Posts

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment?

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do metastatic breast cancer patients need to know about the latest research news? Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS), along with her advice for advocating for the right testing to help guide treatment options.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From INSIST! Metastatic Breast Cancer

Related Resources:

 

What Could Advances in Breast Cancer Research Mean for You?

How Can You Advocate for the Best Breast Cancer Care?

Factors That Guide a Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decision

 


Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

At this year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, there were a few interesting presentations about the treatment of first-line metastatic triple-negative breast cancer that I think patients should be aware of.

Two of the presentations centered around trials that were presented in the past. Those reporting, patients reported outcomes from the IMpassion 130 study, which looked at chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative disease plus the immunotherapy atezolizumab. And then, there was also an update on the results from the KEYNOTE-355 study, which was a study again of chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative patients in combination with pembrolizumab, a different immunotherapy. And both of these studies showed that there was benefit for women in certain sub-groups of triple-negative breast cancer when looking at addition of immunotherapy.

And so, what I’d like to draw patients’ attention to with these presentations is that you have to be aware of if you fall into one of these categories so you know if you’re a candidate for the particular type of immunotherapy that can be added to chemotherapy. There are two different ways to test for if a patient is a candidate for immunotherapy and they are both tests that can be done on biopsies of metastatic or cancer recurrent sites in the body.

They can also be sent off of original breast cancer tumors. And what we now know is that for patients who do not have markers that suggest immune activation or where the immune system would be responsive to immunotherapy the addition of that extra therapy really does not help to improve cancer control over chemotherapy alone. And I think that’s a really important topic because everyone is very interested in immunotherapy, but it does have side effects of its own and it can actually be lasting side effects in terms of inflammation in organs like the liver, the colon, and the lungs.

And then, the third presentation that I’d like to bring up is the IPATunity study, which looked at the addition of a targeted therapy called ipatasertib to, again, chemotherapy for the first treatment of metastatic triple-negative disease.

And so, this is getting into an area of targeted therapy for metastatic triple-negative disease. And again, only looks at patients that have a particular marker that suggests sensitivity to this drug. And those are certain genetic markers, predominately changes in a DNA marker called PIK3CA. In this study, we actually found that there was no benefit for the targeted therapy added to chemotherapy for patients that had that genetic mutation, which was different than what was seen in earlier studies of the same combination. So, I think there’s more work to be done and it’s probably too early to say that this targeted therapy will not be used in treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

But what all of these research studies show together is that metastatic triple-negative cancer is not really just one disease. It’s very clear that within that one name, there are multiple different patient types and tumor types that need to be cared for differently.

And so, again, I think the theme from these abstracts and these research presentations is that we have to look into the right therapy for the right patient at the right time, which largely involved DNA-based testing.

So, when patients are thinking about their treatment options and how to best help with their providers about what treatment options exist for them, I think it’s important to recognize the type of testing that may be advantageous in your cancer type.

And so, for all metastatic breast cancer patients, we really recommend that they’ve had genetic testing to look for DNA changes like BRCA mutations that will lead to treatment options. For metastatic triple-negative disease, it’s important to make sure that you’re providers are testing for PDL1, which would make you a candidate for immunotherapy. And then, the more we learn about clinical trials, the more we have options for patients that have had drug-based DNA or genome-based testing. So, that’s an important term for patients to become familiar with is genomic testing.

And I think when you bring that up with your providers, they’ll know what you’re talking about and they’ll know that what you’re potentially interested in is new targeted therapy for the cancer that may either come in combination with chemotherapy or as a standalone treatment option. If you don’t have those options that are available, and FDA approved basis for regular routine patient care, there is always the option of clinical trials.

And so, if that is something that you’re interested in, genomic testing will often open the way. So, I think as you’re writing notes when you’re talking to your providers, you might wanna jot down whether or not you’ve had genetic testing and whether or not you’ve had genomic testing in the past, as both of those things will help potentially address all of your treatment options.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo

Expert Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS). Dr. Kruse provides an overview of what this news means for early stage breast cancer patients, along with her optimism about the future of breast cancer research and treatment.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From The Pro-Active Breast Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

 

Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

The San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium is a national meeting with international presence that combines all of the latest data from research on breast cancer topics. It involves clinical research, basic science research, a lot of patient, and patient advocate support.

And the idea here is to bring together all the different disciplines that are involved in breast cancer patient care and do the best information and knowledge sharing that we can each year.

This year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium brought us a lot of interesting research focusing on early-stage breast cancer patients. I think the most important presentations that were given had to do with the treatment of high-risk lymph node-positive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients. And these were really across three abstracts. The first abstract of interest was the Monarch E study, which looked at high-risk women with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer and optimizing their medical therapy.

So, these patients are typically treated with anti-estrogen therapy and the idea of the research that was presented was if the addition of a targeted medication called abemaciclib or Verzenio could help to improve outcomes for women in this population. And what the trial found was that for women who took their anti-estrogen therapy for the usual length of time but added the abemaciclib for the first two years of that anti-estrogen therapy that there is actually an improvement in cancer-free survival time or an improvement in cure rates. And this was important because these women may not benefit from chemotherapy, as we’ll talk about in another abstract.

An addition research presentation that was given that goes alongside of the monarch E study was that of the Penelope B study. And the Penelope B took a similar population to what was studied in Monarch E. So, again high-risk women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer; however, in Penelope B, all of these patients had received pre-surgery chemotherapy.

And in order to qualify for the trial, the patients had to have some cancer that remained in the breast or the lymph nodes that was taken out at the time of their surgery. So, these are patients clearly in which chemotherapy did not do the whole job in terms of getting rid of the cancer. And again, the idea here was to add a second targeted therapy to the endocrine therapy to see if that would improve cancer-free time for patients in this population. The difference in this study was that the partner targeted therapy that was used was a drug called palbociclib or Ibrance.

And the drug was actually only used for one year in combination with endocrine therapy rather than two years as was used in the Monarch E study with abemaciclib. Interestingly enough, the Penelope B study was a negative study, meaning that it did not improve the cancer-free survival time for women who took the endocrine therapy plus targeted therapy compared to women who took the endocrine therapy alone.

So, I think that these are two interesting studies that one should look at together. And clearly, may impact what we do for the treatment of high-risk hormone receptor-positive women moving forward. The third abstract that I’d like to touch on that I think was important for women with early-stage breast cancer is the RxPONDER study, also known as SWOG 1007. And this study again was looking at lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer patients and seeing if the addition of chemotherapy helped to improve their cancer-free survival compared to anti-estrogen therapy alone.

And so, in this study, while the study population was all women with early-stage breast cancer, meeting the one to three lymph node-positive criteria, you really have to break the results down into the results for pre-menopausal women and the results for post-menopausal women.

Because overall the study really showed no significant benefit to chemotherapy on top of endocrine therapy for women in this population; however, we did see that there was a clear benefit for women who were pre-menopausal. So, the women who had no benefit from chemotherapy were largely those who were post-menopausal, while those who were pre-menopausal derived extra benefit from chemo on top of anti-estrogen therapy. And that benefit depended on what the Oncotype recurrent score was.

With women that had the lowest of the recurrent scores having a chemo benefit of about three percent going up to over five percent for women who had Oncotype recurrent scores in the mid-teens to 25 range. In both of these groups, women who had Oncotype scores of 26 or above would have chemotherapy as per our standard of care.

So, I think that this abstract is important because in the past women who had lymph node-positive breast cancer generally received chemotherapy no matter what. More recently we’ve understood that not all of these cancers are created equal and that some cancers may not actually have benefit from chemotherapy in terms of improving cure rate. So, this study is a big step forward to help individualize and specify the treatment for women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.                                   

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care?

 

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Peter Forsberg shares advice for myeloma patients on why it’s important to speak up about symptoms and side effects, how to become a better partner in their care, and the role of a second opinion.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources

Myeloma Treatment Decisions: What’s Right for You Resource Guide

What Should You Know About Myeloma Treatment Options?

What Should You Know About Myeloma Treatment Options?

Transcript:

Katherine:                  

What is some key advice that you give patients when they’re considering their treatment options?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Well, I think one important one is to always feel comfortable communicating with your provider. I think that there no by the book questions, list of questions, that’re the right questions to ask. I think the more important thing is trying to establish a good working relationship with your treatment team. Myeloma is much more of a marathon than it is a sprint. So, getting comfortable with your team, getting comfortable with a relationship and a partnership that can be often many years in duration, are really critical steps.

So, I think laying that foundation, feeling comfortable asking questions, trying to understand why. Understand how and what are tools to monitor what the myeloma will be and what indicates success or a need for something else. Those would all be critical pieces that I would encourage patients to feel empowered to be part of.

Katherine:                  

Patients can sometimes feel like they’re bothering their healthcare team with the comments and the questions. So, why is it important for patients to speak up when it comes to their symptoms and side effects?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Well, I think feeling comfortable being vocal about what’s going on is one of the key issues to navigating myeloma successfully. Being aware of issues, even if they may seem minor or insignificant, they may be an indicator for something that is emerging in terms of a treatment related side effect that we wanna be aware of. There are treatment side effects that we are willing to work through. But it can be very broad in terms of the spectrum of how we maneuver through different side effects.

And additionally, we always want to be aware of any issues that may be going on that could be a sign for what’s happening with the myeloma. So, trying to be vocal. Not only to understand what’s going on, what our treatments are, how successful are we at any given point in time, where things stand. But also, to make sure that you are putting things on your provider’s radar are key. So, lots of folks want to be good and compliant patients and we certainly appreciate that hope. But being assertive in terms of issues that may be coming up or questions that you may have, can really make for a much more successful long-term relationship in terms of how we manage the myeloma.

Katherine:                  

Well, do you have suggestions on how a patient could feel more confident in speaking up and becoming a partner in their care?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Well, certainly using tools like, if you found your way to this material, I think is a great first step.

Becoming a little bit more versed in the myeloma, in the language of the myeloma, what these tests that we use are. What their results might be. Using a number of great patient specific organizations are great first steps. So, being proactive about learning, to some degree about the myeloma. And then feeling comfortable asking that first questions. Once you begin the process of unlocking the myeloma and demystifying what it is and what these tests mean and where we stand, then that can really build on itself and allow folks to feel more in control of their myeloma and their myeloma journey.

Katherine:                  

And if a patient isn’t feeling confident with their treatment plan or their care, do you recommend that they seek a second opinion or consult a specialist?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Well, I never think it’s a bad idea to think about a second opinion or seeing a myeloma specialist. Even if you feel very comfortable with your treatment plan. Myeloma’s a unique disease and our approaches for it may be somewhat different, person to person.

And your needs as a myeloma patient my change and they may change somewhat abruptly. So, having seen someone who specializes in myeloma as part of your care team, and usually it is a care team. And there’s different models we sometimes work with in terms of both local or primary oncologists, as well as more specialized academic oncologists. We’re used to working through all sorts of models to provide the best possible care for patients. So, I never think it’s a bad idea to ask about that. Because having that more robust team is usually mostly benefit without adding a lot of headache. 

Is My Myeloma Treatment Working?

Is My Myeloma Treatment Working? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How can a myeloma patient know if their treatment is working? Dr. Peter Forsberg explains tests involved in determining if myeloma treatment is effective and factors that may indicate that it’s time to switch therapies.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

What Key Tests Should Follow a Myeloma Diagnosis?

What Key Tests Should Follow a Myeloma Diagnosis?

Myeloma Treatment Decisions: What’s Right for You Resource Guide

Transcript:

Katherine:                        

Once a patient has started treatment, how do you know if it’s working?

Dr. Forsberg:              

So, we’re lucky in myeloma in that we have some pretty easily accessible tools to evaluate how our response is going. How the myeloma is responding to treatment. How we’re sustaining that response and if we may be losing it at some point in time. And a lot of those come down to those blood tests I mentioned before.

The tools that measure protein levels or antibody levels in the blood, whether that’s intact antibodies or fragments of antibodies. So, that is that serum protein electrophoresis or serum free light chain levels.

Sometimes in conjunction with urine collections, which can measure abnormal antibodies in the urine. Those are ways that we can monitor on a month-to-month basis, how well the myeloma is responding to treatment. How well we are sustaining in a response or remission status. Or if it might be starting to come back.

We do at times use those in conjunction with other tests that look at things like bones using X-rays, MRIs or higher resolution scans like a PET scan. Or things like bone marrow biopsies which we may do at specific time points to evaluate the myeloma in different ways.

Whether that’s to evaluate a remission and see how deep that response might be, correlating it with blood work. Or if the myeloma come back, making sure we understand the characteristics of it. So, we’re lucky to be able to draw on tools that are not very invasive using bloodwork and sometimes urine. But we may couple that at certain other points in time with more substantial evaluations as well.

Katherine:                  

What could indicate that it’s time to switch therapies?

Dr. Forsberg:              

So, the most common indicator may be a change in one of those tests that I just mentioned. If we notice that there’s an increasing level of an abnormal antibody in the blood, one that’s usually produced by the myeloma, that may be our first indicator that the myeloma has become more active and that we need to change our treatment approaches. Other times people may develop symptoms from the myeloma that shows that it is becoming active and those would be our indicators. So, those are different ways that we help to monitor the myeloma. One is assessing the bloodwork and other things that we monitor pretty closely.

The other is being vigilant for new problems that may come out. So, we end up spending a lot of time with folks over the years with the myeloma and some of that may feel a bit routine, but we’re always trying to make sure that we’re attentive to new issues as they come up.

Myeloma Treatment Options: Where Do Clinical Trials Fit In?

Myeloma Treatment Options: Where Do Clinical Trials Fit In? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Peter Forsberg discusses how clinical trials help improve care for myeloma patients and shares advice to patients who are fearful about joining a trial.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

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

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

Is My Myeloma Treatment Working?

Is My Myeloma Treatment Working?

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care?

 

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care?

Transcript:

Katherine:                        

Where do clinical trials fit in as a treatment choice?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, I do clinical trials in myeloma, I am certainly an advocate for the important role of clinical trials in myeloma. It is how we learn more about how best to treat patients. So, clinical trials are the foundation on which our decision-making has been built and continues to be refined. We are at a place where clinical trials don’t mean one thing. There are different types of clinical trials. Different stages of trials. Some that may be what we call, early phase that’re looking at brand new medicines or medicines in entirely different ways.

And ones that are late phase, where they may be comparing a well validated standard of care, versus a new approach. So, understanding what the potential clinical trial is and what that entails and what its goals are, are an important factor for patients as they consider participating. But beyond that, trials are a really critical area for us to evaluate new therapies and to get better at using the medicines we have in novel or improved ways.

So, they can be a really useful piece for not only the myeloma community, but for patients as they navigate through. So, I haven’t had many patients who I take care of who participated in clinical trials and been disappointed that they did so. Usually, it’s a positive experience.

Even if it is one where you want to understand what you may be embarking upon as you begin the process.

Katherine:                  

Some patients can be fearful when it comes to clinical trials. What would you say to someone who might be hesitant to consider participating in one?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Well, like I said, I would say that one of the most important things is making sure you understand what the goal of the trial is. What it entails. Clinical trials may have one name, but they’re very different things. And the right type of trial may be very different in different clinical circumstances. So, feeling comfortable with what it is. Making sure you feel comfortable asking your provider what the rationale for the trial is.

But also, as I mentioned, trials are a unique process and one that can often be very fulfilling for patients. Understanding that not only may you be trying a new treatment approach, but that you’re hoping to contribute to our improvement for how we manage multiple myeloma. It’s an altruistic goal. But it can be one that can be pretty meaningful for patients if they’re comfortable moving in that direction.

What Should You Know About Myeloma Treatment Options?

What Should You Know About Myeloma Treatment Options? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Peter Forsberg outlines options in the myeloma treatment toolkit, including targeted therapies, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and combination approaches —and explains how the recovery process from stem cell transplant has improved.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

Myeloma Treatment Options: Where Do Clinical Trials Fit In?

Myeloma Treatment Options: Where Do Clinical Trials Fit In?

Essential Imaging Tests After a Myeloma Diagnosis

Myeloma Treatment Decisions: What’s Right for You Resource Guide

Transcript:

Katherine:                        

Would you walk us through the currently available myeloma treatment approaches and who they might be right for?

Dr. Forsberg:             

At this point, we’re lucky that we have a much broader toolkit to treat myeloma than we have had in the past. Myeloma is one of the successes in modern oncology in that way. At this point, we have a number of targeted therapies. Some of those are pill-based options, some are injections or infusional medicines. We have some immunotherapies, which are things like monoclonal antibodies, which help to work.

We use some conventional or older fashioned chemotherapy, often lower doses and as part of combinations. And steroids. Steroids are always the medicine that is one of the backbones of our combinations. In myeloma, we do often use combinations. So, it’s usually a mixture of targeted therapies. Sometimes immunotherapies or chemotherapies.

As well as steroids to try to treat the myeloma. And some of the considerations are, which combination makes the most sense. Are there other medical problems or disease related factors like disease aggressiveness that may influence which ones we wanna choose or how many. Also, is a three-drug combination the right fit or is a four or a two drug the right. And it does continue to evolve.

Our options and our ability to use multi-agent regimens has continued to improve as we’ve gotten better and better therapies that’re well tolerated and that allow us to use really active combinations, even in patients who may have substantial other medical problems. So, I think it’s been something that continues to evolve over time and will continue to evolve. But the good news is that it’s been an issue of just how to incorporate more and better options.

How do we bring these good new tools into the mix as early as is appropriate? To control the myeloma in really substantial ways. And again, as I mentioned, the question of the role of stem cell transplant continues to be an important one. That is a way for us to still use older fashioned chemotherapy at a high dose to help to achieve a more durable remission. But usually, the way that we parse through these targeted immunotherapies and chemotherapies, is something that may be individual.

Although, we have some broad principals that help guide us for how we manage patients across different types.

Katherine:                  

How do you decide who stem cell transplant might be right for?

Dr. Forsberg:             

The good news in the United States is that we’re able to be fairly broad in terms of our consideration of stem cell transplant. There is no age restriction above which it’s not. We’ve gotten better and better at supporting patients through stem cell transplant. We have better medicines to deal with potential toxicities. And so, patients do better and better in going through transplant. But it is still an intensive treatment modality. So, in considering it, it is an option for a large portion of myeloma patients at diagnosis. After we get the myeloma under control. But the decision remains an individual one. Some patients may prefer to defer stem cell transplant until a second line therapy or later.

Whereas others feel very comfortable moving forward with it in the first-line setting. I would say that it is certainly something that we try to demystify for patients. It can sound a little bit intimidating, certainly because it is a little more intense and requires more support. But it is something that we have gotten quite good at navigating patient and supporting them through.

Katherine:                  

What about maintenance therapy, how does that fit in?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Following initial treatments to get the myeloma under control, whether that includes stem cell transplant or not. Usually we transition into a maintenance therapy. Maintenance therapy is a way for us to sustain control or remission of the myeloma. And make that longer lived. So, what we use for maintenance may be different patient to patient. But it is a important part of our treatment approach for many patients.

Katherine:                  

Are some therapies less intense than others, and what are some possible side effects of those?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, certainly there are treatments with varying degrees of intensity or potential toxicities. The good news is that as we’ve gained more and more treatment options, we’ve also gotten better at using the ones we have had for a while now to minimize some of their toxicities. So, by adjusting dosing schedule and routes of administration, we’ve gotten better at fine tuning the tools we have toward minimizing those toxicities.

So truthfully, many myeloma patients after you start treatment, actually feel better than before they started chemotherapy because the myeloma itself is a destructive process and the treatments are quite often well tolerated. That being said, certainly over time, treatment related side effects often emerge. Some of the treatment toxicities may cause some challenges in terms of managing patients through their myeloma process. But usually, those can be overcome. Even if that means needing to adjust the treatment protocol.

Adjust doses, change medicines. And so, while there are varying degrees of intensity, we’re usually able to find the right balance for any given patient to still have a very active anti-myeloma regimen while trying to be very cognizant of potential treatment toxicities and taking steps to mitigate that.

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

What Is the Patient’s Role in Myeloma Treatment Decisions? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Myeloma specialist Dr. Peter Forsberg shares his perspective on how patients fit into the shared decision-making process and their role in helping move treatment forward in a timely manner.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

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

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

How Targeted Therapy Works to Treat Myeloma

Myeloma Targeted Therapy: Why Identifying Chromosomal Abnormalities Is Key

Transcript:

Katherine:                        

What do you feel is the patient’s role in the decision, and how does shared decision making come into play?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, I think it’s always a really important piece of the puzzle to be a part of the decision-making process. Myeloma can be a challenging disease to understand. There are some pretty significant nuances in terms of what our treatment options are and what our goals may be.

So, I think having a patient who is involved in that process, who is actively asking questions. Engaging their provider if something doesn’t make sense. If our goal is not clear. Trying to make sure that you ask that. As oncologists, a lot of what we do involves communication and trying to help bridge gaps between our understanding of diseases and treatments and what patients see and feel and understand.

So, I think it’s really a critical piece of it for patients to ask questions, to engage. Now, I will say that one of the important things is often when the myeloma is newly diagnosed, we do need to move into treatment in a relatively timely manner. So, engaging with that process, being ready to move forward is our key component.

 

What Are Key Factors in Myeloma Treatment Decisions?

What Are Key Factors in Myeloma Treatment Decisions? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Myeloma specialist Dr. Peter Forsberg explains the factors that he considers when making a treatment choice, including how treatment goals can vary from patient to patient.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

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

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

How Targeted Therapy Works to Treat Myeloma

Myeloma Targeted Therapy: Why Identifying Chromosomal Abnormalities Is Key

Transcript:

Katherine:                        

 When deciding on a treatment approach with a patient, what do you take into account when making the decision?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, there are pretty substantial factors that may impact treatment decision with myeloma. Our goal in almost all patients is to try to get the myeloma under control. Usually when we diagnose myeloma, it’s pretty active. Often, it’s causing significant problems. So, our goal in all patients is trying to get the myeloma under control to some degree.

Now, how aggressive we may be towards that is impacted by a number of things. One of the most important ones is who the patient is. Myeloma is diagnosed, and it never develops in a vacuum. It always develops in a person and that person may have substantial other medical problems. They may be younger; they may be older. They may be more fit or more frail. So, those are all factors that may contribute to our initial treatment choice.

Because often, what we’re initially deciding on is how many medicines we may use initially to try to treat the myeloma. And our goal my be to try to push a little harder, to try to achieve the deepest possible remission. In those circumstances, in certain patients, we may incorporate things like a stem cell transplant as one of our second steps. In patients who are somewhat less robust, we may be thinking that our primary goal is just to achieve and maintain control of the myeloma.

But not necessarily pushing for the deepest possible remission. Balancing the potential side effects from medicines with the importance of stopping the negative affects that the myeloma drives.

Katherine:

Any talk about treatment goals and what that means?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, as I mentioned, treatment goals may be different person to person. It takes into consideration who the patient is, what their priorities may be. What’s important for them in terms of not only living with the myeloma, but their life in general. So, there are many patients where our goal is to achieve a very robust, very long duration remission.

And there may be other patients where our goal isn’t just to control the myeloma, but to minimize treatment-related side effects. So, our priorities may be somewhat different. But almost always, it is to prevent issues that may come up from the myeloma and we’re lucky that often times those treatment goals align with tools we’re able to bring to bear. Our medicines for myeloma can help us achieve the goals of treatment, whether that’s achieving the deepest possible remission and sustaining it or prioritizing quality of life across a very broad patient spectrum.

Debunking Common Myeloma Misconceptions

 

Debunking Common Myeloma Misconceptions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Myeloma expert Dr. Peter Forsberg discusses common misconceptions about the disease and explains who may have an increased risk for developing myeloma.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources

Essential Tests & Imaging After a Myeloma Diagnosis

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care?

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

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

Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Are there common misconceptions you hear when you see a new myeloma patient for the first time?

Dr. Forsberg:             

Yeah, I think some of the more common questions that come up involve those questions like I mentioned about things like stage and understanding this unique characteristic to myeloma. Myeloma unfortunately remains an incurable disease in the year 2020. So, some of the questions come up regarding what prognosis or treatment approaches may entail. Certainly, going to not up-to-date sources can lead to a lot of misconceptions about what our options are and what our outlook might be for myeloma.

And certainly at times, patients wonder where the myeloma came from. Is there something that I did or that I was exposed to that was a real driver for me to develop this? That’s a really common question that comes up. And unfortunately, or fortunately, the answer is not really any that we know well about. So, let me rephrase. So, one question that comes up a lot is what may have caused the myeloma.

Is there something that someone did or was exposed to that drove the myeloma? And truthfully, at this point there aren’t a lot of drivers for myeloma that we know about. So, usually that’s something that can be a little hard to understand or to reconcile. But it is a type of disease that can, unfortunately, can affect anyone. It does get more common as people get older. But aside from some potential genetic impact or mild increased risk in family members and with certain ethnic groups. Not a lot of historical things that were done might drive the development of myeloma.

How Do Myeloma Test Results Guide Prognosis and Treatment?

How Do Myeloma Test Results Guide Prognosis and Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Myeloma specialist Dr. Peter Forsberg explains how myeloma test results help in assessing the disease stage and prognosis, and how identification of chromosomal abnormalities may aid in treatment decisions.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

Why Myeloma Patients Should Speak Up: Advice from a Nurse Practitioner

Myeloma Treatment Decisions: What’s Right for You Resource Guide

Myeloma Targeted Therapy: Why Identifying Chromosomal Abnormalities Is Key

Transcript:

Katherine:                  

What do the results of these tests tell us about prognosis and treatment choices?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, the tests that we do are important in terms of understanding some degree how aggressive the myeloma may be or what the prognosis may be. One of the most common or challenging things to break through when diagnosing myeloma or learning about your myeloma is that it’s a little different than other types of cancer. Unlike other cancers that’re more common, stage in myeloma is very different than it is in breast cancer or lung cancer or things that people may have more experience with. In myeloma, everybody has systemic disease.

That’s a part of the diagnosis of myeloma. It means it’s a body-wide condition. So, being stage I or II or III is very different than what it might be in other diseases where that has a huge prognostic impact and also, really shapes what treatment might be. In myeloma, we do use blood tests and chromosomal changes to help us assign a stage to the myeloma, which may tell us about how aggressive the myeloma may be over time.

But our treatment approaches tend to be pretty similar, even for people regardless of their stage. So, our goals are always to get patients’ myeloma under control and maintain it there. So, treatment ends up overlapping pretty substantially. Regardless of what those in initial tests are that stratify potential disease aggressiveness. That being said, there are some ways that we do adjust treatment potentially in patients that we see evidence of potentially more aggressive disease or less. And that might be ways that we amplify treatment regiments, adding extra medicines or using maintenance approaches that’re a little more robust to try to help overcome those high-risk features.

Katherine:                  

What about the significance of chromosomal abnormalities?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, chromosomal abnormalities are part of some of those staging systems. They’re included in what we call our revised international staging system, as well as just being part of our routine risk assessment.

To try to understand myeloma. So, in myeloma, at this point those genetic changes or chromosomal changes don’t necessarily drive specific treatment choices except in that they may stratify how aggressive disease could be and may be informative in that regard.

What Key Tests Should Follow a Myeloma Diagnosis?

 

What Key Tests Should Follow a Myeloma Diagnosis? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What are the key tests that should take place following a multiple myeloma diagnosis? Dr. Peter Forsberg details the appropriate tests, including imaging and blood tests, that may aid in assessing the risk and informing treatment options.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources

Essential Tests & Imaging After a Myeloma Diagnosis

How Do Myeloma Test Results Guide Prognosis and Treatment?

How Do Myeloma Test Results Guide Prognosis and Treatment?

What Are Key Factors in Myeloma Treatment Decisions?

What Are Key Factors in Myeloma Treatment Decisions?

Transcript:

Katherine:                  

What testing should take place following a myeloma diagnosis?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, after a patient is diagnosed with myeloma, or with suspected myeloma, a number of tests take place to both understand the myeloma. Get some sense for how aggressive the myeloma might be and understand what may be being caused by the myeloma at any given time. So, that involves a number of blood tests. It involves checking urine, doing at least one 24-hour collection of urine. Doing imaging, tests to look at the skeleton or different areas of the body for myeloma involvement.

And a bone marrow biopsy and what’s called an aspirate.

So, all those tests together are used to help confirm myeloma, to understand what’s going on with it and then to understand some of the characteristics of it that might be important over time.

Some of the more complicated tests when people are initially diagnosed with myeloma to get their head around are some pretty important blood tests that we monitor pretty closely.

Things called the serum protein electrophoresis and serum light chain assays. And basically, those are tools that help us measure antibodies. Myeloma is a disease; it comes from cells that make antibodies or fragments of antibodies. And by measuring those, we can understand the myeloma, we can give it some names. And then we can also measure it over time. So, those can seem a little bit impenetrable to patients when they’re first diagnosed, but they’re pretty important for patients and for people treating the myeloma to understand where the myeloma stands and how things are going.

Katherine:                  

What about genetic testing?

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, the main way that we use genetic testing in multiple myeloma is through something called, cytogenetics. And cytogenetics is a way for us to evaluate chromosomes. Chromosomes are in cells and that’s where genetic material is contained. And in myeloma, some of the main vents that drive myeloma cells to change from normal plasma cells come through changes in chromosomes.

And so, those chromosome changes that can be detected with different tests, sometimes they’re called karyotyping or what’s called FISH can give us a sense for some of the changes that may drive the myeloma or have driven it in the first place.

What is Multiple Myeloma?

 

What is Multiple Myeloma? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What is multiple myeloma exactly? Dr. Peter Forsberg defines myeloma, explaining how it affects bone marrow, and shares details about myeloma statistics and treatment in the U.S.

Dr. Peter Forsberg is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and is a specialist in multiple myeloma. More about Dr. Forsberg here.

See More From The Pro-Active Myeloma Patient Toolkit

Related Resources

Why Myeloma Patients Should Speak Up: Advice from a Nurse Practitioner

How Can Myeloma Patients Advocate for the Best Care?

Debunking Common Myeloma Misconceptions

Transcript:

Dr. Forsberg:             

So, multiple myeloma is a blood cancer. It comes from cells that live in your bone marrow called plasma cells. They’re part of your immune system. And when they do their job, they help protect you from infections.

They’re antibody producing cells. In myeloma, unfortunately something changes in those cells and they begin to grow and live beyond what they normally would. So, myeloma is a disease that results from that and when myeloma is diagnosed, it’s usually because those plasma cells or the antibody they produce has started to cause problems, to cause destructive changes or symptoms. So, that’s multiple myeloma.

And it’s maybe a little more common than people sometimes think. It’s got an unusual name, so most folks haven’t really heard of myeloma when they’re diagnosed with it. But it is the 14th most common cancer and there are about 30,000 cases diagnosed each year in the U.S. and at this point, more than 150,000 people living with myeloma. And that’s because more and more people are living with myeloma all the time. Advancements in treatment have made people live longer and live better with myeloma.

How Can You Advocate for the Best Breast Cancer Care?

How Can You Advocate for the Best Breast Cancer Care? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Breast cancer expert Dr. Julie Gralow explains how you can advocate for the best metastatic breast cancer care, through speaking up, utilizing care team members and taking key steps to achieving better care.

Dr. Julie Gralow is the Jill Bennett Endowed Professor of Breast Medical Oncology at the University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. More about this expert here.

See More From INSIST! Metastatic Breast Cancer


Related Resources:

How Genetic Mutations Affect Metastatic Breast Cancer Disease Progression and Prognosis

Factors That Guide a Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decision

What Could Metastatic Breast Cancer Genetic Testing Advances Mean for You?


Transcript:

Katherine:                  

For patients who may be hesitant to speak out for themselves and advocate for their own care and treatment, what advice do you have?

Dr. Gralow:                

You have a whole team who’s behind you, and I’m the MD on the team, but I’ve got a nurse practitioner, and a nurse, and a scheduler, and a social worker, and a nutritionist, and a physical therapy team, and financial counselors. I’ve got a whole team who works with me. And so, a patient might be hesitant to speak up during the actual appointment with their physician. It’s a short amount of time. I would recommend come into it with written-down questions because things go fast. You don’t get a lot of time with your doctor.

Things go fast, but don’t come in with 25 questions, either. Pick your top few that you want to get taken care of this visit because if you come in with 25 or 30, you’re going to lose the answers to most of them. Maybe bring somebody with you who’s an advocate and a listener for you who could be taking notes, so you can process and you don’t have to write it down, or ask if you can record it. It’s really important if you’re newly diagnosed or maybe there’s a progression and you’re going on a new treatment. That’s okay too.

But, I would also say you have a whole team behind you, so sometimes, if you don’t have time or if you’re hesitant to speak up in your doctor’s visit, you can ask the nurse, or maybe you can ask the social worker for help, even. See if there’s support groups around.

Interestingly, we’ve got a peer-to-peer network where patients can request to talk to somebody else who’s matched to them by some tumor features, and their stage, and things like that. Maybe finding somebody else who’s gone through something similar, and somebody independent to talk to instead of relying on your family.

It can also be really helpful to talk to a therapist or a psychologist about your fears, and sometimes, you want to be strong for your family, strong for your children and all, but you need a safe space with somebody that you can just express your fears and your anger if that’s what’s going on, or your depression or anxiety to while you’re trying to hold a strong face for others in your family. So, I would encourage patients to look at who is the whole team and talk to the other members of the team as well, and sometimes, they can help advocate.

Also, find somebody who might be able to come to your appointments with you, somebody who will help you advocate or remind you – “Didn’t you want to ask this question?” – or be another set of ears that you can process it with afterwards.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Gralow, we’ve covered a lot of useful information today for patients. Thank you so much for joining us.

Dr. Gralow:                 

Thank you, Katherine.

Katherine:                  

And, thank you to all of our partners. To learn more about breast cancer and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell.

Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment and Research News

Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment and Research News from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

As metastatic breast cancer testing approaches continue to expand, new and promising treatments have emerged. Dr. Lisa Flaum shares information on recently approved treatment options and the role of genetic markers in accessing targeted therapy. 

Dr. Lisa Flaum is a Medical Oncologist at the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University. Learn more here.

See More From The Pro-Active Breast Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

 

Transcript:

Dr. Flaum:                  

There are a lot of new and promising treatments for metastatic breast cancer. So, the treatments in general and the novel treatments and studies really vary based on the subset of metastatic breast cancer. So, when we’re making our treatment decisions, a lot of it is defined by those markers. So, if someone has a tumor that is hormone receptor, estrogen and progesterone receptor positive, and HER2-negative, the mainstay of treatment is typically drugs that target estrogen and often partnering drugs that target estrogen with other more novel or newer treatments.

So, just in the last five plus years, there have been a number of new drugs and even new drug categories that we didn’t have previously. So, for that population of the estrogen receptor positive tumors, the biggest breakthrough over the last number of years has been a class of drugs called CDK4/6 inhibitors. So, that includes drugs like Ibrance, Kisqali, Verzenio. And they’ve emerged as a very important and effective and often a recommendation for our first-line treatment for these patients combined with anti-estrogen therapies that have vastly improved outcomes for patients. So, a much higher percentage of patients respond to these drugs, the duration of the responses has extended quite a bit. And importantly, patients tend to tolerate this drug class really, really well.

 So, for many patients starting out with that diagnosis, this type of drug class is going to be part of the discussion. Even in the last year, another drug category has emerged with approval of a new drug called alpelisib, which is something called at PI3 kinase inhibitor. So, again, back to defining the options based on the molecular profile of the tumor. So, this newer oral drug also partnered with anti-estrogen therapy, has been an important breakthrough for the treatment of patients who harbor this specific molecular abnormality. So, important to define whether that’s an option by some of these molecular testing.

There’s also newer drugs and studies of newer drugs that affect the estrogen receptor in different ways than some of our traditional medications.

And this is an ongoing area of significant research. So, that’s the estrogen receptor positive tumors.

For patients who have HER2-positive tumors, these are tumors that tend to be more aggressive, that tend to require more aggressive upfront treatment, which usually involves drugs that specifically target HER2. So, again, defining what’s driving the tumor and hopefully having drugs available that can target that specific abnormality. So, HER2 targeted drugs have evolved quite a bit over the last couple of decades.

Initially, we just had a drug called Herceptin and then a drug called Perjeta or pertuzumab was developed. Then more recently a drug called Kadcyla. And then even in just the last six to 10 months, two new drugs that target that HER2 protein. One of them is called tucatinib, the other one is called Enhertu. They’re not necessarily appropriate for the first line of treatment, but really sort of expands our toolbox in terms of how we treat these types of tumors. And these are developments that have occurred, for one of the drugs, just in the last six months, and the other within the last year. So, a lot of progress.

And then for the third subset of tumors, which are the triple-negative tumors, those are the ones that do not over-express estrogen, do not have estrogen or progesterone receptors, and don’t overexpressed HER2. This has been historically an area of unmet need. So, tumors where we can’t use anti-estrogen therapies, we can’t use HER2 targeted drugs. And so, the main stay has always been chemotherapy. And even for this subset, we’ve had progress.

So, one of the drug classes that’s been approved in the last couple years for triple-negative breast cancers is immunotherapy. So, immunotherapy has gotten a lot of press. It’s been really breakthrough treatment for a lot of different cancers, has lagged behind to some degree in breast cancer, but has become now one of the early treatment options for people with metastatic disease, specifically those that harbor a molecular marker, an immune marker, something called PD-L1. So, another example of the tumor’s biology dictating potentially one of the treatment options.

There have been other drugs that have been approved for triple-negative breast cancers in women who have BRCA mutation, so who have germline genetic predisposition to breast cancer. And that opens another array of treatment tools that have been approved in the last few years. And then more recently, just over the last six months, another drug that’s been approved for triple-negative breast cancer, which is a drug called sacituzumab, again, not first treatment, but something that defines potentially future lines of treatment. So, big picture, there has been a lot of progress that increasingly alters our treatment tools for patients and allows us to have sequential treatments that can be effective if their given treatment is no longer effective.

Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decisions: Which Path is Best for You?

Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decisions: Which Path is Best for You? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

 For each metastatic breast cancer patient, there are several variables to consider to access the best treatment path. Dr. Lisa Flaum explains key factors to consider, and discusses how the risks and benefits are weighed when making treatment decisions for an individual patient.

Dr. Lisa Flaum is a Medical Oncologist at the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University. Learn more here.

See More From The Pro-Active Breast Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

 

Transcript:

Dr. Flaum:                  

So, when we’re determining a treatment approach, there are a number of variables. So, to some degree, based on a patient’s individual characteristics, their age, their other health issues, may guide what treatments are available or indicated or even desirable from a patient’s standpoint. To some degree, the locations and extent of disease are important. So, if someone has cancer and that’s causing a particular symptom, with bony sites being a particular example, there may be a role for something targeted; Something like radiation, and in rare cases, surgery to target a specific symptomatic or worrisome spot of metastatic cancer.

In general, the mainstay of treatment for metastatic breast cancer is what we call systemic treatment or medical treatment, treatment that’s going to go everywhere and treat the cancer wherever it is. In some situations, we may be deciding between more or less aggressive treatment, and the locations and sites of disease may be important in determining that. If someone has extensive disease, for instance in a vital organ like the lung, the liver, the brain, we may start with something more versus less aggressive to try to get it better under control quickly. Whereas people with more limited metastatic disease may be able to start with something less aggressive.

And then beyond that, a lot of the decision-making is based on those molecular markers that I alluded to, which are defined by the hormone receptor status. So, whether the tumor expresses those estrogen and progesterone receptors, and whether the tumor over-expresses HER2. And then to a lesser degree, based on other markers that may be defined by additional tests.

So, every treatment discussion we have is a two-way street. So, our job is to present the data, present options, present recommendations. And often, we have an opinion on where we would fall and if there are a number of different options. But to me, it’s a collaborative discussion. And if there are options, it’s weighing what potential benefit do we get from a single option or from adding something to that particular option versus what are the downsides? And some of it is discussion about logistics. Do we do something IV versus oral? Is there a particular side effect that we’re hoping to avoid, such as hair loss? Which of course, we’re trying to avoid. Some treatments may have a higher likelihood of working, but a higher likelihood of causing hair loss. That may factor into our decision.

So, whether it’s the first decision point when we’re deciding on preliminary therapy or future decision points as we go through this journey, there is always a discussion about this is where we are, these are what our options are. Here’s how we’re going to weigh the pros and cons. And then it comes back to a collaborative decision about how we weigh the risks and rewards and where we’re going with an individual patient.

So, clinical trials are always part of at least the conversation, so they’re always a consideration at each step of our discussion. So, from a preliminary treatment standpoint, we’re always going to go through here are our standard options. Here’s, again, what we think is most appropriate. And if there’s a clinical trial that’s appropriate in that scenario, we’ll lay that out there as an option. So, a clinical trial is always worth discussing. It’s always worth asking that your doctor, “Is a clinical trial appropriate for me at this point?” But it’s not always the right recommendation.

So, there are a lot of scenarios, especially at the beginning of treatment for metastatic disease where we have so many options, and so many new and novel treatment options and drugs that have been approved fairly recently that have defined the standard of care, that the standard is going to be often what we recommend. And a clinical trial may be something that we would use if that treatment fails to work or at some future point down the line. And at other points in time, we have very good, appropriate clinical trials that could be indicated at any step along the way. So, it’s worth the discussion. Whether it’s the recommendation or not depends on the circumstances, it depends on the time. What we have today was very different than what we might’ve had available six months ago and six months from now. But clinical trials are out there, and if the location that a patient is going doesn’t have access to clinical trials, it’s always reasonable to ask too, “Should I be going somewhere else to see if a clinical trial is appropriate?”