Tag Archive for: chemotherapy

How Is DLBCL Treatment Effectiveness Monitored?

How Is DLBCL Treatment Effectiveness Monitored? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How will patients know if their diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment is working? Dr. Justin Kline defines DLBCL treatment goals and explains how they are monitored throughout the treatment process.

Dr. Justin Kline is the Director of the Lymphoma Program at the University of Chicago Medicine. Learn more about Dr. Kline, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Which Emerging DLBCL Therapies Are Showing Promise?

Which Emerging DLBCL Therapies Are Showing Promise?

How Can Patients Access the Latest DLBCL Treatment Options?

How Is Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL Treated?

How Is Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL Treated?


Transcript:

Katherine:      

Let’s turn to what happens after treatment. How is the effectiveness of the treatment monitored?

Dr. Kline:       

Well, so depends on the doc to some degree, but I like to do some, what I call interim imaging. So, we’ll typically, again, depending on the stage, but very often we’re delivering six treatments of R-CHOP, usually given every three weeks. So, the total treatment course is about four and a half months. It can be a little bit shorter for patients who have Stage 1 or Stage 2 DLBCLs. I like to get interim imaging, which is either a PET scan or a CAT scan, done sort of in the middle of treatment, just to give us a sense of how things are going. Are the lymphomatous tumors shrinking down? Some patients are, even by the middle of treatment, are in a complete remission. Their PET scan has gone totally normal. And then at the end of treatment, that’s probably the most important imaging, and there I do like to do PET scans again. Again, they’re the most sensitive test we have to detect lymphoma.

And so at the end of treatment, usually about four to six weeks after somebody completes treatment, we like to get that end of treatment PET scan, and that’s the PET scan that allows us to say, you’ve had a complete response. You’re in a complete remission, or not.

Katherine:                  

So, what does remission mean exactly then?

Dr. Kline:       

So, in DLBCL, remission is pretty simply defined as absence of disease on, or absence of cancer on the tests that we do to detect it. Again, typically PET scans, and if somebody had involvement of his or her bone marrow at the beginning before treatment, we’ll repeat that bone marrow at the end of treatment just to make sure that there’s no lymphoma left over. And so, but for most people it’s a PET scan. If the PET scan does not show any abnormalities, then that’s what we call a complete remission or remission.

Katherine:      

Is a cure possible for patients with DLBCL?

Dr. Kline:       

Cure is not only possible, it’s actually quite common. If you look at all comers, regardless of stage, age, what have you, approximately 60 to 65 percent of folks who are treated for DLBCL are cured. The cure rates are higher with folks with earlier stage lymphomas, but even folks who have advanced DLBCL are frequently cured.

Which Factors Impact DLBCL Treatment Decisions?

Which Factors Impact DLBCL Treatment Decisions? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

When making a decision about diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment, what should you consider? Dr. Justin Kline reviews key patient factors that impact therapy decisions, including comorbidities and treatment side effects.

Dr. Justin Kline is the Director of the Lymphoma Program at the University of Chicago Medicine. Learn more about Dr. Kline, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

 
Which Emerging DLBCL Therapies Are Showing Promise?

Which Emerging DLBCL Therapies Are Showing Promise?

How Is DLBCL Treatment Effectiveness Monitored?

How Is Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL Treated?

How Is Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL Treated?


Transcript:

Katherine:      

Other than a newly diagnosed patient’s stage of DLBCL and their age, what other factors would impact a treatment decision?

Dr. Kline:       

Yeah. So, that’s a good question, so you named I think the biggest two, the most important two. Although I have to say that even people in their – oftentimes in their 80s are prescribed full dose therapy. The goal of our treatment, especially in newly diagnosed patients, is to cure the lymphoma, and so we tend to be aggressive. But outside of age, other things we consider are other health problems. Does the person have a healthy heart, healthy kidneys? How many other medical problems does the person have? How fit is the person? How sick is the person or symptomatic is the person from his or her lymphoma? And sometimes we take into consideration all those factors and we say, well, it’s still worth it to try to deliver the most intensive therapy that we can.

Other times we say, you know what? I think the risk of doing such is probably not worth the potential benefit, and so sometimes we’ll recommend dose reductions, reduce the doses of some of the medicines and the R-CHOP cocktail if that’s what we’re going to do, and occasionally, if the person has too many other things going on, we may talk about more palliative treatments, in other words, gentler treatments that may extend a person’s survival while hopefully maintaining a really good quality of life.

Katherine:                 

Yeah. What kind of side effects should patients expect?

Dr. Kline:       

Well, that’s a conversation I’ve had many, many, many times over the years. And specifically to the R-CHOP cocktail, just because that’s the one that’s used most commonly, I tell people that the most common things are symptoms like fatigue, occasionally nausea, sometimes vomiting, although the medications we have to prevent those things are very good these days.

Constipation is not uncommon, hair loss, mouth sores. I think probably the most important thing is to recognize that the chemotherapy will suppress or reduce the immune system, and so we’re always worried about people catching infections when they’re on chemotherapy, because sometimes they can be serious. And then I talk about rare symptoms that are a big deal. Sometimes the chemotherapy can damage organs like the heart. It’s uncommon, but it happens sometimes. And chemotherapy, while we need to give it to cure the lymphoma, can sometimes cause secondary blood cancers like leukemias years down the road. The risk is low, but again, these are I think serious things that people, even if they’re rare, people need to know about them before they start.

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path?

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Since no two patients are exactly alike, how is DLBCL treatment determined? Dr. Jason Westin explains what factors he considers when determining a patient’s treatment path. 

Dr. Jason Westin is the Director of Lymphoma Clinical Research in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Westin, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Advice for Speaking Up About Your DLBCL Care

An Expert Overview of DLBCL Treatment Approaches

An Expert Overview of DLBCL Treatment Approaches

Tips for Making Treatment Decisions WITH Your DLBCL Team


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Since no two patients are exactly the same, I imagine then that their treatment approaches are different. So, what do you consider when determining the best treatment option for an individual patient?

Dr. Westin:                 

That’s a very important question. How can we personalize treatments in a way that gets us down to what a single patient needs, not both populations of thousands of patients, but the person sitting across the exam room.

Katherine:                  

Right.

Dr. Westin:                 

For first line DLBCL, someone who’s newly diagnosed, unfortunately the one size fits all of R-CHOP being the standard, or versions of R-CHOP, the new treatment that I mentioned having a slight improvement not yet approved by the FDA, there’s not as much customization or personalization outside of clinical trials as I would like. We’d love to be smarter and to be able to say, “Well, you have the subtype A of large B-cell, therefore you should get subtype therapy A,” or subtype B and you get subtype therapy B. We have more of a one-size-fits-all approach in our frontline treatment outside of clinical trials.

On clinical trials, sometimes patients will have a subtype of large B-cell. We talk about things called the cell of origin. We talk about things called double hit. There are specific subtypes of DLBCL that occasionally a clinical trial will target that subtype and have a therapy that’s supposed to work better in that subtype.

So, that’s another reason to consider clinical trials, is the ability to potentially to customize or personalize your therapy to go more specifically after what’s wrong with your cancer cells as opposed to having something that’s given as a shotgun approach to everyone. And the reason that R-CHOP is around for this long is that it works fairly well across the board in different subtypes. It’s not something that’s completely effective in one and completely ineffective in another.

But, in terms of personalizing therapies, clinical trials are an important thing to be considered. In the relapse space, with patients that have relapsed disease, there we have more potential to customize treatments and often that’s done based upon characteristics of the tumor or the patient’s preferences in terms of frequency of treatments, in terms of potential for side effects. There’s more that can be done if somebody’s already had a treatment and it came back. But clinical trials are a great way to try and customize, or to drill down in terms of specifics about your particular cancer.

Katherine:                  

Can you touch upon treatment side effects?

Dr. Westin:                 

Yes. Treatment side effects, obviously, are very important to our patients in terms of what does their quality of life look like while the therapy’s ongoing to try to get rid of this dread cancer. The side effects really depend upon what treatment we’re talking about. And if we focus on frontline treatments, the initial treatments being R-CHOP based treatments, side effects are chemotherapy side effects. And that includes low blood counts, white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets, risk of infection along with the low white blood cells, and risk of fevers prompting a trip to the emergency department for an evaluation.

Thankfully, that’s rare. Maybe one out of four or one out of five patients would have an infection during treatments. But if it happens, it can be serious. Fatigue, nausea – which is usually very well controlled with medications, but nonetheless has to be something we watch out for. And for many patients, it’s important to note that hair loss can occur from the chemotherapy. And that’s something that it’s easy to say, “Oh, I don’t care about that.” But for many people, when you look in the mirror and you see somebody else looking back at you, somebody that has a different physical appearance than you’re used to, it can be quite distressing.

That’s unfortunately part of many patients’ journey with the therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. In nonchemotherapy treatments – the targeted ones that I mentioned – these are the antibody drug conjugates, the targeted immune therapies, or in CAR T-cells, side effects can be very different, sometimes much less in terms of the side effects, other times completely different types of side effects. So, it really matters what type of treatment you’re talking about. And this is something you really want to clarify with your physician, with the nurse, with the PA.

“Tell me a lot of details about what I should expect when I’m feeling this. And give me reading materials so I can digest it, think about it, and figure out what questions I need to ask after we first discuss this.”

Katherine:                  

Yeah.

Dr. Westin:                 

The side effects really are an important part of the patient’s journey.

Emerging DLBCL Treatment Approaches

Emerging DLBCL Treatment Approaches from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What is next for DLBCL treatment? Dr. Jason Westin describes emerging DLBCL treatment approaches.

Dr. Jason Westin is the Director of Lymphoma Clinical Research in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Westin, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Advice for Speaking Up About Your DLBCL Care

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path?

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path?

Tips for Making Treatment Decisions WITH Your DLBCL Team


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Yeah. You touched upon this earlier, Dr. Westin, but aren’t there emerging DLBCL approaches the patient should know about?

Dr. Westin:                 

Yes. Thankfully, there are many, many. We could spend several hours talking about lots of new therapies coming along. So, it’s a great answer to have. It’s an embarrassment of riches that we have for lots and lots of new therapies that appear quite promising in the early development stage.

In terms of those that have actually crossed over the finished line to be approved by the FDA, we have a handful of new therapies in the past few years that have been approved. Previously, we didn’t really have very many, but now there are multiple therapies that are approved by the FDA outside of a clinical trial, that are targeted treatments.

And those include antibody drug conjugates, basically an antibody like you make against an infection. However, this antibody has a chemotherapy warhead attached to the back of it. So, effectively, it’s a heatseeking missile that finds whatever target we want it to find – in this case, cancer cells – and delivers a high dose chemotherapy right to the bad guys, not to the good guys. There are also other immune therapies that we’ve seen than can be very powerful antibodies, plus immunomodulatory drugs. And we can talk about specific names of these if we’d like.

And then, lastly, there are other oral agents that are coming along that look very promising in terms of their ability to target the cancer cells more directly than growing cells.

Lastly, there’s a very new class of therapies not yet approved, but very promising. I mentioned this before. It’s something called a bispecific antibody. Bispecific – the word bicycle meaning two wheels. Bispecific is two specific antibodies. Basically, it’s an antibody that’s grabbing onto a cancer cell and grabbing onto an immune cell. “I’d like to introduce you guys. Why don’t you guys come in proximity and see if we can have a party.”

And it’s an idea here of trying to get the cancer cell to be attacked by the immune cell simply through this close proximity that occurs. Not yet approved. Looks very promising and I think probably will be approved for multiple different lymphoma types, including large B-cell, in the coming years.

An Expert Overview of DLBCL Treatment Approaches

An Expert Overview of DLBCL Treatment Approaches from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How is Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) treated? Dr. Jason Westin provides an overview of current DLBCL approaches.

Dr. Jason Westin is the Director of Lymphoma Clinical Research in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Westin, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Emerging DLBCL Treatment Approaches

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path?

What Helps Determine a Patient’s DLBCL Treatment Path?

How Can You Access DLBCL Clinical Trials?


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

So, once it’s time to treat, then of course it’s time to think about treatment options. So, let’s walk through the types of therapy that are used today in DLBCL treatment. First of all, let’s talk about chemotherapy.

Dr. Westin:                 

Yeah. So, unfortunately, chemotherapy is still the – cornered the realm when it comes to DLBCL therapy, especially in the frontline setting. So, if a patient is newly diagnosed, no prior history of DLBCL, biopsy comes back and describes that’s what we’re looking at, the standard treatment, which has been around for about 40-plus years, is a combination of chemotherapy called CHOP, each letter representing a different medication. The antibody immunotherapy Rituxan, or rituximab, was added about 20 years ago.

So, the standard treatment for the past 20 years has been R-CHOP. And this has been tried and true. It’s been tested many, many times to try and improve this or to beat this. And R-CHOP has been less toxic than other alternatives or as good as other alternatives through many, many, many trials.

Now, late last year, in 2021, there was finally a randomized Phase III trial that showed, in addition of a targeted therapy in place of one of the chemotherapy drugs, had a slightly better progression free survival at two years. The targeted therapy here is a drug called polatuzumab. Polatuzumab is an FDA-approved therapy for large B-cell lymphoma patients in the US. Currently, as of the time we’re taping this, it’s approved for patients with relapsed disease. It’s not yet approved, based on this Phase III trial, but that may change in the coming months.

The improvement was modest. Around six percent of patients differing in terms of those who had progressed versus those who had not progressed in two years. So, not an earthquake, but R-CHOP or variations of R-CHOP are still a standard treatment for patients, outside of a clinical trial, of newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Katherine:                  

And what about CAR T-cell therapy?

Dr. Westin:                 

The other treatment classes, the targeted therapies include CAR T-cell, or other antibody drug conjugates, immunotherapies, bispecific [antibodies] – there is a lot going on in new drugs and new drug development for DLBCL.

As of today, most of those therapies that are approved are looked at in patients that have already had a frontline chemotherapy approach and the cancer has come back. So, those are approved. But they’re either approved for patients in second line therapy – after having had one line, cancer comes back and now we’re in second line – or in third line therapy, two previous treatments and now we’re in third line treatment. There’s a lot of clinical trials, and I think we’ll talk maybe about clinical trials in a bit, that are exploring use of these targeted therapies, including CAR T-cells, including bispecific antibodies, including other targeted therapies as a potential for a frontline treatment.

But outside of a clinical trial, R-CHOP or versions of R-CHOP are still the standard today.

Katherine:                  

And what about stem cell transplant?

Dr. Westin:                 

Stem cell transplant’s been a second line therapy option, and it’s been the standard second line therapy for about 25 years. We’ll see this change in the coming years. There have recently been three randomized clinical trials comparing stem cell transplant versus CAR T-cell. All three of those reported out some information in late 2021, with two of them having final results, one of them having an interim report. And one of the final reports, one the interim reports, showed a significant improvement in chance of staying in remission in all the outcomes that were measured for CAR T-cell beating stem cell transplant.

So, we’re waiting to see how the health authorities view these clinical trials, if CAR T-cell potentially moves into second line treatment for a majority of patients instead of stem cell transplant. So, stem cell transplant’s been there, it’s tried and true. It has cured a significant portion of patients. However, CAR T-cells potentially are better and may be moving in the second line within the next year.

Could a Clinical Trial Be Your Best Cancer Treatment Option?

Could a Clinical Trial Be Your Best Cancer Treatment Option? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Is a clinical trial right for you? Cancer expert and researcher Dr. Seth Pollack is joined by PEN board member and empowered patient, Sujata Dutta, to discuss key information about clinical trials. The guests review clinical trial terminology, debunk common misconceptions about trials, and Sujuta shares her own story of participation in a clinical trial.

Dr. Seth Pollack is Medical Director of the Sarcoma Program at the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University and is the Steven T. Rosen, MD, Professor of Cancer Biology and associate professor of Medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology at the Feinberg School of Medicine. Learn more about Dr. Pollack, here.

Sujuta Dutta is a myeloma survivor and empowered patient advocate, and serves a Patient Empowerment Network (PEN) board member. Learn more about Sujuta, here.

Download Guide

See More from Clinical Trials 101

Related Resources:

Could a Clinical Trial Be Your Best Cancer Treatment Option? Resource Guide

Understanding Clinical Trial Phases

How Could Clinical Trials Fit Into Your Myeloma Treatment Plan?


Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:    

Hello, and welcome. I’m Katherine Banwell, your host for today’s program.

Today we’re going to discuss clinical trials, what they are and how they work, and debunk some misconceptions along the way. Before we get into the discussion, please remember that this program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what might be best for you. All right. Let’s meet our guests today. Joining me is Dr. Seth Pollack. Dr. Pollack, welcome. Would you please introduce yourself?

Dr. Seth Pollack:

Yeah. Thanks so much. It’s a pleasure to be here, my name is Seth Pollack. I’m a medical oncologist here at Northwestern University Medical Center.

And I specialize in treating patients with cancer, and I have a specific interest in patients with a type of cancer called sarcomas.

Katherine Banwell:    

Excellent. Thank you for taking the time to join us today. And here to share the patient perspective is Sujata Dutta, who is on the board of the Patient Empowerment Network and is currently participating in a clinical trial. Sujata, it’s a pleasure to have you with us.

Sujata Dutta:

Pleasure to be here Katherine. Hello, Dr. Pollack. And hi everyone, my name is Sujata Dutta, and I was diagnosed with a cancer called multiple myeloma in December of 2019. And I’ve been on a clinical trial since September of 2020.

Katherine Banwell:    

Thank you, for that information. And we’re going to go into that further in just a few moments. Let’s start with a basic question, Dr. Pollack. What is a clinical trial?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah. It’s a basic question, but actually, sometimes, it can be harder to answer than you might think.

I think everybody has an idea in their mind about what a clinical trial is, you’re going to test a new approach. But actually, there’s a whole variety of different things that can be a clinical trial, right? A clinical trial a lot of the times is testing a new drug, could be testing something for the very first time, could be testing something in combination with other drugs for the very first time. It could be testing a standard approach but doing it in a new way. It could even be giving less treatments than we usually do. For example, if there’s a very intense, harsh, standard of care treatment we might even have a clinical trial where we try a little bit less and see that patients do just as well. So, all of those things are clinical trials, but really the clinical trial in its heart is a very organized and careful approach to testing a new treatment strategy for patients.

Katherine Banwell:    

Okay. What are the phases of a clinical trial?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yup. So, the Phase I clinical trial is usually when we’re testing something for the first time in however we’re doing it. So, it could be the first time we’re testing a new drug, or the first time we’re testing a drug in combination with other drugs. And the real thing about a Phase I trial is that the main goal of the trial is to look at the safety and tolerability of the regiment. That doesn’t mean that we’re not really trying to figure out if the regiment works, I mean, that’s also one of the most important things. But the most important thing for a Phase I trial is making sure that it’s safe and tolerable. A Phase II trial is where we, sort of, shift and we’re still making sure, and double checking, that the drug is, but now our main focus becomes on the efficacy of the strategy.

So, now we’re trying to really figure out if this is a strategy that seems affective enough to go to a Phase III. And a Phase III is a big multi-center trial. Frequently those will be placebo controlled where a lot of the times there’ll be randomized trial where we really try to absolutely prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that, that strategy is affective. And those are most of the types of trials that patients will encounter.

Katherine Banwell:    

Okay. Thank you for providing clarity around the phases. Before we move onto safety and benefits of clinical trials, let’s hear from Sujata. Sujata, I understand that you went through a series of treatments for your multiple myeloma, which is a type of blood cancer, including a stem cell transplant.

At what point did you and your doctor consider a clinical trial might be best for you?

Sujata Dutta:  

Yes, you’re right. I was diagnosed with multiple myeloma in December, and so the line of treatment or the standard protocol is that you go through what is called an induction therapy. Which is like a few cycles of chemotherapy which get you ready for a transplant. And the transplant, the hope is that it kind of washes away, or cleans off all the cancer cells for you, or at least brings the cancer to a very, very minimal level. And I did go through six rounds of chemo which got me ready for the transplant, and I went through the transplant in June of 2020. However, I’m amongst the very few, small percentage of people that just did not respond with the transplant. So, I was at the same point as where I started. So, it was a little bit disappointing, but my doctors were there to help me understand the situation. It was a hard pill to swallow.

But anyways, there were options. And that’s what I feel very hopeful about with multiple myeloma is that there are so many options available today through treat, or to at least bring the disease under control to a very large extent. And I expressed a desire to be in a trial very earlier on, so my doctor did know that I would lend a year or two listening to what the trials were. And it just so happened that there was a trial that was very apt in my situation, somebody who had gone through a transplant. They have some criteria, and I was able to meet that criteria. And so, for me, it seemed to be the right decision to make. And so, that’s how I agreed to be part of the trial.

Katherine Banwell:    

Can you go into some detail about why you thought a clinical trial was a best thing for you?

Sujata Dutta:  

Yeah. So, initially before knowing much about the strain that I’m a part of, I just had the desire to be part of a trial because I was always in awe of patients who had been in trials before me.

And because of whom I was benefiting. But whatever regiments, medications, combos, whatever was happening. And so, from that perspective I always wanted to give back in some way. Unfortunately, we are having more people being diagnosed with cancers, with multiple myeloma, and so I was very motivated to do something for the community that I was now part of. And so, I had my transplant at Mayo, and I knew that they had a whole bunch of trials and had access to different types of trials. So, that was my first motivation and it just so happened that, as I said, my experience with transplant didn’t go the desired way. And so, when I heard that there was a possibility that I could be part of a trial, I kind of leaned into actually agreeing to be part of that.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. It sounds like that was the next step for you.

Sujata Dutta:  

Yup.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Well, I’d like to address a list of common concerns about clinical trials that we’ve heard from various audience members prior to this program.

And this is probably the most common; I will be a guinea pig. Dr. Pollack, how do you respond to that?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah. I know that is a common concern. I mean, I think the thing that people have to understand about clinical trials is there is just so much oversight that happens for these clinical trials. Every document, every procedure, is scrutinized by multiple committees. There’s a scientific review committee, there’s a review board, IRB, that reviews these. Many of these trials are reviewed by the FDA and they’re reviewed by your doctor and your doctor’s colleagues that are also participating in the trial. So, every detail is discussed at length.

In fact, a lot of the times there’s a lot more structure to being on the clinical trial than just routine clinical care because they’ve thought so thoroughly about when everything needs to be done and what the right timing of is for the various procedures.

Katherine Banwell:    

Right. And another concern that people have is; clinical trials are my last resort treatment option. What do you say to that Dr. Pollack?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah, no. That’s a common misconception. So, we like to have clinical trials for every phase of the patient’s cancer journey because we’re trying to make every single part of the cancer journey better. So, I think a lot of people think that, okay, when they hit their last resort that’s kind of the time to try something new. Even in the very earliest parts of the cancer journey, even in the diagnosis phase sometimes we’ll have clinical trials where we’ve tried different images, modalities, or look at things in a different way in terms of the biopsies.

But then, in terms of the cured-of treatments, when somebody is in the cured-of setting we don’t usually try something very brand new. But a lot of the times we’ll try something that is very affective for patients at the end, and we want to try and make the cured-of strategy even better. So, a lot of the times for those patients we’ll have new therapies that are very safe and established that we’re trying to incorporate earlier into patients’ treatments because we know they work really well, right? And then, even in patients who have incurable cancer a lot of times it’s better to try a clinical trial earlier on just because sometimes the clinical trials have the most exciting new therapies that are bringing people a lot of hope.

And a lot of the times you want to try that when you’re really fit and when you’re in good shape. So, that’s why I think that you really want to think about doing a clinical trial when the opportunity arises.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Beause it could be beneficial to you and it’s certainly going to be beneficial to other people. Is this fact or fiction; it will be expensive? Dr. Pollack?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

That’s fiction because the way the clinical trials work is we go through everything very carefully to figure out what things are standard and what things are unique to the clinical trials. So, if you are getting chemotherapy, you’re going to need blood work, you’re going to need the chemotherapy drugs, you’re going to need some sort of imaging, CT scan, or whatever your doctor would do.

And all those sorts of things are considered standard, so your insurance company is built for those. Then there’s a bunch of things that are considered research. For example, there’s special research bloodwork, maybe there’s an investigational agent that’s being added to standard chemotherapy. Those things are billed to the study, so you don’t actually have to pay anything extra, it’s just like you’re getting the normal treatment as far as you’re concerned. I mean, that’s the way it always is, and I haven’t had any of my patients ever get into real problems in terms of the finances of these things. It always works very straight forward like standard therapy.

Katherine Banwell:    

Okay. That’s good to know. The logistics will be a nightmare and I don’t live close to a research hospital. Sujata, did you have that issue?

Sujata Dutta:  

Yeah. That’s a very interesting one, and actually I’ll share my experience. I did have this concern about logistics, because I got my transplant at Mayo Rochester, which is a two-hour drive from where I live. And so, when I got to know about it literally me and my husband were like, “Oh, my gosh. What are we going to do?” It’s not just me, my husband is my caregiver, he has to take the day off to drive me to Mayo, wait through my treatment, and drive me back. Then we have boys who were distance learning at the time, and so what do we do with them? Do we drop off a friends or take a favor from a friend? And so on and so forth.

So, the logistics was an issue and we literally said, “Thanks but no thanks” and we walked out of the room. And we came downstairs, and my husband was like, “What the heck?” My team understands everything, and I fortunately work for a very good employer, and they understand everything, people first. And so, he was like, “I can figure this out. Let’s do it if this is what’s going to help you, then let’s just figure this out.” And at that time, it was so good, and I have total respect for Dr. Pollack.

You and everybody in this medical community. My doctor who leads the trial at Mayo, she actually said, “Why don’t you check with your local cancer center? Maybe they are also approved by FDA, and they may be able to administer this treatment to you.” Unfortunately, at that time they weren’t but we were like, “We’re going to go ahead with the trial. It doesn’t matter.” My husband was like, “I’ll take the day off, you don’t worry about it.” And then, four months later my institute did get approved by FDA, and so I was able to transfer from Mayo to my local cancer center, Abramson Cancer Center, which is 20 minutes from home. And so, there are options, I know that it can be an issue and it can be overwhelming at the time which was the case with me. But I was able to overcome that, so maybe there are options available that the patients can consider.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Dr. Pollack, do you have anything to add?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

No. I think the logistics and the location are real concerns with clinical trials.

Clinical trials do sometimes require you to have an extra visit, sometimes they’re a little bit less flexible in terms of when you can get your medication. If you’re getting a standard treatment your doctor may say, “It’s probably okay for you to wait an extra week.” Whereas sometimes on a clinical trial, not always, but sometimes they could be a little bit more strict about when you’re supposed to get certain things. And likewise, with the travel for some people that can be an issue. I mean, the clinical trial is not available everywhere. I mean, Sujata was very lucky that she was able to do the clinical trial she was doing close to home, but that doesn’t always happen. So, I think that’s an important thing to talk to your clinical team about.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Some patients feel that clinical trials aren’t safe, is that the case, Dr. Pollack?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

No. I mean, we go through, as I was saying before, these clinical trials are extensively vetted. So, the safety is, of course, one of the things that we look most carefully about. But as I was saying before, like with any treatment’s cancer treatments have toxicity, that’s a common problem. So, and when you’re dealing with something brand new sometimes there is a little bit more risk. So, when you’re talking about these very early-stage Phase I trials you probably want to talk to your doctor about what sorts of toxicities you can expect and where they are in the Phase I trial. Are you the first ever to receive this new drug? And if you are nobody’s making you go in the clinical trial, so it can only help to get more information. Right? So, you should ask your team about it, you should find out.

Most of the time there’s going to be a lot of patients that have been treated already, I mean, they can’t give you definitive data about how things are going but they can maybe say, “Hey. I’ve already treated a few patients on it, and they seem to be doing great.”

Katherine Banwell:    

So, you need to weigh the pros and cons of the trial.

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

You do need to weigh the pros and cons. Now, when you’re talking about these Phase IIs and Phase IIIs, I mean, these are drugs now that have really been vetted for their safety and we have a lot of data about it. And even the Phase Is, it’s not like these things are coming out of nowhere, they’ve been scrutinized, we really expect that they’re going to be safe but we’re doing the trial to prove it. So, it’s a good thing to ask about.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah, yeah.

Sujata Dutta:  

Yeah. I would also add that it’s so closely monitored that safety is a top priority, it’s front and center. So, the advantage, I think, with being on a trial is the close monitoring of the patient exactly for this reason.

If something is amiss it’s going to be picked up as quickly as possible and you’re any issues are going to be addressed as soon as. So, I think, safety does get addressed pretty quickly.

Katherine Banwell:    

Good, good. Okay. That’s good to know. Another concern is; I’ll get a placebo. Dr. Pollack, what is a placebo first of all? And is that true in a clinical trial setting?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

So, there are clinical trials with placebos, it’s a real thing. And what a placebo is, it’s a pill and it’s made to look just like the real pill, but it doesn’t have any active drug in it. Sometimes people say it’s a sugar pill, but it may or may not be sugar, but it’ll probably be something without a taste. But it’s an inert substance that is not going to affect you at all.

And your doctor won’t know whether you’re getting a placebo or not, so a lot of the times they’ll call these things double-blind because your doctor doesn’t know, your pharmacist doesn’t know. And to unblind you they have to go through special procedures to find out whether you’re on the studied drug or not.

Katherine Banwell:    

Would a placebo be given solely? Or would it be given in addition to this new drug that’s being tested?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah. So, it’s unusual for a placebo to be given solely. Usually there’ll be a clinical trial where you’re getting the standard treatments plus the new drug or standard treatment plus the placebo, so no matter what you’re getting the standard treatments. There are still some trials where, and these are usually for patients with very advanced cancer, who there’s not really any treatment options that are good. Where they will randomize people to just be on the standard drug versus the placebo.

Sometimes what they’ll do is if they want to do a trial that’s the standard drug versus a placebo, they’ll do the imaging very frequently and they’ll have a crossover. So, a crossover means that everybody gets to be on the new drug, but some people will have to go on the placebo first. So, and then they watch you very closely. So, if you get randomized to go on the placebo and your cancer starts to grow, they figure it out very quickly and then they give you the opportunity to go on the new drug.

Katherine Banwell:    

I see, okay. I’ll be stuck in the trial forever and I can’t change my mind. Sujata, did that happen to you?

Sujata Dutta:  

No. I mean, when I finally agreed and signed the dotted line it was made very clear to me that it was voluntary, I was volunteering to be part of the trial and I could get out of the trial at any point of time. So, in my case I’m in Phase III of a trial, the first commitment was for two years and then the next was five years.

So, again, it sounds daunting to me right now, two years is coming to an end in July of this year. I’m like, “Wow! Two years are over already?” And then five years, I’m not thinking about that, but again, it was at any point I could just say that I’ve had enough, or whatever be the reason, I could get out of the trial. So, no. Yes. There’s an option.

Katherine Banwell:    

Can data from trials even be trusted? Dr. Pollack, is that the case?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Well, of course, I mean, it can be trusted. Because the thing with the clinical trial data is that you really see the data and there’s all kinds of scrutiny making sure that the data is reported accurately. Now, there’s a whole other conversation we could have as to whether we could interpret the data differently. And sometimes that is an issue that comes up, but the data is reported very accurately.

So, and there are statistics that are very well understood, and the bar is actually pretty high to say one arm of the trial was better than the other arm of the trial. So, if patients have better survival on one arm, if we say that, usually it means they did considerably better. Enough better that it wasn’t a random chance that one extra patient did better on the treatment arm. No. There were enough patients that did better that the statisticians can go through it with a fine-toothed comb. And they can be absolutely sure up to exactly how many percent sure they can tell you, 0.05 percent or less chance of error that this was a real difference between the study arm and the standard of care arm.

Sujata Dutta:  

I think you mentioned too that one is trust, and one is data. So, Dr. Pollack mentioned a lot about the data, I think the trust is also a very important thing. I like to go with positive intent because I do not have a reason to believe my doctor has some ulterior motive to suggest a clinical trial. And so, I trust them wholeheartedly. The first hurdle is you have to trust the system or what is being proposed to you because, as Dr. Pollack said, it’s gone through a lot of vetting. A recommendation to be part of a trial itself is vetted by your doctor when they make the recommendation. So, have faith, trust, that they are making a good recommendation. And then, of course, the data, I don’t know much about that, but as I said, I trust it. So, I would trust the data too.

Katherine Banwell:    

Of course. Of course. Some patients feel like they’re going to lose their privacy. Sujata, did you feel that at all?

Sujata Dutta:  

No. Not at all.

I mean, with everything else that is also taken care of, my information, or whatever, is not made available to anybody. And so, obviously there’s a lot of people will get those, and I had a huge pile of paperwork to go through, but I think that’s a good thing. For my peace of mind that I knew that my information was not going to be shared outside of the study, the trial, etc., and things. So, no, I don’t think that’s a problem.

Katherine Banwell:    

Beyond these misconceptions is there anything else you hear? Dr. Pollack?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Well, I hear a lot of people really interested in clinical trials. I mean especially, I treat some patients with rare cancers or with unusual presentations and I think people are very excited to be a part of something that could be new, that could be the next wave. A lot of times the clinical trials have new things with the most exciting science that could be the future of treatment.

So, I think a lot of people are excited about clinical trials. And I also hear some of the reservations that you’re expressing. I think usually when patients ask their questions are very straightforward and easy to address so that people can make their own decisions.

Katherine Banwell:    

Dr. Pollack, I’d like to go back to you and ask you the same question about privacy. Do patients need to be worried about that?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

No. I mean, look, in our crazy modern world there’s concerns everywhere, but the clinical trial is very, very careful. Whenever possible we use the medical chart.

And then, we have a very stringently protected database that’s storing people’s information, but it’s deidentified. So, I mean, we have a separate key to figure out who the patients are and then we try to limit the use of the patient’s name or any identifying information about them beyond that. So, and your information is not shared. For example, if there’s a drug company involved in the trial, your information is not shared with the drug company, you have a new identifier that is unique and not traceable back to you that is provided to whoever, if there’s outside groups working on the trial with you. So, your information is very carefully protected, and everyone is very conscious about issues regarding privacy.

Katherine Banwell:    

That’s great to know. Sujata, there’s clearly a lot of hesitation and misconceptions out there. What would you say to someone who’s considering a trial but is hesitant?

Sujata Dutta:  

I would say speak to your provider, speak to your doctor, and get all these myths kind of busted to say, “it’s going to be expensive” or whatever those questions are. And then, through that process also try and understand what is it that the study is trying to achieve? How is that going to be beneficial to you? So, in my instance, it wasn’t the last line of defense, it was just one of the processes or combos that would help me. And so, that was important for me to understand and then a little bit of education as well. So, I was asking, I have questions on my phone every time I meet my provider, and I did the same thing. So, I think that one of the good practices is keep your note of your questions and have those questions ready. And no question is silly, all questions are important. So, ask as many questions as you can and use that opportunity to educate yourself about it.

And maybe you realize, “No. I don’t think it’s working for me” or “I don’t think this trial is good for me.” But it’s good, important, to have that conversation with your provider, that’s what I would recommend highly.

Katherine Banwell:    

Excellent. Thank you, Dr. Pollack, if someone is interested in participating, how can they find out about what trials are even available for them?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah. I mean, the best thing to do is to start just by asking your doctor if they know about any clinical trials. And a lot of the times the clinical trials are run at the big medical centers that may be closer to you, so you could ask your doctor if there’s any clinical trials at the big medical center even. Or I always think it’s good to get a second opinion, you could go get a second opinion at the big medical center that’s close to you and ask them what clinical trials are at your center.

And sometimes they’ll be conscious about some of the clinical trials that may be even run around the country. And you can ask about that as well.

Katherine Banwell:    

Would specialists have more information about clinical trials than say a general practitioner?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

So, I specialize in rare cancers, so a lot of the times the general practitioners they’ve got my cell phone number, and they text me, and they say, “Hey, do you have a clinical trial going on right now?” And that happens all the time, but yeah, the specialists will usually because frankly there’s so much to know. And the general practitioners really have a lot to keep track of with all the different types of diseases that are out there. Whereas at the big centers, the specialists, part of their job is really to keep their tabs on what’s going on with the clinical trials.

So, they’re good people to ask, either your local doctor could reach out to them, or you could go get a second opinion and ask.

Sujata Dutta:  

There’s also a lot of information, Katherine, on sites such as LLS, or PEN, or American Cancer Society that they also publish a lot of information. Of course, I would recommend once you have that information then vet it by your specialist, or whatever. But if you’re interested in knowing more about clinical trials in general and some that would work for you, then those are also some places to get information from.

Katherine Banwell:    

That’s great information. Thank you, I was going to ask you about that Sujata. Well, before we end the program, Dr. Pollack, I’d like to get your final thoughts. What message do you want to leave the audience with related to clinical trial participation?

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Yeah. I think clinical trials it can be a very rewarding thing for a lot of patients to do, I think patients really like learning about the new treatments. And I think a lot of patients really like being a part of pushing the therapies forward in addition to feeling like sometimes they’re getting a little bit of an extra layer of scrutiny, because there’s a whole extra team of research coordinators that are going through everything.

And getting access to something that isn’t available yet to the general population. So, I think there’s a whole host of advantages of going on clinical trials, but you need to figure out whether or not a clinical trial is right for you.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Sujata, what would you like to add?

Sujata Dutta:  

Absolutely, I second everything that Dr. Pollack is saying. And in my personal experience I wouldn’t say everything is hunky-dory, everything is fine. I’m going through treatment, I have chemo every four weeks, I started with chemo every week. That’s when the logistics pace was really difficult because going to Mayo every week was not easy. But anyways, as the trial progress itself every four weeks, but as I said the benefits are huge because I have labs every four weeks. I meet my provider every four weeks.

So, we go through the labs and anything amiss, I’ve had some changes to my dosage because I’ve had some changes in the labs. And so, there’s a lot of scrutiny which I like, but the flip side, for maybe some maybe like, “I have to have chemo every four weeks. Do I want to do that or not?” Or whatever. In my case, I knew it, and I signed up for it, and I’m committed to doing that for two years. And so, I’m fine with that. So, I would say all in all, I’d see more benefits of being in a clinical trial. One, you’re motivated to give back to the community. Two, you are being monitored and so your health is important to your provider just as it is to you. And so, I highly recommend being part of a trial if it works for you and if you’re eligible for one.

Katherine Banwell:    

Yeah. Sujata Dutta, and Dr. Pollack, thank you both for taking the time to join us today.

Sujata Dutta:   

Thank you.

Dr. Seth Pollack:       

Thank you.

Katherine Banwell:    

And thank you to all of our partners. To access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell, thanks for joining us.  

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Is Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) causing fatigue? Dr. Jorge Castillo shares why WM patients should share any symptoms and side effects they experience with their healthcare team.

Dr. Jorge Castillo is Clinical Director at the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Learn more about Dr. Castillo, here.

See More From The Pro-Active Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Emerging Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches

Emerging Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Fatigue seems to be very common among Waldenstrom’s patients. Here’s a question that we received before the program. Kasey asks, “Why do I feel so tired all the time? Is there anything that can be done about it?

Dr. Castillo:               

That’s a great question, and as I said before and basically kind of summarizing what I put together, I mean, there are many patients why a symptom with Waldenstrom’s could be fatigued. One of them is they could be anemic. The other one, they could have some hyperviscosity symptoms causing some fatigue, maybe some inflammation in the body because of the Waldenstrom’s, but maybe there are other reasons why patients can be fatigued.

And if you go out there in the streets and you start asking people, “Are you tired?” 80 percent of Americans are going to be tired. I’m not trying to minimize the symptoms of the patients. What I’m trying to say is we need to be very careful at understanding what the relation of the fatigue is with the disease. We need to be convinced that there is a relation there.

If that happened in my clinic – for example, a patient comes to see me, and they are fatigued; their hemoglobin is 14, which is normal; their IgM is about 1,000, which is not supposed to cause hyperviscosity. So, I do not know really in that context if the Waldenstrom’s is driving the fatigue or not.

Katherine:                  

Or if it’s something else.

Dr. Castillo:               

Exactly. So, we need to make sure that the patient doesn’t have any iron deficiency, that the patient doesn’t have any thyroid problems, that the testosterone problems are okay, that there’s no sleep disturbances, that there’s no depression. So, there’s so many different other things that we need to make sure are not there before we mount into that. Because if someone is fatigued with a hemoglobin of 8, which is very low, with my treatments, if I make that 8 14, I know the fatigue is going to get better. But if the patient is fatigued with a hemoglobin of 14, which I am not going to improve with my treatments, then how confident do I feel that I’m going to improve the patient’s quality of life with a potentially dangerous treatment?

So, we talked about already secondary leukemias, neuropathy, other problems that the patient can have with the treatments or because of the treatments.

So, we need to balance that out and understand that the potential benefit has to be higher than the potential risk, and that’s why the personalization comes into play. So, fatigue is a big issue, and we try to take a very systematic approach about that, you know, ruling out other conditions, making sure that we understand its relation with the disease before recommending treatment just for fatigue.

Katherine:                  

Yeah. This is one side effect that is so important for patients to share with their healthcare team, right?

Dr. Castillo:               

Oh, absolutely.

Katherine:                  

So that their healthcare team can know how to treat them.

Dr. Castillo:               

That’s right. And again, there are so many interventions that are not medications that could be done in these type of situations, right? Meditation, mindfulness. There are so many other approaches to try to help in these type of situations, changing a little bit sometimes the perspective, trying to be a little bit more on the positive thinking, right?

So, there are so many different ways outside of pharmacological approaches that we can use to try to improve our patients’ quality of life.

Katherine:                  

Yeah. Knowing that one has an incurable disease can be very stressful, right? Knowing that you have to live with this.

Dr. Castillo:               

That’s absolutely correct, and again, what I’ve seen happening in some of my patients is every little thing that happens to them, they do not know if it’s because of the disease or not.

Katherine:                  

Oh, yeah.

Dr. Castillo:               

“So, I have a twitch there. Oh, it’s due to Waldenstrom’s. Do I need to be treated because of that twitch?” And that, I understand it. Well, I try to understand it. I’m not in that same situation, so I cannot understand it completely. But I try to understand how if you don’t trust your body anymore, right? I mean, you have a disease, and you don’t trust your body anymore, then how you trust all these little symptoms here and there?

So, in my conversations with my patients, I discuss these things openly and that you’re going to have a lot of different symptoms here and there. Most of them probably are not going to be related to the disease, but if some of them are concerning enough to you in terms of your activities, in terms of eating, drinking, sleeping, social life, sexual life, you know, working life, then let me know, and then we will be happy to investigate those because anything can happen to anybody.

So, you can have other problems. Waldenstrom’s doesn’t protect you from anything, so, and it’s always important to discuss this with patients and pay attention to the patients, not dismiss their symptoms, think about them with them, talk about them with the patients to try to understand how these are affecting them.

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Many factors come into play when making treatment decisions for Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) patients. Dr. Jorge Castillo reviews key decision-making factors and explains how genomic profiling results may affect WM care.

Dr. Jorge Castillo is Clinical Director at the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Learn more about Dr. Castillo, here.

See More From The Pro-Active Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Emerging Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches

Emerging Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Dr. Castillo, many factors coming into play, obviously, when making a treatment decision. How do you decide which treatment is appropriate for a particular patient?

Dr. Castillo:               

Yeah, that’s a million-dollar question. And the reason that is the case is because when we think about other types of cancers, right, breast cancer and lung cancer, we do have these large studies with thousands of patients in which half of the group got one treatment; the other half got the other treatment. And we know that one treatment is better than other in this context of a randomized, large study. We don’t have a lot of that in Waldenstrom’s because it’s a rare disease. So, most of the studies that we do have are studies in which we have maybe 30, 40, 50 patients, 100 if we’re lucky, so comparisons between all these different treatments have not been done.

So, the chemotherapy, for example, versus the PI, there’s no study comparing that. The chemotherapy versus the BTK inhibitors, there’s no study comparing that. So, based on that, since there’s no comparison, we need to kind of understand the profile of the drug, you know. And you need to match that with the patient’s preferences.

So, we need to look at the patient’s age. We need to look at the patient’s comorbidities. We need to look at the patient’s medications that they’re on. Are their insurance going to cover the pills or not? Are they comfortable with getting intravenous infusions? What is the risk of leukemia versus the risk of neuropathy in those patients? So, we need to look at so many

factors. Interestingly enough, efficacy is not the problem. We don’t choose treatments based on efficacy because all of the treatments are almost equally effective. We actually choose treatments based on patients’ preferences. We choose treatment based on the medication side effects.

And the newer thing is actually, we’re doing genomic profile in the patients. We’re actually seeing which mutations the patients have, and there are some treatments that work better or worse with specific mutations, so we kind of tailor a treatment option based on all those factors.

So, it’s not an easy job, but I think it’s rewarding to understand that the best treatment for a patient with Waldenstrom’s is a personalized treatment. And as long as –

Katherine:                  

That’s what it sounds like.

Dr. Castillo:               

And as long as the patient understands the best he or she can in terms of the pros and cons of the treatment before going in, an educated decision, I think that’s probably best choice, yeah.

Katherine:                  

Are there test results that can impact options?

Dr. Castillo:               

I would say so. So, for example, in patients who have very high IgM levels, we try to avoid giving rituximab alone, for example, because rituximab can also make the IgM go up in about 40 to 50 percent of the cases, and patients can become more symptomatic if they were symptomatic because of the IgM in the first place.

So, that’s one value that we follow carefully. Sometimes, the kidney function can tell us if there are some chemotherapies that cannot be given with a kidney function that is not normal or close to normal, for example. And again, there are some mutations that can help us understand if a treatment might work better than other treatments too.

So, yeah, there’s a lot of shades of gray in there to be able to pick and choose. And again, the patient’s symptoms are important. I mean, if a patient, for example, already has an arrhythmia, I’m going to try to avoid a medication that can cause more arrhythmias. If a patient has already some nerve damage, I’m less likely to recommend a treatment that can cause more nerve damage. So, yeah, there’s a lot of room there for personalization.

Katherine:                  

Yeah. You’ve mentioned existing conditions. So, how do patients’ specific factors like lifestyle and age and other preexisting conditions impact treatment choices?

Dr. Castillo:   

Well, I think the way that affects it is just because patients who are older age tend to have other problems, you know. And I think having that in mind is important. So, if somebody has a liver dysfunction of some kind, then that will modify my treatment options. And as I said earlier, if someone has a kidney disfunction of some kind or depending on the degree, I can choose a different type of treatment there.

Now, also, we need to be mindful, for example, if somebody’s not so reliable on taking pills because they cannot remember or they don’t know, they are not organized enough or they don’t – you know. So, there are so many other factors playing into that role – maybe a pill form treatment might not be the best option, you know.

If somebody doesn’t have help to transfer him to take him to the infusion room back and forth, maybe an infusion treatment might not be the best there. So, again, another series of factors could be taken into account when making treatment decisions.

Current Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches

Current Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Approaches from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Which Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) treatment is right for you? Dr. Jorge Castillo discusses available WM treatment approaches and their side effects.

Dr. Jorge Castillo is Clinical Director at the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Learn more about Dr. Castillo, here.

See More From The Pro-Active Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions

Factors That Affect Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment Decisions

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

What Is the Patient’s Role in WM Treatment Decisions?

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects

Why Patients Should Speak Up About WM Symptoms and Side Effects


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Can you walk us through the currently available treatment approaches for WM?

Dr. Castillo:               

Oh, there’s plenty. And that is actually a good message. So, there are many treatment options, and the treatment options are almost equally effective. So, I think we can separate the treatment options in big groups. I think that the big group, the first group that we use, treatments that are very effective, is chemotherapy-based. And we have a number of chemotherapy options that we use routinely for patients with Waldenstrom’s. We typically combine chemotherapy with an antibody called rituximab. And that rituximab is used universally for a lot of different blood cancers out there.

And so, when we combine the chemotherapy with the rituximab, I would say probably 90 to 95 percent of patients that get treated do feel better. Not only their numbers improve, but also the symptoms improve, the treatments. These treatments are typically given intravenously, and they are typically given for about six months of treatments. It’s very easy to tolerate.

I mean, it’s not the classic chemotherapy that we think about with other cancers, right? Losing your hair and vomiting and being very sick. That is not what happens with these chemos. They are very gentle chemos. But the fact that they are gentle doesn’t mean that they do not work. I mean, they are very effective against the disease, but they are more gentle in terms of the side effects. Some other side effects that I think are important with chemo specifically is the small risk of developing another bone marrow disease, and that’s because of how chemo works. It also damages a little bit the good cells, and that can cause other problems, and the risk of infections.

I think nowadays, in the context of the pandemic, I think the risk of infections is something that we need to really talk about a lot with our patients. But these typically are six-month treatments, intravenous treatments, and then done with treatments and very effective regimens. Then, we have the non-chemo treatments, which is you have a lot of those, development of those therapies over the years.

We do have a group of medications called proteasome inhibitors, or PIs. And we borrow those from the myeloma group.

Myeloma is another blood cancer that shares some similarities with Waldenstrom’s, so we use some of those treatments into our treatments. And these are non-chemotherapy agents. We also combine them with rituximab to make them more powerful.

And some of them are intravenous. Some of them are injected under the skin. Some of them are pills. And again, six months of treatments, very nicely tolerated, very effective. I’m talking about 90, 95 percent efficacy rate. And the side effects with this are more like nerve ending damage or more like lung, heart problems, not really secondary malignancies, but infections is also an issue here too.

And then, we have the most – the newer treatments that are the pill form treatment. We call them BTK inhibitors, B as in Boy, T as in Tom, K, BTK inhibitors.

We use that for many other diseases as well, but we use them for Waldenstrom’s too. And we use them alone in most scenarios. Sometimes, we can combine them with rituximab, but the large experience is without rituximab. So, it’s just the pill. Nothing else. No injections or infusions. No risk of secondary bone marrow disease. No risk of neuropathy. But they are pills that you have to take every day, indefinitely.

So, in contrast with the other six-month treatments, duration treatments, these are treatments that tend to last for several years. And we do have some taking these pills sometimes for six, seven, eight years, and they continue on them because they do well, and their response is as good as chemotherapy. But it’s just with a pill that you need to take every day.

Now, these pills have a different set of side effects, and that includes sometimes some irregular heartbeats, some bleeding and bruising. We have a new pill just that we published on recently, a medication called venetoclax, with a V. Again, it’s a different mechanism of action. It’s a BCL-2 inhibitor. It doesn’t have any risk of arrhythmia or bleeding, but it can cause some issues with infections.

But maybe you can take two years of this treatment and not take it indefinitely. So, all these are treatments that we keep advancing, and we will continue running studies with new medications that hopefully have similar or higher efficacy with a better side effect profile.

Now, just to finalize, the last option that should always be in the mind of a patient is clinical trials, investigational agents that are not sometimes – some of them are approved already by the FDA.

Sometimes they’re not. But they are agents that either in the laboratory or in prior experience suggest that they might have efficacy on these patients.

And that’s another treatment option that could be considered in some scenarios.

How Can Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Patients Participate in Their Care?

How Can Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Patients Participate in Their Care? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Vernon Sondak shares encouraging advice for patients to speak up and be active participants in their advanced non-melanoma skin cancer care and treatment decisions.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                  

Dr. Sondak, do you think a patient should consider a second opinion or consulting a specialist? If so, what would you say to them, to make them feel comfortable to do that?

Dr. Sondak:                

So, I would remind everyone – as we said earlier – advanced skin cancer is not something you can pass off. “Oh, it’s just skin cancer. Everybody gets skin cancer. It’s just minor. Just put a band aid on it.” I’ve seen people who’ve neglected these cancers for a long time, thinking they weren’t serious, or thinking that the treatments were gonna be too awful, too disfiguring, or too toxic. That’s just not the case anymore.

Everyone with advanced skin cancers should have cutting edge appropriate treatment. Cutting edge doesn’t always mean brand new. It might mean the same surgery we’ve been doing for many years. Just done properly and appropriately for that patient.

So, this is a kind of cancer that usually should be treated by very experienced teams. Especially when drug treatment is needed, often when radiation is needed, and certainly when major surgery is needed. Not just the use of the drugs, but the sequence. Which drug first? Which drug second? When is surgery appropriate? When do we do the radiation?

These are sophisticated decisions, and every patient is different. So, we strongly encourage people to go to a center that has a whole panel of different specialists. And they work and talk to each other. They work with each other, work together, talk to each other, and come up with a plan for each patient. If you just go to one doctor, sometimes – an old saying – when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. There are times when somebody says, “Well, I can do radiation.” Surgeon says, “I can do surgery.” Oncologist says, “I can do chemo, or targeted therapy, or immunotherapy.”

We want them all together, saying “Yeah, but what should we do for this patient?” That’s the goal that we’re striving for. That’s when you’re gonna be the most likely to get the most successful outcome.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Sondak, what would you like to leave patients with? Are you hopeful?

Dr. Sondak:                

We have seen the most dramatic progress in the treatment of these forms of cancer of the skin – melanoma, merkel cell cancer. basal and squamous cell cancers – in my lifetime. Progress I never ever thought I would see. We are not curing everybody, but we are curing a lot more people than we used to.

Yet I still see things about these forms of cancer on the internet that say, “Oh, this is really aggressive. This needs to be treated right away. Don’t wait. Don’t make me go get a second opinion. Have somebody deal with it.”

No. Time out. First thing, it’s better to do it right than to do it right away. Second thing, you don’t get a second chance to make a first impression, and if you go down the wrong treatment path, sometimes you can’t undo that. There is always time to stop and ask, “Am I doing the right thing? Is there somebody who really specializes in this that I should be seeing?”

But the most important advice at all, of course, is you’ve got to get the diagnosis made in the first place. So, that means you have to be willing to go to the doctor, to the dermatologist, to say, “Hey, this doesn’t seem right. It’s just not healing. It just keeps getting worse. What’s going on?”, and then have to be willing to follow up and go through treatments.

If you do, we are extremely optimistic. We are seeing progress, responses, cures that we never thought possible. So, there’s a lot of reason to be optimistic. It’s not always easy. There are plenty of side effects of all the treatments that we talked about. Including surgery, radiation, and all the drugs. But it’s not like it was even 10 years ago. Huge progress for people at any age. So, really, we really are optimistic.

A Review of Current Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Treatment Options

A Review of Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Treatment Options from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How is advanced non-melanoma skin cancer currently treated? Skin cancer expert Dr. Vernon Sondak reviews advanced non-melanoma skin cancer treatment approaches.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                  

Yeah. Let’s turn now to the treatment options for advanced disease. What approaches are currently available to treat advanced non-melanoma skin cancer?           

First and foremost, we always think about, can this thing be entirely removed? Can we get the cancer out and cure the patient once and for all with an operation?

Most skin cancers have not yet spread to the lymph nodes or beyond, even when they’re advanced. So, it follows that if we can remove every last cancer cell from that site, we can cure that patient. That is obviously a worthwhile goal.

But these skin cancers occur in places where a big enough surgery to remove all the cancer can be a pretty deforming surgery. It’s why plastic surgeons get involved a lot. But it’s also why we try combinations of therapy to see if we can get by with less surgery, less radical surgery. Perhaps by adding radiation or adding drug treatments to shrink the cancer.

So, surgery first. Can we do it? Can we just fix this once and for all with surgery and get it done? Whether it’s Mohs, for more advanced cases, usually a general anesthesia type surgery. Often with a skin graft or other kind of plastic surgery reconstruction. Could we just get it all out and have the pathologist tell us, “This is done. This is taken care of”? It’s not a guarantee. There’s no guarantees in this business. Only in the muffler business.

But the odds are good if the pathologist tells us the margins are completely negative. If the pathologist tells us the margins are close here, or positive there, and we don’t think removal of additional tissue is wise, then we may call in the radiation oncologist and say, “Let’s give radiation.” Kill that area where there was a positive margin and give us a margin of safety around the surgery.

In the minority of cases, we say, “This is too big to even tackle with surgery – at least at first – or two widespread. So, we’re gonna use drug treatments. If it shrinks, we may use radiation for surgery later. But first, drugs and let’s see what happens after that.”

So, today we have really three main categories of drug therapy. In the old days we had – and it wasn’t that long ago – we had really one category. I’d say that’s only been in the last – not even – ten years that we’ve had multiple options. But let’s go back 10 years.

Chemotherapy. Standard chemotherapy that people think about with cancer. Hair falls out, nausea as a prominent side effect, suppressing of your immune system, suppressing of your blood counts. That form of chemotherapy was really the only drug therapy we had for advanced melanoma. I mean, advanced non-melanoma skin cancer. Advanced melanoma too could years or more ago.

Now, through progress with melanoma, we have drugs that work in the other kinds of skin cancer. Immunotherapy took the world by storm. It worked so well for melanoma that we tried it in squamous, and merkel cell, and even basal cell cancers, and also saw great results. Now immune therapy is approved in all three of those types of non-melanoma skin cancer.

But there are problems with immune therapy if you have an altered immune system. Especially if you have a kidney transplant, or liver transplant, heart transplant, and we boost your immune system, we run a serious risk of rejection. It isn’t a guarantee, and it can sometimes be managed with additional medications. But it’s something that we have to be very, very, very cautious about, is using immune therapy in someone with a transplant.

So, targeted therapy works when we have a genetic abnormality in a cancer, that we know is only in the cancer, and that we have a drug that can block. For melanoma, if it has a BRAF mutation, we have targeted therapy drugs that target the BRAF mutation.

But non-melanoma skin cancers don’t have BRAF mutations. Squamous cell cancers don’t have mutations that today we can target. Only basal cell cancer, along with melanoma, has a mutation that we can target.

But unlike melanoma – where only some melanomas have the gene mutation in BRAF – basal cells, all the cancers have a mutation in the hedgehog pathway. You can’t pretty much have a basal cell cancer without having a mutation in the hedgehog pathway. Fortunately, we have pills that inhibit that pathway that we call hedgehog inhibitors. Vismodegib, sonidegib, and these drugs are very effective at shrinking even gigantic basal cell cancers.

But the problem with targeted therapy in general, compared to immune therapy, is that the responses don’t tend to last as long. The tumor will shrink very rapidly. But some of those cancer cells figure out a way to mutate further and avoid the drugs that we were using to treat them, and eventually grow back.          

Let me just correct one thing I said about targeted therapy, so I don’t leave the wrong impression. I said there’s not really mutations in squamous cell cancer that can be targeted. There is one called the EGF receptor, or EGFR, that we sometimes target with a drug called cetuximab.

It’s not used as much now with immunotherapy. But it turns out there is some targeted therapy, even for squamous cell cancers. But for basal cell, is where the hedgehog inhibitors are used much more effectively than targeted therapy in most other forms of skin cancer.

What Are Treatment Goals and Considerations for Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer?

What Are Treatment Goals and Considerations for Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Skin cancer expert Dr. Vernon Sondak reviews current treatment goals for advanced non-melanoma skin cancer patients. Dr. Sondak discusses factors to consider when making treatment decisions, including age, lifestyle factors, and potential treatment side effects.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                          

There are so many factors that come into play when making a treatment decision, including a patient’s age and overall health. So, let’s walk through the considerations when choosing therapy for advanced disease. What are the treatment goals? What does that mean and what are the goals?

Dr. Sondak:                

It’s actually really important and somewhat underrated to think about, “What’s the goal of the treatment?” I think even doctors sometimes, certainly medical students and trainees, it’s something they have to learn a lot about. Because it’s easy to memorize all the names of all the drugs and all the muscles in the body. But thinking about, “What are we really trying to accomplish here?”

The first thing we would like to accomplish, when we can, is cure the cancer. Most of the advanced skin cancers we’re talking about are still curable. We can’t say all, but most. Even in the high stages they are still potentially curable with treatment.

So, of course, if we can cure someone, we might be more aggressive with our treatment plan. More intensive with our treatment than if we’re not intending to cure them. Why wouldn’t we want to cure them? Why would we have a different intention? We’d always want to, but there are times when we say, “Gee, the standard treatments haven’t worked. Now we have to think about what other goals? We can’t cure you anymore.”

It’s pretty rare with skin cancer. But it happens. It happens with melanoma, and it happens with basal, and squamous cell cancers, but rarely.

We can’t cure you. We can help you feel better because the symptoms that this large skin cancer – this advanced skin cancer – is causing. Whether they might be bleeding, or pain, or pressure on a nerve, or whatever it might be. If we can relieve that, that’s palliation. That’s relieving symptoms. There are times we say, “We want to prevent that symptom from happening in the first place. If we don’t remove this, this is gonna start bleeding, or it’s gonna press on the nerves.”

So, even if we can’t cure you, we might want to treat one or more spots to prevent symptoms from occurring. Only in the most extreme, end of the line, kind of situations would we say now our goal is just comfort. We can no longer do anything to really alter the disease. When and how we make those decisions, obviously, they are challenging. But if you don’t start with that point, then you can’t get to the right treatment decision.

If you’ve got a patient who’s not curable, you want to do the least treatment to make them feel better or prevent them from feeling bad. Whereas if you’ve got a patient who is curable, you may be willing to justify much more aggressive treatment, if that’s what’s needed to cure them. 

Katherine:                  

How do patient specific factors, like lifestyle and pre-existing conditions, impact treatment choices?

Dr. Sondak:                

It really depends, but in skin cancer it can affect them a lot.

Number one: Lifestyle. Well, how did we get skin cancers in the first place? Whether they’re melanoma, basal, squamous? Usually, the one common denominator is ultraviolet light. Got it from being out in the sun or occasionally from being in a tanning bed. Something like that. Melanomas, and to a small extent basal cell cancers, tend to be associated with brief intermittent heavy exposure, meaning sunburns. Squamous cell cancer tends to be associated with chronic cumulative years of sun exposure. I was out in the sun all my life, I fished all the time, I was a lifeguard, what have you. That’s generalization.

A lot of overlap. But the common denominator, the common theme, is ultraviolet exposure. One thing about the sun, it doesn’t just shine on one spot all the time. It shines on lots of places. So, you may have a skin cancer here, but that doesn’t mean you didn’t get sun exposure there, or here, or anywhere else.

So, lifestyle factors. One: We can’t undo the ultraviolet exposure you already had. But we can prevent it from accumulating further. So, once a person is diagnosed with skin cancer, they really need to think about protecting themselves from the sun, avoiding sun exposure, and covering their skin, and protecting their skin when they’re in the sun. Ideally, they think about it before they got skin cancer. So, they don’t get skin cancer. Or if they get it, they get a mild, minimal, non-advanced, and easily treatable case.

But we want to make sure that once a person has skin cancer, that they recognize that their lifestyle needs to change. Cigarette smoking, unbeknownst to a lot of people, is also associated to some degree with skin cancers and a lot of other big and bad medical problems. So, we would love to alter people’s lifestyle as far as smoking is concerned. Those are the couple of key lifestyle factors that we always think about.

I think the other area that is so important in deciding about treatment is the overall health of the patient, other medical conditions that they might have, and then lastly, what the patient’s own specific concerns and considerations are.

How Is Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Staged?

How Is Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Staged? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Skin cancer expert Dr. Vernon Sondak describes how advanced non-melanoma skin cancer is staged and explains which factors are taken into consideration to understand an individual’s diagnosis.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                  

And we are going to focus today on advanced disease. So, what makes this type of cancer considered advanced?

Dr. Sondak:                

So, this also is somewhat – I won’t say controversial. I’ll just say it’s not uniformly agreed on by everybody. Not everyone means the exact same thing or has the exact same definition in their mind when they say advanced.

It’s a little different than the stage. The staging of skin cancer is mostly based on the size. So, a small skin cancer is almost never an advanced skin cancer. By small I mean less than 2 centimeters, sometimes. Depending where. Two centimeters is just under an inch.

But 2 centimeters in the middle of your face or on the tip of your nose. That’s already a pretty big problem. So, somebody might say, “Well, that’s kind of advanced.” Yes it is. But that’s not what we’re really talking about here. We’re talking about larger tumors. Tumors that have spread deeply into the tissues, or tumors that have spread and gotten to the next stages. Stage III, meaning in the lymph nodes. Or stage IV, meaning it’s spread beyond the lymph nodes, to the lungs and beyond.  

In terms of stages, in terms of stage III and stage IV, basal and squamous cell cancers, we are talking about much fewer than 2 percent of all those skin cancers. For basal cell, way fewer. For squamous cell, slightly fewer than 2 percent of all cases ever getting to a higher stage, like stage III and stage IV.

Sometimes they can be very advanced without ever spreading to the lymph nodes or beyond because they invade down into the bone. Could be on the top your scalp and invade down into your skull bone. Can be on the cheek, and invade, and follow the track along the nerves of the face. A lot of ways that the skin cancer can become advanced without spreading. But cancers that have spread are automatically considered advanced.

Katherine:                  

Right. That helps us understand the disease and how it progresses.

Is the COVID Vaccine Safe and Effective for Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Patients?

Is the COVID Vaccine Safe and Effective for Advanced Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Patients? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Vernon Sondak discusses the safety and efficacy of the COVID vaccine for advanced non-melanoma skin cancer patients.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                  

Is the COVID vaccine safe and effective for advanced non-melanoma skin cancer patients?

Dr. Sondak:                

I’ve spent my entire career studying the human immune system and vaccines for cancer. The COVID vaccine is the safest, most effective vaccine we have ever seen. It is like the difference between the Wright brothers airplane and the Apollo spaceships in terms of sophistication.

It is a vaccine that has gotten politicized and has gotten tangled up in all kinds of stuff. But again, it is the safest, most effective vaccine we’ve ever seen. I highly recommend it for all of our patients. I believe that all of our patients with cancer, and their family members, and their children of appropriate age should be vaccinated and boosted.

Even if you do that, as I have done, I go vaccinated, I got boosted, and I got COVID. It was milder than the usual cold I get every year before COVID. If I hadn’t been tested, I wouldn’t have even known I had it. I only get tested to avoid spreading it to family members and especially to vulnerable patients. If your immune system is weakened and it’s even more important to be vaccinated.

So, the only advice I give to my patients about the vaccine, and the vaccination specifically, is think about which arm to have it in. If you’ve got an active cancer, say in the left arm, have it in the right arm. Not because it will hurt the cancer, but because in the early days after the vaccine, you may get a little bit of swelling of the lymph nodes. We don’t want your doctor or anybody doing a CAT scan, or ultrasound, or mammogram, or any other test to accidentally think that those enlarged lymph nodes are from the cancer.

If you had the vaccine recently and are getting any type of diagnostic procedure, like a CAT scan mammogram or ultrasound of those lymph nodes, tell the team that you had a recent COVID vaccine.

Katherine:                  

That’s excellent advice. Thank you. Good to know.

What Is Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer?

What Is Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Vernon Sondak provides an overview of the types of skin cancer and defines non-melanoma skin cancer.

Dr. Vernon Sondak is the Chair of the Department of Cutaneous Oncology at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute. Learn more about Dr. Sondak, here.
 

Katherine:                  

Let’s start with the basics Dr. Sondak. What exactly is non-melanoma skin cancer?

Dr. Sondak:                

Well, it’s a great question. Sometimes we wish there was a better term, because it obviously is defining this by what it’s not, not by what it is.

Katherine:                  

Right.

Dr. Sondak:                

Melanoma is the most prevalent of the really severe skin cancers. By severe, I mean the ones with the highest chance of spreading and dying. Each year in the United States, there are close to 10,000 deaths from melanoma every year, and about 100,000 cases of invasive melanoma.

But the other forms of skin cancer, and the most common two forms of skin cancer, are basal cell and squamous cell cancers. These two cancers alone, they are about two to three million cases a year, compared to 100,000 melanoma cases.

Katherine:                  

Wow.

Dr. Sondak:                

But probably causing fewer deaths than those 100,000 melanomas. So, there are many, many more of the skin cancers that aren’t melanoma, then there are of the skin cancers that are melanoma.

In fact, there are probably more skin cancers – just if we took basal and squamous cell cancer – there are probably more of those diagnosed every year in the United States than all other forms of cancer put together.

Katherine:                  

Wow. Wow.

Dr. Sondak:                

Now in general, these skin cancers – besides melanoma – are at a low risk of spreading, and metastasizing, and killing the person if their immune system is normal. So, they have almost gotten passed off as, “Oh, it’s just the skin cancer. It’s nothing to worry about.” But when they reach a certain size, when they get to a point where we call them advanced, then now the stakes are higher. It’s not millions of advanced cases, but it’s many tens of thousands of advanced cases in the United States. Some of them do spread and some of them can be life threatening, or even lethal.