosumab, and (3) Vorinostat.

• Elotuzumab is a laboratory-manufactured monoclonal antibody which works against a cell surface glycoprotein, CS1, highly expressed in multiple myeloma (MM). Like the antibodies that our own bodies produce, it attaches to the target protein and kills or disables the cell possessing that protein. It has been tested successfully in Phase I and II trials with both Velcade and Revlimid. In the Revlimid trial, 28 patients with lots of prior therapies experienced an overall response rate of 82%. Not bad. I personally believe that many more monoclonal antibodies are in our future - these are the "silver bullets," highly-directed therapy that really could make myeloma a chronic disease. Someday, not yet.
  
  By the way - the suffix "mab" on the generic drug name elotuzumab means "Monoclonal AntiBody." We'll see more MABs.
  
  
• Denosumab (see - here's another) is also a monoclonal antibody, this time directed at a signal protein which promotes bone removal. Thus denosumab inhibits destruction of bones by myeloma and its treatments. This is cool stuff. Several Phase III studies were reported at ASCO, all of them showing an advantage for denosumab over Zometa. Quoting the conclusion of one study (9042), which included myeloma patients: "In this head-to-head study, patients receiving denosumab had longer time to first skeletal-related event (SRE) or hypercalcemia and time to radiation to bone compared with Zometa. A lower proportion of patients experienced an on-study SRE in the denosumab group compared with Zometa." In another study, patients taking denosumab experienced less bone pain than those taking Zometa.
  
  
• Vorinostat, brand name Zolinza, is already approved for some cancers. It is a new class of drug called histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors. I don't know what means, actually, except that it works by a different mechanism than Revlimid, Velcade, melphalan, or dexamethasone, making it an excellent candidate for use WITH those drugs. So far it looks promising in early studies with both Velcade and Revlimid. Another HDAC inhibitor, panobinostat, also shows promise.

Nice salmon dinner aboard the Amtrak Empire Builder:

Maintenance or Not - A Patient Perspective

I posted about this three days ago, but have now heard the talks and thought about it some more.

At least three different papers at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) make this clear: When a good response (from a transplant or drug combo) is followed by continuous maintenance with a single agent drug, the time of remission may be extended significantly.

For example, I get an autologous stem cell transplant (SCT), or I go on a multi-drug treatment, and achieve a "very good partial response" (VGPR) or even a "complete response" (CR). That may be followed by a couple of months of additional drug therapy, such as Velcade or Revlimid with dexamethasone (Dex), to "consolidate" my response and hopefully improve it even more. Then I would LOVE to go on a drug holiday for a while, but instead I start taking Revlimid at 10 mg/day, 21 days out of each 28 (example). According to one study, my chance of remaining free of disease progression for three years would be increased from 35% to 68% because I took the maintenance drug.

Speakers at the conference used words like "new treatment paradigm," implying that post-SCT maintenance will soon be the standard of care. Mostly they mean maintenance with low-dose Revlimid as a single agent.

Having thought it over, though, it may not be a simple choice for me. For instance, we know that the myeloma will eventually return in either case, so if I take Revlimid for maintenance, will I still have it available as a possible therapy later when the disease does come back? My very knowledgable friend says maybe so, because (1) the Revlimid dosage will be higher; (2) and it can be combined with other agents such as Dex and even melphalan or Velcade. I am skeptical, but neither of us is a doctor, and this question really did not come up at the talks. I sure do want to get the opinion of my Dr L.

Here are some pros and cons from my point of view.

Pro Maintenance

• A longer time before my tumor burden goes up and my doctor and I have to figure out a new plan. Just take the drug and don't think too much about it.
• More-frequent blood tests. These will be necessary to check for drug side effects, and in my view this is a pro rather than a con because the tests may reveal other problems, including disease progression, sooner than otherwise.
• A greater chance that a brand-new therapy will be available by the time I need it. How cool would that be!
• Maybe, but not for certain, a longer life. See below.

Pro Drug Holiday

• Regular, ordinary, high-quality life, including:
  • Freedom from the suffocating expense of Revlimid or whatever is my maintenance drug. This affects some people much more than others.
  • Freedom from the side effects. So does this.
• When the myeloma does come back, Revlimid may be fully available as my next therapy. It might be anyway, but I suppose more likely if the myeloma hasn't come back in the face of Revlimid maintenance.

The studies aren't mature enough yet to show an actual survival advantage for maintenance. It is possible that they will never show one because the myeloma will eventually return in either case, at which point other therapies will be tried, and some may succeed.

I am not actually facing this decision right now, and I invite you to comment if you are. Aw heck, comment anyway. :-)


Below: A slide by the lead researcher in the study of the drug that I am currently taking. I'm still receiving primary therapy, not maintenance.

By the way, Blogger was down for a day and just came up, so look farther down for posts that got stacked up in the interim.

Estrogen in Chicken and Beef

Japanese researchers presented a poster titled "Does dietary estrogen intake from meat relate to the incidence of hormone-dependent cancers? (1553)" Unfortunately, they did not answer their own question. They did measure estrogen levels in checken and beef from three countries, however, finding high levels of estrogen in USA chicken and beef. They summarized the work as follows, quoting directly from their abstract:

"The high estrogen concentrations in Japanese chicken, USA chicken, and USA beef have been attributed to the residue of external estrogen in the feed given to the livestock. The nearly zero level found in Japanese beef and Brazilian chicken is considered to be natural endogenous amount without estrogen supplementation. The estrogen levels in meat are much lower than those of contraceptive pills (0.035 mg/tab). Even so, when considering lifetime exposure to meat containing higher level of estrogen than human fat tissue, estrogen intake from daily meat consumption cannot be disregarded as a factor governing human health. Consequently, dietary estrogen intake from meat might promote estrogen accumulation in the human body and could be related to the incidence of hormone-dependent cancers."

Hmmm. The researchers did not say how they obtained the USA chicken and beef, but I suspect that it was not from organic sources. I do believe in buying only organic meat, or at least meat that is advertised "no added hormones." It may cost more, but cancer is a real bummer.

Some of the 30,000 people at ASCO: