February 29, 2012

Electronic Nose Can Smell Out Mesothelioma

I came across an interesting study today.  An electronic nose can distinguish between people with malignant pleural malignant, those who have been exposed to asbestos but do not have the disease, and normal controls.  I really liked the name of the electronic nose, the Cyranose 320.

Abstract

Background: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) is a tumour of the surface cells of the pleura that is highly aggressive and mainly caused by asbestos exposure. Electronic noses capture the spectrum of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) providing a composite biomarker profile (breathprint).


Objective: We tested the hypothesis that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with MPM from subjects with a similar long-term professional exposure to asbestos without MPM and from healthy controls.

Methods: 13 patients with a histology confirmed diagnosis of MPM (age 60.9±12.2 year), 13 subjects with certified, long-term professional asbestos exposure (age 67.2±9.8), and 13 healthy subjects without asbestos exposure (age 52.2±16.2) participated in a cross-sectional study. Exhaled breath was collected by a previously described method and sampled by an electronic nose (Cyranose 320). Breathprints were analyzed by canonical discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validated accuracy (CVA) was calculated.

Results: Breathprints from patients with MPM were separated from subjects with asbestos exposure (CVA: 80.8%, sensitivity 92.3%, specificity 85.7%). MPM was also distinguished from healthy controls (CVA: 84.6%). Repeated measurements confirmed these results.

Conclusions: Molecular pattern recognition of exhaled breath can correctly distinguish patients with MPM from subjects with similar occupational asbestos exposure without MPM and from healthy controls. This suggests that breathprints obtained by electronic nose have diagnostic potential for MPM.

February 16, 2012

Living with Cancer--a Young Oncologist's Experience

I have a membership in a website, Oncostat, that provides periodic emails with links to cancer journal articles and analyses.  Today I found an article by an oncologist who learned that he had a rare kind of cancer just as he was entering his residency.  His article follows his response to his father's cancer, his reaction to his own cancer, and its affect on his work with his patients.  I've been planning to write a post about what it's like to live under a death sentence, but I just haven't done it.  I'll probably wait until my prognosis is clearer, but his article provides an interesting perspective on living with cancer and the uncertainty of individual prognoses.

http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/early/2011/04/04/JCO.2011.35.1122.full.pdf

David

January 25, 2012

Good Chemo News

I saw my oncologist this afternoon to get the results of my CT scan and blood work following the second round of my second course of chemo. I had been concerned that the tumors were continuing to grow because one blood test, a measure of the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), had increased by about 40% (from 2.3 to 3.2) since the last blood test three weeks ago. The good news is that the increase was not meaningful, and my tumors were either unchanged or apparently smaller in a couple of cases. The pemetrexed seems to have had a positive effect. Consequently, I had another round of chemo following my doctor's appointment.

To explain why the CEA values were not significant, the doctor showed me a graph of another patient's CEA values (with the name obscured, of course). His scores had risen from 100 to 400 at the start of therapy (for non-small cell lung cancer) but had declined back to around 50 over the course of a year, and he said he had patients with much higher values than that. He said that the increase in CEA at the start of treatment may be the results of dying or stressed cells producing more of the antigen. We'll see in three weeks if the values continue to rise, but it will six weeks before the next CT scan.

All in all is was a good afternoon at the hospital.

January 21, 2012

Cancer Cells Can Change over Time

Cancer cells do not always stay the same throughout the duration of an individual's disease.  A recent blog post on Discover Magazine's web site describes how the cancers can change through mutation and selection over time.  The post describes changes in acute myeloid leukemia, a disease similar to Jana's chronic myeloid leukemia, but the process can occur in any cancer.  The changes parallel the way in which new species arise through natural selection.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2012/01/12/inside-darwins-tumor/

January 7, 2012

Single-Drug Chemotherapy: Second Round

Another round of chemo to document. 

Tuesday, Jan 3:  Had my blood drawn early in the morning and got the results online before noon.  The tests determine whether or not my blood counts are adequate for the chemo.  Everything looked good.  Began taking the steroid Dexamethasone to reduce side effects of the chemotherapy.  The steroid revs up the body, and I felt good and energetic. Only slept about four hours that night even though I had taken a benadryl.

Wednesday, Jan 4:  Started my oral anti-nausea medicine in the morning and worked on installing the new dishwasher.  Had a doctor’s appointment at noon and began my infusion about 1:30 pm--an anti-nausea drug and pemetrexed.  It took about an hour or so.  All went very smoothly, and when it was done, I felt no different than when I went in.  Went home and worked on the dishwasher.  Taking the steroid made getting up and down on the floor easier.  Again only about four hours of sleep that night.

Thursday, Jan 5:  Stopped taking the steroid but continued the anti-nausea medication.  Finished installing the dishwasher.  Felt good all day.

Friday, Jan 6:  Not so energetic because no more Dexamethasone.  Continued anti-nausea medicine.  Did not do all that I had planned for the day.  Read Michael Connelly’s The DROP.

Saturday, Jan 7:  Got up and fried some ham and scrambled eggs for breakfast.  Then began feeling fatigued so I took a two-hour, after-breakfast nap.  Still not much interested in doing any work around the house.  Tiny pimple-like spots forming at the hairline on my neck.  Occasional coughing and tendency to gag.  Slight tingling in my hands.  Big snowflakes falling outside.

Sunday, Jan 8:  Didn't have the same fatigue as Saturday morning.  Took a nap after noon.  Occasional waves of feeling ill and a little short of breath.  Pretty much the same as yesterday, but I did get out and shovel and sweep some light snow.

Monday, Jan 9:  Pretty good day; however, felt bad at times in the evening.  I hope the feeling doesn't presage a bad day tomorrow.  Last time, Tuesday was a bad day.

Tuesday, Jan 10:  Today was not as bad as the first Tuesday of the last round.  Occasional waves of feeling ill stopped, but I easily became short of breath.  Had a cough and a low fever (99.2).  Mouth sores larger than last time.

Wednesday, Jan 10:  Better today.  No waves of feeling ill, cough less, no fever.  On the mend.  Unless there's something else to report this will be the last entry for this round.

David

January 3, 2012

An Epigenetic Day

About a year ago in the post entitled "Uncle Sam and Gini," I speculated that poverty and income inequality might have negative biological affects on children that take multiple generations to overcome. That could happen through changed in which genes are turned on and off during development through the action of epigenetics.

Well, yesterday was an epigenetic day. First I read an article in the Denver Post that was reprinted from the LA Times. The article reported on research that suggests that the conditions of women during their pregnancies in the 1950's laid the groundwork for the obesity epidemic we see today.

http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-obesity-causes-20111219,0,6170668.story

Then later in the day I caught part of "Talk of the Nation" on NPR which discussed how identical twins are not truly identical because of epigenetic differences. They may have the same genes, but interactions with the environment impact the activation and deactivation of those genes which result in differences between the twins.
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=144583977&m=144583970

If you find these article interesting, then I'd like to share a recent Science New article that goes to the molecular level to explain how lincRNAs coded from the parts of the DNA that do not code for proteins may orchestrate the differences between cell types within the organism and may be involved in epigenetic differences. These RNAs appear to be involved in cancer promotion and/or prevention.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/336570/title/Missing_Lincs

David

December 17, 2011

First Round, Second Course of Chemo

On Wednesday the 14th I had the first round of my second course of chemo. So far, it has been much easier to tolerate than the first course. The steroid I take at the beginning of the round wound me up a little, so I had trouble sleeping the night before the treatment, but a Benadryl the next two nights helped me get to sleep without a problem. The steroid also caused a spike in my blood sugar, but I think that should drop now that I’m through taking it this round. No nausea, no particular loss of appetite, and only minimal feelings of being unwell and fatigued. Interestingly, I felt worse today than any day so far. Maybe the damage done by the drug to cancer and normal cells is now affecting the body.


Bottom Line: If this is as bad as it gets, and the drug does slow down the growth of my tumors, I can keep this up through many rounds. I get the next round on January 4.

David

December 7, 2011

Starting Another Round of Chemotherapy

In late October I wrote a post telling about how my tumors appeared to be growing at a more rapid pace and about the difficulty of knowing what to do in response.  I had by bimonthly imaging on Friday, a CT scan this time, and saw the oncologists today.  The cancer continues to grow more rapidly, so we talked again about possible responses.  The bottom line is that we decided to return to chemotherapy because my first round of chemo appeared to have halted the growth while it lasted and for a few months afterwards.

Last year at this time, I was receiving a combination of pemetrexed and cisplatin.  This time I will be getting pemetrexed alone, and we will monitor to see if it slows down the growth.  Apparently, there has never been a trial of pemetrexed alone, but it is used alone as a second line treatment.  Pemetrexed was introduced as an agent to kill the cancer cells, but Dr. Camidge said that it is seen now to have the effect of keeping cancer in check rather than killing it.  Later, his nurse noted that one patient would be coming in today for her 38th cycle of pemetrexed therapy.  At three weeks between treatments, that’s over two years of treatment.  I doubt that she is being treated for mesothelioma, and I would be surprised to see mesothelioma turned into a chronic disease by pemetrexed, but it does indicate that the treatment is not so debilitating that it must be stopped even if it is working.

I am very pleased with this plan.  It feels good to be taking action, and I am convinced that this is the best approach to slow down the cancer growth with a minimum dent in my quality of life.  I also see it as a way of living longer in case a good clinical trial opens or an ongoing trial proves successful against mesothelioma.  I’m certainly not looking forward to the treatment, but it will be intellectually interesting to compare my experiences this time with the first round of chemo.  Pemetrexed in generally well tolerated and only takes about 10 minutes to infuse.  I’ll have to avoid contact with sick people during part of the cycle, but it should create only a minimum amount of fatigue and anorexia.  

I’ll post again in probably a couple of week to say how this new round is going.

Thanks again for reading my posts.  It’s rewarding to know that some people find them interesting and perhaps helpful.

David

October 23, 2011

Tumor Growth? Exploring Cancer Treatment Options

Last week Jana and I met with my Australian oncologist, Dr. Weickhardt, for the bimonthly review of my latest imaging, a CT scan this time. As I understand it, there are three major foci of cancer in my right thoracic cavity. One is high in the sack that surrounds the heart, the pericardium. From August to October, this tumor shrank 66% from 27 X 51 mm to 15 X 31 mm. That sounds terrific, but it makes me wonder about the measurements, because these tumors are not supposed to shrink. Another area in the fissure between the upper and lower lobes of the lung, remained constant, 10 X 15 mm, while the third area, lower down, near the diaphragm, increased 61% from 18 X 59 mm to 26 X 66 mm.

I don’t’ know exactly what to make of these results. For one thing, the measurements are given in two dimensions. Are they so thin in depth that the depth can be ignored? It also seems strange that one would grow substantially and the other shrink by a similar amount. Of course, the growth of the lower disease area caught our attention because the increase does not seem to be “glacial” as was found two months ago.

I have found over the years that I better understand what I believe after I have written it down. Writing imposes a certain discipline because it requires me to ask myself, “Do you really believe that?” What follows is an attempt to clarify and document my thinking about what action to take. Most readers of this blog may want to stop here, but my thinking is here for any who might be interested.


Background

The initial plan in the summer of 2010 was to have my lung removed along with the lining of the thorax to be followed by radiation therapy in the hopes of obtaining a cure; however, finding mesothelioma in the pericardium blocked that plan, and all accessible tumor was removed. I subsequently received six rounds of chemotherapy. Since that time the tumors appeared to be stable, and frankly, my attitude towards the cancer changed. Before finishing chemo, I did not think I probably had too many more months to live, but the stability of my scans following chemo gave me hope that I might live meaningfully longer than I had expected. Now with the apparently significant growth in one area of disease, I have become more sober about my condition and must review where we go from here.

The findings initiated a discussion of where to go now. It would have been easy to say, “You’re the doctor, what do we do now?” However, I have sufficient knowledge of disease processes, biology, physiology, and the use of data to inform decision making that I want to understand the situation as well as possible in order to participate in the decisions. Consequently, we had a long discussion, and I am very grateful to Dr. Weickhardt for taking the time and having the patience to discuss the options thoroughly.

Four general treatment approaches are available—watch and wait, more chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and participation in a clinical trial. Each approach has its potential benefits and risks, and given the many unknowns in the situation, the decision-making process becomes an interesting intellectual challenge. How do you decide a course of action when the unknowns dominate the decision making? Because mesothelioma is such a rare cancer, the amount of research done is limited as is the understanding of the disease at the molecular level. For example, it is hard to get a critical mass of patients so clinical trials examining variations in treatment options can be tested.


Watching and Waiting

Since the end of my chemotherapy, I have been in a watch and wait phase, and the stability of my disease has been encouraging. I could continue to watch and wait to see what happens with the two major areas of the disease, and decide on a new course of action later; however, in the face of apparently more rapid growth, even if the situation is not completely clear, one feels an urge to take action. While my good quality of life argues for not doing anything until new symptoms develop, changes such as rapid growth in one or more of my lesions, developing other diseases or complications could occur that would preclude other lines of treatment. Do I risk sacrificing my good quality of life for the potential benefit that could come from a new treatment which would most certainly have risks and pain and suffering? If there is no potential for a cure or a significant extension of my life by undergoing a new treatment, is it worth it to do anything but watch and wait?


Chemotherapy

The second option would be more chemotherapy. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, there is no second-line chemotherapy of proved efficacy. Dr. Weickhardt gave me an excellent review article entitled Current Chemotherapy and Emerging Systemic Strategies for Treatment of Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Nowak, 2011) from which the following quotations were taken.
Patients almost invariably progress after initial therapy, and at this point many are fit for second-line treatment. . . [but] as yet there are no randomized studies showing survival benefit from subsequent treatment. (page 310)
Perhaps I could have another round of cisplatin and pemetrexed; however, there is no evidence that additional rounds would be beneficial, and I expect more cisplatin might have undesirable toxic effects. Would my lower quality of life be worth a life extension of only a few months? According to Nowak, “Treatment with a second pemetrexed regimen has been proposed, but only low level evidence is available for this approach. . . In the area of first-line pemetrexed, no second-line therapy is supported by enough evidence to consider it standard care.”

Nevertheless, I might be amenable to second-line treatment with pemetrexed if the side effects could be reasonably controlled.


Clinical Trials

Another option would be to take part in a clinical trial, especially a phase II or phase III trial where phase I results have shown that the treatment is relatively nontoxic and shows promise for improvement. Clinical trials are the sources of hope in the fight against cancer, and come in a variety of flavors.

Traditionally, cancer has been fought by the brute force methods of cutting it out, burning it out with radiation, and poisoning it with chemotherapy. The idea is to kill the cancer cells while sparing as much as possible the nonmalignant cells of the body. The cisplatin and pemetrexed I received and most other chemotherapeutic drugs have their affect by interrupting the functioning of rapidly dividing cells. Consequently, such systemic drugs affect healthy rapidly dividing cells as well which contributes to their side effects. Very little progress has been made in identifying new, effective drugs of this type in recent years; however, work continues on developing such drugs and drug combinations.

Another approach is to develop drugs that attack targets that are more specific to cancers than to other rapidly dividing cells. For example, drugs have been developed that attempt to stop angiogenesis, the growth and development of the blood vessels necessary to nourish cancer cells. Attempts have been made to induce the body’s immune system to attack cancer. Cells that have significant DNA damage normally self-destruct through a process called apoptosis, but cancer cells have lost that ability; consequently, attempts have been made to reinstate apoptosis in cancer cells. Again, work of this kind continues.

Another approach comes through using specific characteristics of a type of cancer to target those cells only. A major breakthrough came a few years ago with the development of the drug Gleevec (the drug Jana takes) because the drug targets a specific molecule that causes certain blood cells to reproduce unchecked. Subsequently, tens of drugs have been developed that target specific molecules, but unfortunately, my understanding is that most cancers do not have a single, unique mutation that can be targeted like CML, Jana’s cancer. Most cancers display multiple mutations, and it is unclear which one or number of those mutations are essential driver mutations for the cancer and which are only along for the ride.

If medicine is ever able to tame or eliminate cancer, therapies will be dependent on the understanding of the many genetic mutations that drive cancer cells to replicate relentlessly. As I understand it from Siddhartha Mukherjee’s The Emperor of all Maladies: A Biography of Cancer, scientists think that mutations in one or more of 13 major pathways may underlie all cancers which gives hope that cancer can be controlled much more effectively in the future. Success will depend on basic research into the biology, especially the genetics, of cancer before one or more specific targeted drugs can be developed and administered based on the mutations found in an individual’s tumor or tumors.

Given the small number of cases of mesothelioma and the fact that mesothelioma is characterized by the significant DNA loss, it seems unlikely that mesothelioma specific treatments will be developed any time soon. It seems that any upcoming advances in mesothelioma treatment may depend on the success of treatments that attack the characteristics seen in cancer cells in general. As Nowak wrote,

Mesothelioma is characterized by genomic loss, with loss of tumor suppressor genes rather than the constitutively activating mutations, which have been key to therapeutic advances in other diseases. Loss of regions encoding the tumor suppressor genes p16INK4a, p14ARF, NF2, and TP53 are common. Unfortunately, these losses do not readily translate to therapeutic strategies. However, mesothelioma also demonstrates abnormalities in growth factor receptor pathways, angiogenesis, and apoptosis, which may be amenable to intervention. (page 311)
Even though clinical trials are the source of hope for the defeat of cancer, I am not hopeful that a magic bullet will come along in time to provide me with any benefit; however, I look forward to participating in a clinical trial, even at the loss of some quality of life and with the low chance of a curative outcome, because a trial would provide both a modicum of hope and the chance to make a small contribution to understanding the disease.

Unfortunately, there are no clinical trials available to me now, but we will continue to look for them.


Radiation Therapy

The final option would be to undergo radiation therapy, if appropriate. To that end, I had a referral and thorough discussion of radiation therapy with Dr. Laurie Gaspar, a radiation oncologist at the University of Colorado Hospital. Dr. Gaspar explained that there are two common uses (if anything can be called common for a rare disease like mesothelioma) of radiation in mesothelioma. As initially planned for me, radiation can be given to the lining of the thorax following the removal of the lung and tumor burden with the intent to cure the disease. The other use is palliative treatment when the lung is still present in order to reduce pain and perhaps other symptoms as the tumor develops.

I do not fall into either group, so it is doubtful that radiation would be appropriate for me at this time. The problem is that there is no evidence that the radiation of my tumors would be curative; it would most likely only slow down the tumor growth and provide some months of life extension. It would not be curative because a full lethal dose of radiation might not be possible because of the effects of the radiation on nearby tissue, particularly in my case the other lung and the liver.

The radiation treatment is given by beaming the x-rays from several different angles so that the tumors receive a significant dose, but the other tissue does not. When I had prostate cancer, it was relatively easy to plan the treatment because the prostate is a small target in a relatively stable location away from important tissue that might be injured by the radiation. While she doesn’t seem very hopeful, the oncologist has agreed to order a special CT scan and a PET scan to enable her to develop a treatment plan. If the scan shows that it is possible to deliver a meaningful dose to my tumors with a reasonable risk of side effects, they will proceed.

One factor to consider with regards to radiation is what would happen if I got the therapy and then needed palliative treatment later. Could I have both rounds of radiation? I don’t see why not, if I am going to die anyway, but I don’t know the answer. Another factor is that having the radiation might foreclose participation in some clinical trials; however, from what I have read in the descriptions of clinical trials, it might only delay my participation by a month.


What to Do?

So how do I decide what to do. Here are the thoughts that seem most important to me:

  1. Mesothelioma is fatal, and it appears that my cancer has awakened and is growing again which causes me to want to take some action; however, I have some doubts about the scans because of the apparently significant decrease in one of the tumor sites. How reliable are the conclusions of different radiologists who examine the same images? How thoroughly do they compare scans from one date to another, and why don’t they look at progression across multiple scans rather than just comparing the two most recent?
  2. Watching and waiting preserves quality of life at the risk of developments that might prevent receiving another treatment later. If my cancer is growing again, what is the risk of waiting to take any action for another six weeks when my next imaging is scheduled?
  3. There does not seem to be any advantage to chemotherapy. I don’t believe that gaining a couple of months of life extension would be worth the loss in quality of life that chemotherapy would require.
  4. Clinical trials are currently unavailable, but I am positively disposed to participation if the rational for the treatment seems reasonable, even at the cost of a lower quality of life.
  5. Radiation is unlikely to be curative, and it would probably lower my quality of life as well as add some risk of damage to lung and/or liver.
The only avenue available for immediate action is to pursue the testing to see if a plan can be developed for me; however, given my lack of new symptoms, and the fact that I do not relish the idea of getting more radiation exposure from the CT and PET scans, I believe I will cancel those scans and wait until December before deciding whether or not to ask them to pursue radiation treatment. I’ve always believed that if there is no logical imperative to take one course or another, the best thing is to do what you want to do. At this time, that is to do nothing new but to wait and see if the growth of my cancer is confirmed by the December scans.


Mukherjee, S. The Emperor of all Maladies: A Biography of Cancer. New York: Scribner, 2010.

Nowak, A. K. Current Chemotherapy and Emerging Systemic Strategies for Treatment of Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma, American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2011, http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Home/Education%20&%20Training/Educational%20Book/PDF%20Files/2011/zds00111000309.PDF

October 10, 2011

Pages on Bullfighting

Last week in response to a post by a cousin, I posted an account of my first bullfight on Facebook.  Subsequently, a friend wrote to express her concern about how cruel bullfighting is, what a great waste of time and energy it is, and how painful it is to watch.  This got me to thinking about why bullfighting has persisted in this time of animal rights, and I wrote some thoughts on the subject.

Those two pieces are now shown in the column to the right as A Bullfight in Madrid and Reflections on Buillfighting in case anyone is interested.

PS Going to have my bimonthly imaging tomorrow.  A CT scan this time.