Tag Archive for: cancer research

What’s REALLY the News You Can Use?

/in , /by

“New study shows baby otters prevent diseases!” “Chocolate promotes weight loss!” Don’t we wish headlines like that were true?  Unfortunately, some of the things we read about possible new cancer treatments are just about as likely.   

Because we seek hope from these good reports, it can be easy to misinterpret what we hear about studies and results. How do you know when reading about a study’s findings whether it’s a real breakthrough or just a sensational story? 

First, let’s go over the basics of research.  

Basics of Research

  • Scientific method is how scientists figure out if some treatment makes a difference by conducting an experiment.  
  • In cancer research, the experimental process of understanding if a particular treatment is effective and safe is called a clinical trial.  
  • One study can seem to prove almost anything; it’s only through repeated, tightly monitored and designed clinical research that we can know that a treatment actually works.  An example: I ate chocolate AND I lost weight; that doesn’t mean the chocolate CAUSED the weight loss. 

Cancer Research Facts

  • There are strict regulations for designing and conducting trials and reporting results, monitored by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 
  • The journey from an idea to an approved treatment can take many, many years, thousands of scientists, hundreds of thousands of patients, and millions of dollars. Only a fraction of clinical trials result in an approved treatment that is available to the public.  
  • Cancer researchers start with experiments in the laboratory, often done on cells, tissues, or animals whose cells work like human cells. If the results are promising, the researcher (also known as a Principal Investigator or PI) will apply to the FDA to begin a clinical trial, sharing data and a detailed design for testing the treatment on humans.  
  • Once the application is approved, the trial begins and goes through a series of phases that are closely monitored not only by the FDA, but by the internal review board (IRB) of the institution where the trial is taking place. These phases determine if the treatment works, if it’s safe, and ultimately if it works better than what has been regarded as the “standard of care” for a specific cancer type. 
  • If the clinical trial meets the criteria stated in the initial design, it is presented to the FDA for approval. There is even more rigorous review of the research design and results, including peer review by other researchers, before the treatment is approved. 
  • Once approved for public use, the treatment is continuously scrutinized for long-term side effects and other adverse events that may indicate serious problems. Sometimes, a treatment approved for one cancer type seems promising for others, and it will go through another clinical trial. 

Here are some factors that add credibility to articles and news stories that report findings:  

  • It’s reported by a neutral (non-political or entertainment) source. Examples include the Associate Press, Nature magazine, and medical publications such as the New England Journal of Medicine of the Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). 
  • The phrase “versus standard of care” lets us know there was an experimental group that did receive the test drug and a control group that did not. 
  • Funding sources, when identified, are the National Institutes of Health, academic medical centers or research universities.  
  • The sample size is very important: the larger the study, the more significant the results and the farther along in the clinical research process it has proven valid. 
  • The entity making the report isn’t trying to see you something. 

The good news? There are AMAZING treatments currently in clinical trials that once would have seemed like science fiction. This June, our team will report “breaking news” about new cancer treatments from the ASCO annual meeting in Chicago. We are thrilled to share with you that one of OUR programs, Empowering Providers to Empower Patients (EPEP), is being published among ASCO’s online abstracts.  

Have a question about something you see online? Reach out to us at tracy@powerfulpatients.org and we will help you interpret how the information might apply to you. 

Should Prostate Cancer Patients Consider a Treatment in Clinical Trials?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Should Prostate Cancer Patients Consider a Treatment in Clinical Trials? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Prostate cancer expert Dr. Andrew Armstrong explains how prostate cancer clinical trials work and discusses why patients should feel confident exploring this option at any stage of their cancer journey.

Dr. Andrew J. Armstrong is a medical oncologist and director of clinical research at the Duke Cancer Institute’s Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers. For more information on Dr. Armstrong here.

See More From Prostate Clinical Trials 201

Related Resources

An Overview of Prostate Cancer Treatment Approaches

An Overview of Prostate Cancer Treatment Approaches

 Why Should Prostate Cancer Patients Be Empowered

Why Should Prostate Cancer Patients Be Empowered?

 Key Questions for Prostate Cancer Patients to Ask Before Joining a Clinical Trial

Key Questions for Prostate Cancer Patients to Ask Before Joining a Clinical Trial

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

At what point should a prostate cancer patient consider participating in a clinical trial? 

Dr. Armstrong:

Sure. If you look at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN guidelines, you’ll see that clinical trials should be discussed along all parts of the journey. 

And that’s because clinical trials often can change how we think about cancer, how we treat cancer, can improve cure rates, can improve survival. Most of our drugs and treatments that have been successful in all cancer have been the result of clinical trials. 

And it’s not always appropriate, though. We have very many treatments that can cure patients, and we don’t want to interfere with that, but sometimes a clinical trial can layer on top of that cure rate. 

But many patients, their cancer becomes resistant to proven therapies. That’s certainly an area where clinical trials can make a big difference, either to put off chemotherapy or more toxic therapies, or in patients who have exhausted proven therapies. That’s certainly appropriate. 

But sometimes clinical trials do not involve placebos. They involve combination therapies, they involve layering on top several approaches to try to improve the survival on top of standard of care.  

And so as a director of a research program, we have all sorts of trials. They come in Phase I, Phase II, Phase III. Really only the Phase IIIs involve placebo controlled or controlled trials. Phase II tend to be early studies, where everybody gets a therapy and it’s preliminary to determine efficacy. Phase I is really trying to determine the safety and dosing of an experimental drug. But patients can benefit across the spectrum. 

So, it’s important, particularly if you have advanced disease, to go to a site, like a comprehensive cancer center, for a second opinion to see if there is alternatives to what you might get in the community.  

Katherine Banwell:

Yes. What would you say to someone who might be hesitant to participate in a trial? 

Dr. Armstrong:

Participation in a trial involves shared decision-making, just like being diagnosed, embarking on initial treatment, even embarking on standard of care treatment. Everything is shared decision-making in terms of risks and benefits.  

Sometimes a trial is not in a patient’s best interest, and it’s important for a physician to be upright about that and up front about the risks of a trial. 

I think when patients have exhausted proven therapies, it’s quite appropriate to talk about therapies that might be in the research pipeline that are showing some promise, that have demonstrated at least success in the laboratory or in small numbers of patients coming before.  

For example, in 2022, a brand-new drug just got approved called Pluvicto, or PSMA lutetium. This is a new smart bomb for prostate cancer. Just last year it was a research drug, but this year it’s successful and being used in the clinic. All those hormone drugs I mentioned earlier, those were research drugs five years ago. So, we don’t make advanced, we don’t extend lives without participating in research. We’re not happy with the way things are, we want them to be better. 

And the only way to make them better is by studying them. And not all of these trials are successful, unfortunately, but many are, and that’s why we are seeing men live longer and have better survivorship nowadays. 

How Has Cancer Research Evolved in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

/in , , , , , , , , /by

How Has Cancer Research Evolved in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo. 

What have been some benefits for cancer research during the COVID-19 pandemic? Expert. Dr. Shaji Kumar describes some of the clinical trial changes that have been born from the pandemic to improve access to care and to decrease the risk of infection for cancer patients.

See More From the Best Care No Matter Where You Live Program

Related Programs:

Transcript:

Mary Leer:

Are there any noticeable trends born out of the pandemic that will be or could be a benefit to the future of cancer care or research?

Dr. Shaji Kumar:

That’s a very important question, and I think we always learn from adversity, and I think this is going to be no different. I think, especially when the pandemic hit back in the spring of last year, we all had to think fast on our feet to figure out how best to continue to tell about the best care for the cancer patients without compromising the care in any way. And we knew that bringing the patients back into the clinic at the same rate we did before the pandemic would expose them to significant risk for infection, so how do we continue with treatment? There have been very different things people have tried…one of them is to try and get the medications to patients at home. If they are on IV medications, they can be changed to something that’s comparable that can be given by mouth. We already did that for some patients. For some patients who used to come to the clinic very often, so we figure out is there a way for them to get some of those testing done in a clinic much closer to home, so they can avoid the travel, they can avoid being in a bigger city, they can avoid being in a bigger institution, again, reducing the risk of exposure, and then you look at those numbers and then decide on the next course of treatment. We converted many of the clinic visits to video visits. Nothing is as good as having the patient right in front of you, but this is the best we could do under the circumstances.

And I think that helped. So I think the clinical trials was a big problem because in many of those trials were done in a very rigid fashion with very little variability allowed within the protocols. And everybody loosened from the clinical trial sponsors, the pharmaceutical companies, the institutional review board, the investigators to try and build flexibility into those clinical trial structures to allow patients to continue to be on those trials, So what does that mean for the future? I think the video visits are here to stay, I think we will continue to utilize that and bring patients back to the clinic only when it’s absolutely needed. I think the clinical trials will have in-built flexibility so that patients can enroll on clinical trials remotely, they can potentially be given some of those medications at home, maybe it would be something where we would check into the patients on a regular basis to make sure things are proceeding in the right way. I think there are increasingly technologies that will allow the patients to communicate in real time with the care team and also provide many of the data that we need through iPads or iPhones, Apple watches, whatever we end up using.

So that is that I think that technology will rapidly take off in the next few years. So I think a lot of the care of the patients with cancer in general, and particularly cancer patients, is going to look very different five years from now, because of all these things that we have always thought of and we thought, “Yeah it will take time to implement, it’s difficult.” Now we figure it out in a year. We can do a lot of those things.

Jeff Bushnell:

What’s the final takeaway for the average cancer patient and caregiver, how to get through this? What’s your bottom line for us all?

Dr. Shaji Kumar:

Your cancer treatment comes first, let’s not compromise on it, let us do it as safe as we can by observing all the instructions in terms of social distancing, masking, avoiding gatherings, getting vaccinated, and make sure you keep connected with your care team. You don’t have to be in the clinic to do that. There’s a variety of different tools, I think every hospital has options to either through their medical records to message their care team, or set up video visits and so forth.

So we want to be in a state where it was before the pandemic in terms of your communications, but use the technology, so we can decrease the risk of exposure without compromising the quality of care.

An Oncologist’s Perspective on Clinical Trials

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

(Editor’s note: This article is in 2 parts. This is Part 1 (go here to read Part 2) and consists of an interview of Dr. Anita Wolfer, Senior Oncologist and Head of Unit in Oncological Research, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV). The interview was conducted by the “Indomitable” Christine Bienvenu, breast cancer patient, avid patient advocate and board member of the Patient Empowerment Foundation, our sister organization under development in Europe. And please, don’t be concerned that this is an interview with a European oncologist. You will be surprised to see that the issues, thoughts, concerns of patients and doctors are the same. These issues are worldwide!)

Great progress has been made today in immunotherapy and targeted therapies – especially in cancer research – thanks to patients having access to clinical trials. It is crucial that patients learn about their options.

Interview With Dr. Anita Wolfer

The Indomitable Christine Bienvenu

The Indomitable Christine Bienvenu

Christine Bienvenu (CB): How do clinicians learn about clinical trials?

Dr. Anita Wolfer (AW): It depends very much on where they’re working: Doctors in university hospitals are constantly informed of clinical trials. Their peers outside the hospital environment are not, though: It’s up to them to actively find clinical trials and stay informed.

 

CB: Here in Switzerland, are there formal protocols in place for spreading information about clinical trials?

AW: In terms of the medical system, there aren’t any formal protocols on doctors being up to date on clinical trial options. I think it’s important that university doctors take it upon themselves to keep their non-university environment peers informed. Often, unfortunately, those oncologists working outside the hospital environment only think of clinical trials when conventional treatments have failed. For researchers like us, it’s more second nature to turn to them for treatment options.

Here in Switzerland, the “Réseau Romand d’Oncologie” (Western Switzerland’s oncology network) centralizes all the information about clinical trials, and keeps it updated. For the new Swiss Cancer Center Lausanne (SCCL) opening in 2017, its director, Prof. Coukos’ vision is simple: All information – clinical trials, research, collaboration, and participatory medicine – should be accessible to patients and professionals alike.

 

CB: When and why do clinicians talk about clinical trials to their patients, and how do you view the patient’s role in trials?

AW: Often today, oncologists will only talk to a patient about clinical trials if they see that there’s a direct benefit to the patient. But in my view, it’s important to inform the patient of the clinical trial, regardless so that they too can look into the application process. In an ideal world – and I say this as an oncologist and clinical researcher – there would be a clinical trial for every patient who walks through our doors.

As for the patient’s role, I’m a firm believer that sharing is building in this profession. Patients are crucial in this process: No-one knows their bodies better than they do. The way I see it, any patient of mine gives me the opportunity to learn. I don’t want to waste that.

 

CB: What obstacles do clinicians face in conveying clinical trial information to their patients?

AW: Unfortunately, some oncologists are afraid that university doctors might “steal” their patients, so they don’t readily refer them for fear of losing income for their own hospital. With patients being so closely followed during the clinical trials as well, this is comforting: Often, they’d rather not go back to their ‘regular’ oncologist. In my view, it’s a shame to look at it that way: If there’s a relationship of confidence and trust with their primary oncologist, if patients know they will get all the necessary information, they’ll be more inclined to stay with their respective ‘regular’ oncologists. To be brutally honest, my feeling is if an oncologist is upset about a patient seeking a second opinion, then maybe it’s time to find a new oncologist? It happens in the medical profession: I’m not immune to it – no-one is. But it shouldn’t be an issue… Just like in any relationship, if the doctor/patient relationship isn’t working out for the patient, he or she has every right to move on.

 

CB: In your profession, how important is mindset – in both the patient and the doctor or clinician?

As in any profession, or with any patient or co-worker, there are always those who are willing and excited to go the extra mile. If the mindset to do so isn’t there, there really isn’t much that either a patient or an oncologist can do in terms of moving forward. A pro-active mindset is crucial.

 

CB: In the same vein, how important is mindset in clinical trials, then?

AW: Being convinced about the clinical trial is also very important – not only for the patient, but for the doctor. A well-informed doctor means a well-informed patient. Speaking for myself, I’m constantly on the lookout for the best treatment options for my patients – even if it’s a clinical trial outside the CHUV. Why wouldn’t I? It’s about moving forward in cancer research, not about being territorial with knowledge.

 

CB: What role, for you, does the sharing of information and access to clinical trials play in patient mindsets?

AW: Armed with information, most patients are willing to be a part of trials – even if it isn’t one they had specifically hoped for. Time and again, we’ve seen how patients who participate in clinical trials usually have better outcomes than patients who don’t. Beyond the obvious rigorous monitoring, the crucial element here is that the patients feel more responsible for, and engaged in, their care. What strikes me, time and again, is that clinical trials offer hope. And while not every clinical trial story is a positive one – with frustration and heartbreak often integral to the process – hope is a crucial element and great motivator.

 

CB: Getting into clinical trials is no small feat. What improvements, if any, would you suggest? Can patients be better-informed about clinical trials?

AW: In an ideal world, there would be a clinical trial for every patient. One of the objectives of the CHUV oncology department is to have a portfolio of trials so that there are alternatives for every patient. And despite limited resources, the department is working hard to open up a maximum of number of trials. Also, with the SCCL opening up in Lausanne, more research funding is coming in, and more specialised oncologists are coming on board.

 

CB: What for you is a key component of a successful patient/clinician or doctor relationship?

AW: Ultimately, it’s about trust, confidence and collaboration. And going back to your previous question, if patients feel they’re being fully supported by their oncologist, they’ll return to them – university hospital setting or not. To me, it’s extremely important that patients take the necessary steps to establish the relationship of trust that they seek.

 

CB: What feedback have your patients given you about their experiences in clinical trials?

AW: Some patients will say outright that they’re not interested. But the vast majority – I’d say 70-80% – are willing participants. So far, I’ve only ever had one patient tell me she wasn’t happy with a clinical trial. For most, it goes beyond participating for their own benefit, per se: it’s about being part of a greater cause and helping medical science advance. Patients are genuinely altruistic. What is clear, though, is that it’s a team effort that involves the patient and the medical community.

 

CB: Where can patients find information about clinical trials?

AW: There are a number of great resources out there. In no particular order, I can suggest the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (http://sakk.ch/en/) or Clinical Trials (https://clinicaltrials.gov/) which is a service of the US National Institutes of Health that lists all the studies being done in all 50 US States and in 190 countries.

Here in Switzerland, there are obviously the Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV: http://www.chuv.ch/) or the Geneva University Hospital (HUG: http://www.hug-ge.ch/) websites. Experience has taught me that the university websites are sometimes a bit outdated, but patients can send emails directly to oncologists there and should get an answer.

 

CB: Any parting words of wisdom?

AW: Patients never doubt themselves in asking questions. There is no such thing as a stupid question. If a patient isn’t having his or her questions answered, he or she has every right to find someone who will! Questions are crucial: They lead to greater understanding, knowledge, and progress.

Also, it’s important to remember that in Clinical Trials, limits have to be set to be able to provide realistic results. Make the criteria too broad, and it becomes difficult to show a trial’s effectiveness. With immunotherapy, clinical trials broaden patient eligibility. Granted, a patient needs to be healthy enough to be able to benefit from a trial, so if for example a patient is in palliative care, they wouldn’t be eligible – unless, of course, the clinical trial is in palliative care.

The National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) “10 step guide on how to find a cancer treatment trial” helps patients better understand what clinical trials are all about, how to talk to their doctors, and know what questions to ask, visit: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trials/search/trial-guide?cid=tw_NCIMain_nci_Clinical+Trials_sf39211784