Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?
JF_at_NoName.com
Date: 02/13/05
- Next message: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Previous message: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- In reply to: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Next in thread: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Reply: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:25:14 GMT
>> I've gone through the standard surgery & platinum/taxane
>> therapy. I responded relatively well (ca125 at 18 and 12
>> after 5th and 6th chemos). But now, 2.5 months after my
>> 6th and last chemo, CA125 reads as 79. (CT scan to follow
>> soon, but expected to be clear since I was clear even at
>> diagnosis).
>>
>>
>> So the choice is: start 2nd round chemo right away
>> (Topotecan? Doxil?) or take a 1 month detour to try this
>> first.
>>
>>
>> Any advice?
>>
>>
>
> There is a third option - if you are feeling well, don't take
> any treatment until there is a reason to.
I understand that this is what some doctors recommend, and I
understand that since there is no clear evidence that early
treatment is better, it is an option.
However, logic dictates that early treatment is better.
Earlier stage disease responds better to chemo than later
stage disease. Also, the fundamental theory of biology,
evolution, suggests that the more cancer cells there are,
the higher the odds that one of them will have a mutation
which will render it immune to chemo. Since cancer grows
more or less exponentially, earlier treatment should be
better.
I certainly wouldn't wait until bacteria had taken
over my body before starting antibiotics.
So in my mind, treatment is the only way to go.
The question I'm left with: is it worth it to 'waste' a
month on a treatment which may not help at all (the phase I trial),
or should I go straight to 2nd line chemo (which also may not
help!).
> It depends on the trial, but if they have said it's a single
> injection, I suspect that's it.
It just seems strange to me that if the response is shown to
be good, they wouldn't try to give another injection. To both
satisfy their curiosity, get data, and out of compassion!
But I guess that there are also regulatory hurdles that
stop them...
- Next message: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Previous message: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- In reply to: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Next in thread: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Reply: Steph: "Re: Radioactive Antibodies: outlook?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|