At Last Someone is doing some real work and thinking

[Guest guest]

Hard headed fools are now waking up.

 

Melly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Immune therapies finally working against cancer

 

 

Print

 

 

 

 

AP – In this Wednesday May 27, 2009 photo, Dr. Patrick Hwu, left, talks

with his cancer patient Hilde Stapleton …

 

 

 

by MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione, Ap Medical Writer

– 2 hrs 26 mins ago

 

ORLANDO, Fla. – First there was surgery, then chemotherapy and radiation. Now,

doctors have overcome 30 years of false starts and found success with a fourth

way to fight cancer: using the body's natural defender, the immune system.

The approach is called a cancer vaccine, although it treats the disease rather

than prevents it.

At a cancer conference Sunday, researchers said one such vaccine kept a common

form of lymphoma from worsening for more than a year. That's huge in this field,

where progress is glacial and success with a new treatment is often measured in

weeks or even days.

Experimental vaccines against three other cancers — prostate, the deadly skin

disease melanoma and an often fatal childhood tumor called neuroblastoma —

also gave positive results in late-stage testing in recent weeks, after decades

of struggles in the lab.

" I don't know what we did differently to make the breakthrough, " said Dr. Len

Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society.

Instead of a single " A-Ha! " moment, there have been many " ah, so " discoveries

about the immune system that now seem to be paying off, said Dr. John

Niederhuber, director of the National Cancer Institute.

It's way too soon to declare victory. No one knows how long the benefits will

last, whether people will need " boosters " to keep their disease in check, or

whether vaccines will ever be a cure. Many vaccines must be custom-made for each

patient. How practical will that be, and what will it cost?

Those are all good questions — but there are no answers yet, said Dr. Richard

Schilsky, a University of Chicago cancer specialist who is president of the

American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Several vaccine studies were reported over the weekend at the oncology group's

annual meeting in Florida.

A big problem has been getting the immune system to " see " cancer as a threat,

said Dr. Patrick Hwu, melanoma chief at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson

Cancer Center. Viruses like the flu or polio are easily spotted by the immune

system because they look different from human cells.

" But cancer comes from our own cells. And so it's more like guerrilla warfare

— the immune system has trouble distinguishing the normal cells from the

cancer cells, " he said.

To help it do that, many cancer vaccines take a substance from a cancer cell's

surface and attach it to something the immune system already recognizes as

foreign — in the lymphoma vaccine's case, a shellfish protein.

" It's a mimic to what you're trying to kill, a training device to train the

immune system to kill something, " Hwu explained.

To make the attack as strong as possible, doctors add a substance to put the

immune system on high alert.

Dr. Stephen Schuster of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine led a

study testing BiovaxID, an experimental vaccine against follicular lymphoma

developed by the National Cancer Institute. Rights to it are now held by Biovest

International Inc. of Worcester, Mass., and some of his co-researchers have

financial ties to the company.

To be in the study, patients had to have achieved a remission for at least six

months with standard chemo. This often occurs with this type of lymphoma, but

the disease usually comes back.

Researchers gave 41 patients the shellfish protein and an immune booster; 76

other patients were given those plus the vaccine. After nearly five years of

followup, the average time until the cancer worsened was 44 months in the

vaccine group and 30 months in the others.

Big gains also were seen with a neuroblastoma vaccine developed by the cancer

institute. In a study of 226 patients, 86 percent of vaccine recipients were

still alive after two years versus 75 percent of others not given the vaccine.

Results were released by the oncology society two weeks ago.

The benefits from a melanoma vaccine developed by the cancer institute were more

modest. It extended the time until patients relapsed — three months versus one

and a half for those not given the vaccine.

Hilde Stapleton, 53, of suburban Houston, is one of the lucky ones it helped.

Still, she found what many other vaccine recipients have learned: The vaccine

had few side effects, but the immune system boosters were " like the worst case

of flu you've ever had, " she said.

The prostate cancer vaccine, Provenge, is farthest along. Its maker,

Seattle-based Dendreon Corp., is seeking federal Food and Drug Administration

approval for it. A study last month found that it extended survival by four

months in men with very advanced disease.

Doctors unconnected with these experiments are cautiously optimistic.

" We've raised so many false hopes in the past, " said Lichtenfeld of the Cancer

Society. " What's different this time is we have the science reports to back up

improvements. "

___On the Net:

Cancer meeting: http://www.asco.org

National Cancer Institute: http://www.cancer.gov

 

 

[Guest guest]

Way back in 2000, my oncologist (research

associate with MD Anderson) told me that the future of cancer treatment would

be vaccines and that they way cancer was being treated in 2000 would be looked

back upon as being barbaric, within the next 10-15 years.  The vaccines have been planned for a long

time.  Will vaccines be a safer

treatment, maybe / maybe not.  Remember

that vaccines produce side-effects sometime short-lived and sometimes for life

and many times the association between the vaccine and illness/disease is denied

until absolutely proven – usually through law suits brought by families who

have lost loved ones or have loved ones who have been maimed by vaccines. 

 

I’m not totally convinced this is the “discoveryâ€

that is it being played out to be.  You

see the major red-flag to me is that the vaccine “treats†disease rather than

prevents it.  Until conventional medicine

decides to focus on prevention (other than as an “oh by the wayâ€) we will not

have any real cures for anything.  They

want us to be able to live with cancer just as people live with diabetes, heart

disease, by using conventional meds. 

Keeps them in business and the patient at their mercy.

 

Notice that in one study, the participants had to have a remission that was

brought about by standard CHEMO.   Would

they have taken someone in remission brought about by natural medicine?  Chemo is a “cash-cow†and it will be very

difficult if not impossible to let this “cash-cow†die.  And then we also have to look at the word “improvementsâ€â€¦..most

likely it will mean something much different to the docs than it does to the

patient.

 

And, extending survival by three-four months? 

Does that mean the quality of live was good or does that mean the

patient is confined to an easy chair or bed hooked up to oxygen and pain

killers?  Survival and quality of life

usually mean two different things.

 

Certainly this is something to watch closely to see just how it plays out.  We must always remember to follow the money

and this still reeks of pharmaceutical companies and doctors making big bucks

especially if boosters are required.  And

we must always watch out for those “buzz words†– survival time, remission,

treats (never means cure), response, percentages. 

 

Be Well

Dr.L

Visit My Blog

 

 

 

 

oleander soup

oleander soup On Behalf Of Melly Bag

 

 

 

 

 

 

Immune therapies

finally working against cancer

 

 

 

 

 

 

AP – In

this Wednesday May 27, 2009 photo, Dr. Patrick Hwu, left, talks with his

cancer patient Hilde Stapleton …

 

 

 

 

 

by

MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione, Ap

Medical Writer –

2 hrs 26 mins ago

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORLANDO,

Fla. – First there was surgery, then chemotherapy and radiation. Now, doctors

have overcome 30 years of false starts and found success with a fourth way to

fight cancer: using the body's natural defender, the immune system.

 

 

The

approach is called a cancer vaccine, although it treats the disease rather

than prevents it.

 

 

At

a cancer conference Sunday, researchers said one such vaccine kept a common

form of lymphoma from worsening for more than a

year. That's huge in this field, where progress is glacial and success with a

new treatment is often measured in weeks or even days.

 

 

Experimental

vaccines against three other cancers — prostate, the deadly skin disease melanoma

and an often fatal childhood tumor called neuroblastoma

— also gave positive results in late-stage testing in recent weeks, after

decades of struggles in the lab.

 

 

" I

don't know what we did differently to make the breakthrough, " said Dr.

Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society.

 

 

Instead

of a single " A-Ha! " moment, there have been many " ah, so "

discoveries about the immune system that now seem to be paying off, said Dr.

John Niederhuber, director of the National Cancer

Institute.

 

 

It's

way too soon to declare victory. No one knows how long the benefits will

last, whether people will need " boosters " to keep their disease in

check, or whether vaccines will ever be a cure. Many vaccines must be

custom-made for each patient. How practical will that be, and what will it

cost?

 

 

Those

are all good questions — but there are no answers yet, said Dr. Richard

Schilsky, a University of Chicago cancer specialist who is president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

 

 

Several

vaccine studies were reported over the weekend at the oncology group's annual

meeting in Florida.

 

 

A

big problem has been getting the immune system to " see " cancer as a

threat, said Dr. Patrick Hwu, melanoma chief at the University of Texas M.D.

Anderson Cancer Center. Viruses like the flu or polio are easily spotted by

the immune system because they look different from human cells.

 

 

" But

cancer comes from our own cells. And so it's more like guerrilla warfare —

the immune system has trouble distinguishing the normal cells from the cancer cells, " he said.

 

 

To

help it do that, many cancer vaccines take a

substance from a cancer cell's surface and

attach it to something the immune system already recognizes as foreign — in

the lymphoma vaccine's case, a shellfish

protein.

 

 

" It's

a mimic to what you're trying to kill, a training device to train the immune

system to kill something, " Hwu explained.

 

 

To

make the attack as strong as possible, doctors add a substance to put the

immune system on high alert.

 

 

Dr.

Stephen Schuster of the University of Pennsylvania

School of Medicine led a study testing BiovaxID, an experimental

vaccine against follicular lymphoma developed

by the National Cancer Institute. Rights to it

are now held by Biovest International Inc. of Worcester, Mass., and some of

his co-researchers have financial ties to the company.

 

 

To

be in the study, patients had to have achieved a remission for at least six

months with standard chemo. This often occurs with this type of lymphoma, but

the disease usually comes back.

 

 

Researchers

gave 41 patients the shellfish protein and an immune

booster; 76 other patients were given those plus the vaccine. After

nearly five years of followup, the average time until the cancer worsened was

44 months in the vaccine group and 30 months in the others.

 

 

Big

gains also were seen with a neuroblastoma

vaccine developed by the cancer institute. In a study of 226 patients, 86

percent of vaccine recipients were still alive after two years versus 75

percent of others not given the vaccine. Results were released by the

oncology society two weeks ago.

 

The

benefits from a melanoma vaccine developed by the cancer institute were more

modest. It extended the time until patients relapsed — three months versus

one and a half for those not given the vaccine.

 

Hilde

Stapleton, 53, of suburban Houston, is one of the lucky ones it helped.

Still, she found what many other vaccine recipients have learned: The vaccine

had few side effects, but the immune system boosters

were " like the worst case of flu you've ever had, " she said.

 

The

prostate cancer vaccine, Provenge, is farthest

along. Its maker, Seattle-based Dendreon Corp.,

is seeking federal Food and Drug Administration

approval for it. A study last month found that it extended survival by four

months in men with very advanced disease.

 

Doctors

unconnected with these experiments are cautiously optimistic.

 

" We've

raised so many false hopes in the past, " said Lichtenfeld of the Cancer

Society. " What's different this time is we have the science reports to

back up improvements. "

[Guest guest]



I have small B cell follicular lymphoma which I have been fighting since 1999. I have had Rituxan sessions different times over the past few years. It seems to knock it down but not out. In the past few years the cancer (lymphoma) has gotten into the skin on my face, chest and back. This is very rare. My local oncologist says that it is difficult for Rituxan to get to it to kill it since there are no big veins in the skin to carry Rituxan to it. Therefore, she once gave me a light round of a chemo that did suppress it. But now, it is on the move again worse than ever. I have been doing the Budwig diet, taking Beta 1 3D Beta Glucan, doing Bill Henderson's protocol, Dr. David Williams supplements, Juice Plus, gone vegan( one month now), juicing, and am starting the 5 day colon cleanse from Dr. Schultz ( in a few days) and his super food, upping the juicing, ordered Cordyceps sinensis medicinal mushroom product from Vita Cost, drinking lots of pure water, and praying for wisdom and healing.

 

Anyone have any info on lymphoma in the skin?

 

Darlene

 

-

Dr. Loretta Lanphier

oleander soup

Sunday, May 31, 2009 3:05 PM

RE: At Last Someone is doing some real work and thinking

 

 

 

 

Way back in 2000, my oncologist (research associate with MD Anderson) told me that the future of cancer treatment would be vaccines and that they way cancer was being treated in 2000 would be looked back upon as being barbaric, within the next 10-15 years. The vaccines have been planned for a long time. Will vaccines be a safer treatment, maybe / maybe not. Remember that vaccines produce side-effects sometime short-lived and sometimes for life and many times the association between the vaccine and illness/disease is denied until absolutely proven – usually through law suits brought by families who have lost loved ones or have loved ones who have been maimed by vaccines.

 

I’m not totally convinced this is the “discovery†that is it being played out to be. You see the major red-flag to me is that the vaccine “treats†disease rather than prevents it. Until conventional medicine decides to focus on prevention (other than as an “oh by the wayâ€) we will not have any real cures for anything. They want us to be able to live with cancer just as people live with diabetes, heart disease, by using conventional meds. Keeps them in business and the patient at their mercy. Notice that in one study, the participants had to have a remission that was brought about by standard CHEMO. Would they have taken someone in remission brought about by natural medicine? Chemo is a “cash-cow†and it will be very difficult if not impossible to let this “cash-cow†die. And then we also have to look at the word “improvementsâ€â€¦..most likely it will mean something much different to the docs than it does to the patient.And, extending survival by three-four months? Does that mean the quality of live was good or does that mean the patient is confined to an easy chair or bed hooked up to oxygen and pain killers? Survival and quality of life usually mean two different things.Certainly this is something to watch closely to see just how it plays out. We must always remember to follow the money and this still reeks of pharmaceutical companies and doctors making big bucks especially if boosters are required. And we must always watch out for those “buzz words†– survival time, remission, treats (never means cure), response, percentages.

Be WellDr.L

Visit My Blog

 

 

 

 

oleander soup oleander soup On Behalf Of Melly Bag

 

 

 

 

 

Immune therapies finally working against cancer

 

 

 

 

 

AP – In this Wednesday May 27, 2009 photo, Dr. Patrick Hwu, left, talks with his cancer patient Hilde Stapleton …

 

 

by MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione, Ap Medical Writer – 2 hrs 26 mins ago

 

 

ORLANDO, Fla. – First there was surgery, then chemotherapy and radiation. Now, doctors have overcome 30 years of false starts and found success with a fourth way to fight cancer: using the body's natural defender, the immune system.

 

The approach is called a cancer vaccine, although it treats the disease rather than prevents it.

 

At a cancer conference Sunday, researchers said one such vaccine kept a common form of lymphoma from worsening for more than a year. That's huge in this field, where progress is glacial and success with a new treatment is often measured in weeks or even days.

 

Experimental vaccines against three other cancers — prostate, the deadly skin disease melanoma and an often fatal childhood tumor called neuroblastoma — also gave positive results in late-stage testing in recent weeks, after decades of struggles in the lab.

 

"I don't know what we did differently to make the breakthrough," said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society.

 

Instead of a single "A-Ha!" moment, there have been many "ah, so" discoveries about the immune system that now seem to be paying off, said Dr. John Niederhuber, director of the National Cancer Institute.

 

It's way too soon to declare victory. No one knows how long the benefits will last, whether people will need "boosters" to keep their disease in check, or whether vaccines will ever be a cure. Many vaccines must be custom-made for each patient. How practical will that be, and what will it cost?

 

Those are all good questions — but there are no answers yet, said Dr. Richard Schilsky, a University of Chicago cancer specialist who is president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

 

Several vaccine studies were reported over the weekend at the oncology group's annual meeting in Florida.

 

A big problem has been getting the immune system to "see" cancer as a threat, said Dr. Patrick Hwu, melanoma chief at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Viruses like the flu or polio are easily spotted by the immune system because they look different from human cells.

 

"But cancer comes from our own cells. And so it's more like guerrilla warfare — the immune system has trouble distinguishing the normal cells from the cancer cells," he said.

 

To help it do that, many cancer vaccines take a substance from a cancer cell's surface and attach it to something the immune system already recognizes as foreign — in the lymphoma vaccine's case, a shellfish protein.

 

"It's a mimic to what you're trying to kill, a training device to train the immune system to kill something," Hwu explained.

 

To make the attack as strong as possible, doctors add a substance to put the immune system on high alert.

 

Dr. Stephen Schuster of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine led a study testing BiovaxID, an experimental vaccine against follicular lymphoma developed by the National Cancer Institute. Rights to it are now held by Biovest International Inc. of Worcester, Mass., and some of his co-researchers have financial ties to the company.

 

To be in the study, patients had to have achieved a remission for at least six months with standard chemo. This often occurs with this type of lymphoma, but the disease usually comes back.

 

Researchers gave 41 patients the shellfish protein and an immune booster; 76 other patients were given those plus the vaccine. After nearly five years of followup, the average time until the cancer worsened was 44 months in the vaccine group and 30 months in the others.

 

Big gains also were seen with a neuroblastoma vaccine developed by the cancer institute. In a study of 226 patients, 86 percent of vaccine recipients were still alive after two years versus 75 percent of others not given the vaccine. Results were released by the oncology society two weeks ago.

 

The benefits from a melanoma vaccine developed by the cancer institute were more modest. It extended the time until patients relapsed — three months versus one and a half for those not given the vaccine.

 

Hilde Stapleton, 53, of suburban Houston, is one of the lucky ones it helped. Still, she found what many other vaccine recipients have learned: The vaccine had few side effects, but the immune system boosters were "like the worst case of flu you've ever had," she said.

 

The prostate cancer vaccine, Provenge, is farthest along. Its maker, Seattle-based Dendreon Corp., is seeking federal Food and Drug Administration approval for it. A study last month found that it extended survival by four months in men with very advanced disease.

 

Doctors unconnected with these experiments are cautiously optimistic.

 

"We've raised so many false hopes in the past," said Lichtenfeld of the Cancer Society. "What's different this time is we have the science reports to back up improvements."

[Guest guest]

if the Rituxan molecule isn't too large for it to work, DMSO might carry it into

the skin transdermally.

may be worth a try? i think the molecular weight of the molecule has to be

under 100 daltons, but some stuff over that is carried successfully, so 100

isn't a " set in stone " limit line.

 

i know nothing of this lymphoma, but it occurs to me from various reading that

if it were me i'd try aloe gel from fresh fronds on it topically and swallow

some aloe juice also. fresh aloe is showing up in the produce depts of common

markets a lot these days. if you're going to try the DMSO, get on the DMSO

to learn about using it ... dilution, and query about whatever. if

used too strong it can irritate the skin, and used in the same place repeatedly

will also, but aloe seems to help for that a lot.

 

________________________________

 

oleander soup oleander soup On

Behalf Of Darlene Kurz

Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:01 AM

oleander soup

Re: At Last Someone is doing some real work and

thinking

 

 



 

 

I have small B cell follicular lymphoma which I have been fighting since 1999.

I have had Rituxan sessions different times over the past few years. It seems

to knock it down but not out. In the past few years the cancer (lymphoma) has

gotten into the skin on my face, chest and back. This is very rare. My local

oncologist says that it is difficult for Rituxan to get to it to kill it since

there are no big veins in the skin to carry Rituxan to it. Therefore, she once

gave me a light round of a chemo that did suppress it. But now, it is on the

move again worse than ever. I have been doing the Budwig diet, taking Beta 1 3D

Beta Glucan, doing Bill Henderson's protocol, Dr. David Williams supplements,

Juice Plus, gone vegan( one month now), juicing, and am starting the 5 day

colon cleanse from Dr. Schultz ( in a few days) and his super food, upping the

juicing, ordered Cordyceps sinensis medicinal mushroom product from Vita Cost,

drinking lots of pure water, and praying for wisdom and healing.

 

Anyone have any info on lymphoma in the skin?

 

Darlene