Shrinkage
- This topic has 22 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi Percy,
From your comments, I think we are thinking along similar lines. Anyway, let me try and answer your questions.
Q – What is the current plan?
A – The liver board at Stanford reviewed the scans and suggested we do another 3 cycles of gem/cis. We are going to do this. However, my thinking is that a linear approach to therapy (do one therapy until it fails, then try another) is not ideal. There are so many therapies out there that could be active against the cancer, that I think it makes sense to try as many as possible. Our plan is to add other therapies to the mix over the next 9 weeks. We have a consult set up with a dr. in the immunotherapy group at stanford. Hopefully that will identify a therapy that can be added with minimal toxicity.
Q – What about Radioembolization?
A – This is still a strong possibility for the future. Stanford specializes in this therapy, and the data does suggest it helps. However, I share your concern that the residual effects of the radiation are poorly understood. One of my concerns here is that I think they want to do the therapy to both lobes at once. My research suggests this is dangerous and not any more effective. They are going to have to explain that better before we do radioembolization.
Q – Heard back from Dr. Kato?
A – We sent the new scan to Dr. Kato to update his files. He has not reviewed our case yet. Given the timing of the scan, we thought it would be better to have him look at the latest scan before the consult. I talked with his assistant Sarah, and I think we should hear from Dr. Kato in the next week or so.
I am concerned that some forum members have had bad outcomes from Dr. Kato. However, I agree with you that given Dr. Kato is accepting cases that are so poor that they are rejected by other surgeons, a much poorer outcome profile is expected.
Is there any more concrete data on patient experiences with Dr Kato?
Anyway, thanks as always for the support and helpful comments.
Jason
Hi,
That is a very good news indeed. A 20% partial response to the regimen.
So what will be your next planning ?continue the current regimen until it no longer works;than change to other systemic regimen?; or I noticed you are interest in radioembolization as you had mentioned before,since you get treatment with Stanford,they may recommend it to you sometime in the future when it is appropriate to do so.but before you say yes, please know that radiation Tx may preclude the patient for the next available CLINICAL trials or Tx if you decide to go that route in the future.( check out the clinical trials list on this board for the exclusion of trial in each of the trial) ; I know the glass bead type of radioembo is still not approval by the FDA but the resins type does. Ask lot of questions before say yes to radioembo. Base on what I can understand it, the overall result is average for our members who have radioembo done. I really think that they need more studies to rule out the residual radiation effects on the sensitive organ like LIVER. Did Dr.
kato reply to you? And what did you think of him? Again, do research on the outcome of the patients that He treated to get an idea of whether you can accept such level of risk with Dr. Kato,because most of his patients were at the very advanced stage of the disease and therefore the outcomes of his treated patients should be less optimistic .
God bless.Brilliant news Jason!! Thanks for sharing that with us all, we never get tired of hearing about shrinkage!!! Fingers crossed for the rest of your wife’s chemo!
Best wishes to you both,
Gavin
- The forum ‘Good News / What’s Working’ is closed to new topics and replies.