Jump to content


Photo

Timely article on the current state of a search for a cure for CML


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 CallMeLucky

CallMeLucky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • LocationCT

Posted 10 August 2011 - 12:56 PM

For those who are interested, there has been recent discussion on this topic in some other threads, so I felt this was very timely.  It appears to be a well written "state of the union" (if you will) for where the research community is with regard to a potential cure for CML in the future.

The article does not imply a cure is imminent, or if there will ever be one.  I think we all know that this is not simple or it would have been figured out by now.  Nonetheless, the amount of research going on is encouraging and it does seem like there are people really trying to figure out how to cure this disease.  When I was first diagnosed I thought with TKI drugs there was no incentive to cure, TKI was good enough in the eyes of the doctors, I'm pleased to see that does not appear to be the case.

I do not present this to dilude anyone, it is meant to be informative and for some of us, inspirational.  It helps me to get through the day knowing that people are working on this and maybe someday I will be cured of this disease, and if not me, those who come after me.  The only thing I look to take away from this is that the future looks hopeful.....

http://www.current-o...le/view/652/713

cml biology for the clinician in 2011:  six impossible things to believe before breakfast on the way to cure


B. Leber, MDCM

ABSTRACT

Chronic myeloid leukemia (cml) is a model disease in oncology: it  is the first human cancer linked to a distinct chromosomal abnormality,  ultimately causing constitutive overactivity of a known oncogenic tyrosine  kinase that represents a drug target. The introduction of the tyrosine kinase  inhibitor imatinib into clinical practice has far exceeded expectations and  resurrected hope that the fundamental insights from the "war on cancer" can lead  to significant therapeutic advances. Nevertheless, the current perception among  clinicians is that imatinib and its newer more potent cousins offer superb  long-term disease control for most patients, but that cure without  transplantation has remained elusive. However, several important  laboratory-based observations over the last few years have changed those  perceptions. Several of those developments are discussed here, including direct  manipulation of the apoptosis pathway in cancer cells and prevention of disease  progression with the use of antioxidants. Intriguing results from a French study  indicate that, if disease progression is halted, a small but significant group  of patients may be able to stop imatinib therapy without disease recurrence. And  for patients whose disease, because of resistant stem cells, needs a more direct  attack than tyrosine kinase inhibitors alone, several approaches investigated in  laboratory and animal models seem promising, and some are ripe for clinical  testing, including inhibitors of Smoothened and 5-lipoxygenase, and suppression  of autophagy. Thus, there is realistic hope that true cure of cml, without transplantation, may be a  feasible goal in the near future.

KEYWORDS: Leukemia, stem cells, targeted therapy, tyrosine  kinase inhibitor, apoptosis

1.?INTRODUCTION

The improvement in clinical outcome for treated patients with  chronic myeloid leukemia (cml)  arguably represents the most important advance in clinical oncology in the last  decade—not only because of the magnitude of the difference (a more than 40%  increase in 5-year survival over that with previously available therapies) 1, but also because of  the means by which that increase occurred. In this sense, cml represents a model disease for  oncology, with the Philadelphia chromosome being the first chromosomal  translocation (and therefore genetic defect) identifiable in any human cancer 2; the first human  fusion-activated oncogene, by identification of Bcr-Abl as the translocation  product 3; the first  cancer treated with targeted small-molecule therapy (imatinib, beginning in  1999); and the first disease in which a gene-based test to monitor disease bulk  became a standard of clinical practice 1. Other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) that are more potent against  Bcr-Abl are now available or in development.

Furthermore, the apparent long-term persistence of disease for  many years despite excellent control represents the most obvious clinical  correlate of the currently dominant, but still controversial, model of cancer  stem cell biology, whose explanation for that persistence is the fact that the  targeted therapy hits the differentiated progeny of the cml stem cell, which itself is immune to  that therapy. Despite the many hidden biological and biochemical cellular  complexities, the conceptual simplicity of that model is pedagogically pleasing  and can easily be presented to non-oncology colleagues, medical students,  patients and their families, and the mass media. However, as the English  economist John Maynard Keynes noted, we are all prisoners of our implicit  metaphysics, and clinicians are prisoners of the models they carry in their  heads of the diseases that they treat.

The present article therefore examines several features of that  model and points out where the current understanding of the cell biology and  biochemistry of cml and Bcr-Abl  indicate that parts of the model may be oversimplified or even wrong. Each of  the new insights has implications for the prognosis and therapy of cml (and, by extension, other  malignancies). Therefore, in the spirit of the Queen of Hearts, who told Alice  that she needed to believe six impossible things before breakfast, many recently  investigated features of cml  biology are reviewed here with the aim of discovering where the science stands  in 2011. This brief review is not intended to be exhaustive or complete—but it  will focus on recent results that may have near-term clinical application  because they involve agents or approaches that are currently available or will  soon be undergoing clinical trial. Depending on the reader's degree of adherence  to the current model of cml  pathophysiology and treatment, the number of surprises presented may or may not  exceed the Queen's quota of six.

2.?SHUTTING DOWN KINASE ACTIVITY COMPLETELY: IS IT NECESSARY?

Initial characterization of the consequences for cell biology  of the BCR-ABL fusion oncogene led to the conceptually pleasing notion  that the Bcr-Abl product functioned as an autonomously active protein mimicking  constant growth-factor signalling to activate many downstream pathways,  including the well-characterized Ras pathway. Clinicians were thus presented  with an easily identifiable phenotype that used growth factors to drive up white  cell numbers. A constitutively active growth factor mimic as a downstream  mediator would cause cell numbers to rapidly and persistently increase.  Inhibiting that effect with tkis  such as imatinib would reverse the phenotype, but the disease would remain.

However, it is now clear that Bcr-Abl is a node for many  different signalling pathways in hematopoietic cells, and that those pathways  not only mediate proliferation, but also altered adherence to stroma and  inhibition of programmed cell death (apoptosis). It is this latter important  notion that has most recently come to the fore, with surprising results from Dr.  Neil Shah's lab, where the pharmacodynamic effects of long-acting imatinib were  compared with those of short-acting dasatinib 4. The original clinical dosing for all currently  active tkis in cml was based on the assumption that  continuous inhibition of Bcr-Abl was needed to prevent proliferation. It is now  clear that the relevant goal is probably not prevention of proliferation  (although it occurs as a consequence), but rather the induction of apoptosis.  Recent insights from biologic models of the process indicate that, after a  variable lag phase, apoptosis is triggered as an all-or-nothing process in a  single cell once a threshold is reached, and therefore the threshold does not  have to be "breached" continuously 5. This threshold breaching occurs when  antiapoptotic proteins of the Bcl-2 family (such as Bcl-2, Bcl-XL, or Mcl-1) are  prevented from binding to the proapoptotic Bcl-2 family members Bax or Bak,  which are then free to self-associate and form pores in the outer mitochondrial  membrane 6. This last  step is the one that makes the irreversible commitment to cell death.

The process that peels Bcl-2/Bcl-XL off Bax/Bak is the  activation of the third class of the Bcl-2 family of proteins (called BH3  proteins), which includes Bim, Bad, Bmf, tBid, and others. These BH3 proteins  act as sensors for various types of cell stress, such as growth factor  deprivation, dna damage, loss of  intercellular adherence, and many others 6. Thus the role of growth-factor stimulation—and  "fake" growth-factor stimulation (such as Bcr-Abl!)—that works through the Ras  and phosphoinositide-3 kinase pathways is to keep those proteins absent or  inactive. When kinase activity in the cml cell is switched off with inhibitors  such as imatinib or dasatinib, several BH3 proteins are released or activated 7, 8. Furthermore, a rapid  shut-off by Bcr-Abl of constitutive phosphorylation of Stat5, which is a key  transcriptional upregulator of Bcl-XL, also occurs 4. The combined effect is therefore to tip the  balance in favour of "freed" Bax to kill the cell, and Dr. Shah's work has  demonstrated that it is the magnitude of this downstream effect (resulting from  a deep, but potentially brief, kinase inhibition) that determines the cell's  fate 4. Because the  final decision to die is the result of a "titratable" balance between  antiapoptotic proteins such as Bcl-XL and proapoptotic activators such as Bim  and Bad (a balance adjusted by kinase inhibition), any direct tipping of the  balance in favour of the latter would enhance the effects of tkis.

That balance is the target of a newly developed class of drugs  designed to be BH3 mimetics, some of which, such as navitoclax 9 and obatoclax, are  already in phase i/ii clinical trials in lymphoid  malignancies 10.  Work with cml-like cell lines and  patient samples, including putative cml CD34+CD38- progenitor cells, have  demonstrated marked synergy of tkis and the BH3 mimetics in  vitro 11,  suggesting a promising future for such clinical combinations in markedly  enhancing the extent of leukemic cell kill.

3.?IS THE CML STEM CELL THAT DRIVES THE DISEASE ISOLATED, PERPETUAL, AND  UNASSAILABLE?

Despite the enormous clinical and conceptual strides made by  the introduction of tki therapy in  cml, the current clinical  consensus is that these drugs represent excellent ways to control, but not to  cure, the disease, because they do not affect the behaviour of the stem cell in  which the disease started and that represents an ongoing source of new leukemic  cells, leading to indefinite disease persistence and risk of progression despite  control. The next step is therefore to examine the nature and likelihood of this  "indefinite control" and then to ask whether cure, in the conventional sense of  the word, is ever possible without transplantation—that is, with the application  of tki therapy by itself or in  combination with other drugs that enhance the effect.

With respect to the nature of indefinite control, the  invaluable, well-characterized database from the pivotal iris (International Randomized  Interferon Versus STI-571) trial of patients with cml treated using tkis over prolonged periods of time has  indicated a diminishing likelihood of progression to blast crisis as time goes  on 1. The current  model that best explains these data is that progression actually happens in a  target population that is different from, and more mature than, the cml stem cell. In certain instances at  least, the cellular target for the transforming event during myeloid blast  crisis has been identified as a granulocyte-macrophage progenitor. Elegant work  by Catriona Jamieson has indicated that the mediator of this transformation is  the acquisition of unregulated beta-catenin activity in this specific cell type  that now makes it behave like a stem cell, with indefinite self-renewal capacity  and the decreased differentiation that gives it the myeloid blast phenotype 12. The most recent  work from her laboratory has identified a potential molecular mediator of this  upregulation, with aberrant splicing of GSK3B, a loss-of-function  mutation that prevents the physiologic degradation of beta-catenin by the  proteosome 13. The  ultimate cause of this abnormal splicing that ultimately leads to myeloid blast  crisis is still under investigation. It is thought that the transformation  itself is directly or indirectly a result of mutagenesis mediated by reactive  oxygen species (ros) that are a  consequence of overactive kinase activity caused by Bcr-Abl. Experiments at the  laboratory of Dr. Tomas Skorski showed that this ros-mediated mutagenesis is also  associated with deficient dna  repair that, together, yield the genomic instability of untreated cml 14. Skorski and others also showed that  inhibition of kinase activity by tkis inhibits ros generation, with the clinical  consequence that mutagenesis should decrease in frequency. In addition, as  treatment with tki progresses, it  is theoretically possible that the actual target population in which a  transforming mutation such as beta-catenin activation would lead to myeloid  blast crisis (granulocyte-macrophage progenitor for myeloid blast crisis, common  lymphoid progenitor for lymphoid blast crisis) decreases to the extent that the  chance of it occurring within the individual's lifetime would be vanishingly  small. Therefore, in a subpopulation of patients, true indefinite disease  control that would be functionally equivalent to cure is a possibility, at least  with ongoing therapy. However, as pleasing as that outcome may be for at least a  proportion of patients, evidence is now increasing that the controversial  proposition that tkis (plus or  minus other medications) may cure cml is now an achievable reality.

A powerful counter-argument to such optimism is found in a  mathematical model from the Harvard evolutionary dynamics group 15. The data used to  test the model reflected the decline in BCR-ABL transcripts precisely  measured in patients on the iris  trial. The model makes the assumption that the small stem-cell fraction slowly  and continuously expands during treatment, even as the more differentiated  progeny that are readily detectible die. Because their model fits the clinical  iris data, the assumption of stem  cell invulnerability to tkis was  taken to be correct "as demonstrated." However, another mathematical model  proposed by a group in Leipzig 16 fits the iris clinical data just as closely, but  makes other assumptions: namely, that the cml stem cell occupies a specific  kinetic niche in a competitive fashion and that the prevention of the expansion  of this stem cell pool by tkis  will not permit it to continue to compete for that niche 16. As a clinical  consequence, this latter model predicts that provided a mutation-causing blast  crisis or resistance to tki does  not develop (as discussed earlier), the cml stem cell population will just  slowly peter out. When this model was proposed, it was looked at with great  skepticism in the clinical community; however, more recent data from a select  group of patients with well-controlled disease who have stopped their therapy  under close monitoring have given early indications that, for at least a  proportion of patients, disease eradication may be feasible. Several groups are  trying this approach, with a French group being the largest and having the  longest follow-up 17. Their trial, stim (the Stop Imatinib trial), has  allowed patients who, by the most sensitive molecular techniques, have shown no  detectible disease for a 2-year period to stop therapy in conjunction with  frequent monitoring. Interestingly, the Harvard and the German models both  predicted that any relapses would occur within a period of approximately 6  months. However, in approximately half the patients studied, it appears that the  disease has not recurred over time intervals varying between 6 and 24 months.  The risk of relapse seems to be slightly increased in patients who did not  receive interferon therapy before the imatinib, but the proportions were not  significantly different in these two subgroups, at least at early analysis,  indicating that, contrary to earlier preliminary reports from the same group,  prior interferon therapy is not required for a disease-free state to persist  off-therapy 18.  Longer-term follow-up on this intriguing trial is anxiously awaited.

4.?IF TKIs CANNOT CURE BY THEMSELVES, CAN WE OFFER THEM HELP?

If long-term inhibition of Bcr-Abl by effective tkis still does not cure the disease  (even if resistance is prevented and the direct downstream effects are enhanced  by BH3 mimetics), these drugs may nevertheless be the backbone of combination  therapy when added to agents that specifically target a cml stem cell that is potentially  resistant to tki alone. Over the  past few years, several intriguing reports in the literature have indicated a  differential susceptibility between normal stem cells and cml stem or precursor cells in animal  models or from patients.

On the one hand, tantalizing evidence from a murine cml transplant model suggests that the  cml stem cell may require a  physical niche that is different from that for normal stem cells and therefore  therapeutically exploitable. Richard Van Etten's group demonstrated both with  antibodies and with knockout mice that the cell adhesion molecule CD44A is  required for engraftment of a model cml, but not for engraftment of normal  bone marrow 18.  Given that anti-CD44 antibodies potentially capable of exploiting this  differential sensitivity are currently in preclinical development, that group's  discovery may represent an exciting new therapeutic avenue 19.

On the other hand, several groups have also identified  intrinsic cellular factors that are required for cml initiation or propagation and that  may also be differentially expressed or required in cml stem cells compared with normal stem  cells. One of the newest results involves one of the oldest drugs. A  high-profile publication has delineated a complex effect of interferon on normal  stem-cell proliferation: promotion of cell-cycle entry with short-term  administration that turns into prevention of cell cycling with chronic  administration 20.  That publication did not study cml  stem cells; nevertheless, despite uncertainty about the exact mechanism or  timing of administration, the independent activity of interferon against cml has prompted at least four national  trials in Europe to investigate the combination of interferon and imatinib in  newly diagnosed patients. Getting the right dosing schedule to avoid treatment  delays for toxicity has been a bit tricky, but the preliminary results seem to  indicate that in patients who can tolerate treatment, the response is deeper and  faster. These results have prompted newer trials looking at lower-dose  interferon to mop up the residual stem cells after an imatinib "induction," with  the hope that the sequence will eradicate cml stem cells 21.

There are also many indications that combinations of tkis with newer agents may lead to  significant advances in eliminating cml stem cells. Two separate groups have  demonstrated in murine models that Hedgehog signaling is required for the  maintenance and expansion of stem cells positive for Bcr-Abl 22, 23. Both of these  elegant experiments used knockout mice to demonstrate that the downstream  mediating target of Hedgehog, Smoothened (smo), is required for the development of  Bcr-Abl-induced cml. The smo knockout did not affect normal  hematopoiesis, and an exciting extension of this work by both labs indicates  that administration of the smo  inhibitor cyclopamine inhibited growth both in the murine models and in patient  samples from long-term in vitro cultures. Cyclopamine is too toxic to be  administered as a drug to patients, but several smo inhibitors are already advanced in  clinical development because of the interest in this pathway, which is critical  for other malignancies such as basal cell carcinoma and glioblastoma. The newer  drugs also show synergy with tkis  against cml progenitor cells from  in vitro patient cultures. Preliminary indications are that no major  safety concerns are connected with these agents, and so combination therapy with  tkis for selected groups of  patients may be feasible relatively soon.

Another potential intracellular target susceptible to drug  treatment has been revealed by the laboratory of Dr. Pandolfini 24. This group's  studies were motivated by the observation that cml patients had a worse prognosis with  higher expression of the nuclear factor pml, well known to hematologists in the  context of the pml rar-alpha  translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia (apl). Using patient samples and a mouse  model, these workers demonstrated that degradation of pml by arsenic trioxide retards the  self-renewal of cml stem cells.  Because arsenic trioxide is currently in clinical use for the treatment of apl, their finding may represent a  chance to add an easily testable agent to tki. However, particular attention would  have to be paid to toxicity of the combination, because both agents can prolong  the QT interval.

Both of the foregoing approaches use a tactic of finding  differentially expressed pathways in cml stem cells that are required for  their self-renewal; another tactic is to try to find something that enhances the  killing of tkis such that cml stem cells are included, as with the  use of BH3 mimetics already described. Exciting progress along those lines has  been made as well. Recent investigations have demonstrated that the autophagy  pathway, a current hot topic in cancer cell death, is activated as cells try to  salvage themselves from apoptosis. When both pathways are circumvented,  regulated necrosis occurs, with rapid cell death. This escape route appears to  be relevant in cml progenitor and  stem cells from patients, such that exposing them to imatinib caused them to  turn on the autophagy pathway and achieve at least some cell survival 25. In combination with  imatinib, inhibition of autophagy by chloroquine (a currently available drug)  resulted in significantly increased cell death even if primitive and progenitor  cells were otherwise resistant to imatinib because of BCR-ABL point  mutations 25! A  clinical trial using this combination of therapy in patients having a good but  incomplete preliminary response to imatinib alone is about to start in the  United Kingdom.

As a clear indication of the fact that one never knows under  which stone gold may be found, a recent report has indicated that, in a mouse  model, the enzyme 5-lipoxygenase, which is involved in leukotriene biosynthesis,  is a required pathway to maintain cml stem cells, but not necessarily  normal stem cells 26. A drug that specifically targets this enzyme  is currently used (and is well tolerated) in the treatment of asthma, and so  tests of a combination therapy directed at the cml stem cell and Bcr-Abl may be  feasible and practical.

Finally, the laboratory of Dr. Tessa Holyoake in Glasgow has  pioneered extensive investigations into potential agents that could directly  cause cell death (rather than prevent self-preventing self-renewal) in quiescent  cml stem cells. She identified a  compound previously investigated as a farnesyl transferase inhibitor (fti) as a novel therapeutic agent. The  experiments demonstrated direct induction of apoptosis in cml stem and progenitor cells from  patients, regardless of their responsiveness to imatinib; synergy when added to  imatinib; and relative lack of toxicity when tested on normal hematopoietic stem  cells 27.  Intriguingly, those effects do not require the fti activity, because a closely related  congener that is equally active as an fti lacks those effects, suggesting that  activity against some other target (which might still require fti as a partner) is doing the job 27, 28. Preliminary  evidence indicates that this new compound works by upregulation of protein  kinase C beta activity, leading to apoptosis, because inhibition of that  activity abrogated the effect of the new drug 28. Work on identifying the relevant target and  enhancing the unique property has been somewhat slowed because the drug's patent  has migrated from one pharmaceutical company to another, but hopes are high that  applications will be found not only against cml, but also against other cancer stem  cells.

5.?SUMMARY

The novel and exciting avenues being pursued in the attempt to  get at the cml stem cell are many,  if that cell cannot simply be exhausted by long-term ongoing and effective  Bcr-Abl inhibition. Although all the experiments so far have been based on in  vitro or mouse models (or both), the multiple points of attack give hope  that at least one will be effective, and that true cure of cml without an allogeneic  transplantation is a realistic hope within the next decade, if not sooner.

6.?CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES

BL is a member of the medical advisory boards and speakers'  bureaus for Novartis Canada and Bristol- Myers Squibb Canada.

7.?REFERENCES

1.?Hochhaus A, O'Brien SG, Guilhot  F, et al. Six-year follow-up of patients receiving imatinib for the  first-line treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia. Leukemia 2009;23:1054-61.
cross-ref  pubmed 

2.?Rudkin CT, Hungerford DA,  Nowell PC. dna contents of  chromosome Ph1 and chromosome 21 in chronic granulocytic leukemia.  Science 1964;144:1229-31.
cross-ref  pubmed 

3.?Teyssier JR, Bartram CR,  Deville J, Potron G, Pigeon F. c-abl Oncogene and chromosome 22 "bcr"  juxtaposition in chronic myelogenous leukemia. N Engl J Med 1985;312:1393-4.
cross-ref  pubmed 

4.?Shah NP, Kasap C, Weier C,  et al. Transient potent Bcr-Abl inhibition is sufficient to commit  chronic myeloid leukemia cells irreversibly to apoptosis. Cancer Cell 2008;14:485-93.
cross-ref  pubmed 

5.?Albeck JG, Burke JM, Aldridge  BB, Zhang M, Lauffenburger DA, Sorger PK. Quantitative analysis of pathways  controlling extrinsic apoptosis in single cells. Mol Cell 2008;30:11-25.
cross-ref  pubmed 

6.?Leber B, Lin J, Andrews DW.  Embedded together: the life and death consequences of interaction of the Bcl-2  family with membranes. Apoptosis 2007;12:897-911.
cross-ref  pubmed 

7.?Belloc F, Moreau-Gaudry F,  Uhalde M, et al. Imatinib and nilotinib induce apoptosis of chronic  myeloid leukemia cells through a Bim-dependant pathway modulated by cytokines.  Cancer Biol Ther 2007;6:912-19.
cross-ref  pubmed 

8.?Kuroda J, Puthalakath H, Cragg  MS, et al. Bim and Bad mediate imatinib-induced killing of Bcr/Abl+  leukemic cells, and resistance due to their loss is overcome by a BH3 mimetic.  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:14907-12.
cross-ref  pubmed 

9.?Tse C, Shoemaker AR, Adickes J,  et al. ABT-263: a potent and orally bioavailable Bcl-2 family inhibitor.  Cancer Res 2008;68:3421-8.
cross-ref  pubmed 

10.?Nguyen M, Marcellus RC,  Roulston A, et al. Small molecule obatoclax (GX15-070) antagonizes MCL-1  and overcomes MCL-1-mediated resistance apoptosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S  A 2007;104:19512-17.
cross-ref  pubmed  pmc 

11.?Belloc F, Airiau K,  Jeanneteau M, Mahon FX. ABT-737 cooperates in a strong synergism with tyrosine  kinase inhibitors to induce apoptosis of chronic myeloid leukemia cells  [abstract 3246]. Blood 2009;114:22.

12.?Jamieson CH, Ailles LE, Dylla  SJ, et al. Granulocyte-macrophage progenitors as candidate leukemic stem  cells in blast-crisis cml. N  Engl J Med 2004;351:657-67.
cross-ref  pubmed 

13.?Abrahamsson AE, Geron I,  Gotlib J, et al. Glycogen synthase kinase 3beta missplicing contributes  to leukemia stem cell generation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009;106:3925-9.
cross-ref  pubmed  pmc 

14.?Koptyra M, Falinski R,  Nowicki MO, et al. Bcr/Abl kinase induces self-mutagenesis via reactive  oxygen species to encode imatinib resistance. Blood 2006;108:319-27.
cross-ref  pubmed 

15.?Michor F, Hughes TP, Iwasa Y,  et al. Dynamics of chronic myeloid leukaemia. Nature 2005;435:1267-70.
cross-ref  pubmed 

16.?Roeder I, Horn M, Glauche I,  Hochhaus A, Mueller MC, Loeffler M. Dynamic modeling of imatinib-treated chronic  myeloid leukemia: functional insights and clinical implications. Nat Med 2006;12:1181-4.
cross-ref  pubmed 

17.?Mahon FX, Réa D, Guilhot J,  et al. on behalf of the Intergroupe Français des Leucémies Myéloïdes  Chroniques. Discontinuation of imatinib in patients with chronic myeloid  leukaemia who have maintained complete molecular remission for at least 2 years:  the prospective, multicentre Stop Imatinib (stim) trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:1029-35.
cross-ref  pubmed 

18.?Rousselot P, Huguet F, Rea D,  et al. Imatinib mesylate discontinuation in patients with chronic  myelogenous leukemia in complete molecular remission for more than 2 years.  Blood 2007;109:58-60.
cross-ref 

19.?Krause DS, Lazarides K, von  Andrian UH, Van Etten RA. Requirement for CD44 in homing and engraftment of  BCR-ABL-expressing leukemic stem cells. Nat Med 2006;12:1175-80.
cross-ref  pubmed 

20.?Jin L, Hope KJ, Zhai Q,  Smadja-Joffe F, Dick JE. Targeting of CD44 eradicates human acute myeloid  leukemic stem cells. Nat Med 2006;12:1167-74.
cross-ref  pubmed 

21.?Essers MA, Offner S,  Blanco-Bose WE, et al. IFN? activates dormant haematopoietic stem cells  in vivo. Nature 2009;458:904-8.
cross-ref  pubmed 

22.?Dierks C, Beigi R, Guo GR,  et al. Expansion of Bcr-Abl-positive leukemic stem cells is dependent on  Hedgehog pathway activation. Cancer Cell 2008;14:238-49.
cross-ref  pubmed 

23.?Zhao C, Chen A, Jamieson CH,  et al. Hedgehog signalling is essential for maintenance of cancer stem  cells in myeloid leukaemia. Nature 2009;458:776-9.
cross-ref  pubmed 

24.?Ito K, Bernardi R, Morotti A,  et al.pml targeting  eradicates quiescent leukaemia-initiating cells. Nature 2008;453:1072-8.
cross-ref  pubmed 

25.?Bellodi C, Lidonnici MR,  Hamilton A, et al. Targeting autophagy potentiates tyrosine kinase  inhibitor-induced cell death in Philadelphia chromosome-positive cells,  including primary cml stem cells.  J Clin Invest 2009;119:1109-23.
cross-ref  pubmed  pmc 

26.?Chen Y, Hu Y, Zhang H, Peng  C, Li S. Loss of the ALOX5 gene impairs leukemia stem cells and prevents  chronic myeloid leukemia. Nat Genet 2009;41:783-92.
cross-ref  pubmed 

27.?Copland M, Pellicano F,  Richmond L, et al. BMS-214662 potently induces apoptosis of chronic  myeloid leukemia stem and progenitor cells and synergizes with tyrosine kinase  inhibitors. Blood 2008;111:2843-53.
cross-ref 

28.?Pellicano F, Copland M,  Jorgensen HG, Mountford J, Leber B, Holyoake TL. BMS-214662 induces  mitochondrial apoptosis in chronic myeloid leukemia (cml) stem/progenitor cells, including  CD34+38- cells, through activation of protein kinase C?. Blood 2009;114:4186-96.
cross-ref  pubmed 


Correspondence to: Brian Leber,  Department of Medicine, Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre, 711 Concession  Street, Room B3-147, Hamilton, Ontario L8V 1C3., E-mail: leberb@mcmaster.ca

(Return to Top)


Current Oncology, VOLUME 18, NUMBER 4, 2011

Copyright © 2011 Multimed Inc.
ISSN: 1198-0052 (Print) ISSN: 1718-7729  (Online)


Date  -  Lab  -  Scale  -  Drug  -  Dosage MG  - PCR
2010/Jul -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 1.2%
2010/Oct -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.25%
2010/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.367%
2011/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.0081%
2011/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2011/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.00084%
2011/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.004%
2012/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2013/Jan -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  50-60-70  - 0%
2013/Mar -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  60-70  - 0%
2013/Apr -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.036%
2013/May -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.046%
2013/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.0239%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0192%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0034%
2013/Oct -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0054%
2014/Jan -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0093%
2014/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.013%
2014/Apr -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0048%
2014/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2014/Nov -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.047%
2014/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0228%
2016/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Dec - Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  100 - 0%
 

 


#2 scuba

scuba

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts
  • LocationHouston, Texas

Posted 10 August 2011 - 01:17 PM

Very timely:

Elegant work  by Catriona Jamieson has indicated that the mediator of this transformation is  the acquisition of unregulated beta-catenin activity in this specific cell type  that now makes it behave like a stem cell, with indefinite self-renewal capacity  and the decreased differentiation that gives it the myeloid blast phenotype

AND b-Catenin is downregulated by .... yep...... applause please:

Curcumin:  http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20680030

It's not enough just to reduce tumor load - we need to be able to prevent blast crisis and get at the CML stem cells.

Right now cure is possible for long term patients like Trey and Susan who probably outlasted the stem cells.  Perhaps there are agents (Zileuton!?) that can get at the CML stem cells selectively?


Diagnosed 11 May 2011 (100% FiSH, 155% PCR)

with b2a2 BCR-ABL fusion transcript coding for the 210kDa BCR-ABL protein

 

Sprycel: 20 mg per day - taken at lights out with Quercetin and/or Magnesium Taurate

6-8 grams Curcumin C3 complex.

 

2015 PCR: < 0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale)

2016 PCR: < 0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale) 

March        2017 PCR:     0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale)

June          2017 PCR:     "undetected"

September 2017 PCR:     "undetected"


#3 John

John

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 02:48 PM

You just never know when a cure might pop up.  Look at this potential good news for our CLL brother and sisters...

http://www.msnbc.msn...ncer/?GT1=43001



#4 LivingWellWithCML

LivingWellWithCML

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • LocationAtlanta, GA

Posted 10 August 2011 - 05:46 PM

This CLL development just made the NBC Nightly News; of course, I'm still at work, but my Mom was frantically calling my mobile phone to tell me what she was seeing on TV.  This is how breakthrough treatments start!


Dan - Atlanta, GA

CML CP Diagnosed March 2011

Gleevec 400mg


#5 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 07:18 PM

What this means in this article is that is only for CLL people.?



#6 Trey

Trey

    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 10 August 2011 - 07:32 PM

John posted an interesting link about a proposed treatment for CLL leukemia (RCT also posted it in another thread):

http://www.msnbc.msn...ncer/?GT1=43001


To summarize what the article is discussing, it is discussing a type of leukemia vaccine. The  term "vaccine" can be confusing when used in this context, since a  vaccine is normally used to prevent a disease from occurring, such as a  flu vaccine. A leukemia vaccine would be given to someone who already  has the disease, to control or possibly even eliminate the disease. There are several different leukemia vaccines currently being tested.


In general terms, the leukemia vaccine trials are trying to stimulate the body's own immune system  T-cells to mount a battle against leukemic cells. Leukemic cells look mostly normal to the body's immune system, so they are generally left alone.  But  leukemic cells are actually different than normal cells in some  important ways, besides just being malignant. They have subtle variations that make them actually look slightly different, although not normally different enough to trigger attacks from the T-cells. So a vaccine would teach the immune system to recognize  that the leukemic cells are different, since they have greater or lesser amounts of certain substances on the cell surfaces. The theory is that if you can teach the body's T-cells to recognize the leukemic cells as abnormal, including the leukemic stem cells, the immune system  would see them as a target and kill them. And since the leukemic stem  cells are the source of all other leukemic cells in the body, killing  them would be like cutting the head off the snake. But even if it did not kill the stem cells, a vaccine could be used to control the disease much as Gleevec and Sprycel kill the leukemic offspring cells, but not  the stem cells that produce them. Remember that this is mostly theory  and not yet proven as actually possible, although there is some evidence  so far that the theory works to some degree on some people.


There  are various types of vaccine trials ongoing around the country. Some involve a peptide "marker" called PR1, others involve WT1, and some use a person's own leukemia cells that have been irradiated. So  theoretically, the leukemic cells are different enough that the body's immune system could be taught to recognize those differences and  respond. As previously discussed, leukemic cells look very much like regular cells, so they are not normally attacked by the immune system's T-cells. Each type of T-cell is specific to certain invaders. A polio vaccine teaches the body to make T-cells to fight anything that looks like a polio virus, and the effects last for a lifetime. That is the theory of a leukemia vaccine, except that it is given to someone who already has leukemia to control or eliminate it. So a leukemia vaccine could be a cure, not used for prevention.


Now, regarding the article cited above, this is discussing a very novel leukemia vaccine approach that turns patient T-cells into something called "chimeric antigen-receptor T cells" or CAR T-cells, which is a type of "designer T-cell" that has been bio-engineered and altered.  So this type of T-cell is not manufactured naturally by the body.  In trying to explain this in understandable terms I will need to make an imperfect analogy.  This generally means that some of the body's T-cells are changed so they grow new external "antenna" that are highly attracted to leukemic cells, and they also grow new "docking ports" that match the leukemic cells external "shapes" (remember this is an imperfect analogy). After "docking" with the leukemic cell, it is destroyed.  Sounds wonderful, and it could work in some cases.  But there are issues that need to be overcome.  These genetically engineered "antenna" and "docking ports" (wish I could do better, but let's stick with that) can sometimes also attract and kill non-leukemic cells that look like leukemic cell docking shapes.  So in teaching the T-cells to kill something new like leukemic cells (yippee) they have also been taught to kill good stuff like, oh, let's say organ cells (boooo hisssss double bovine sharts).  I am speaking in general terms here, not about this specific CLL issue in the article.  But if you read the NEJM article associated with the main article, this issue is pointed out as something that has happened previously when trying to use "chimeric antigen-receptor T cells".  So it takes some hard work to eliminate the toxicity of things like this so they only attack what you want them to attack.  But what else is new.  That is how progress is made. 


So far the study looks like it has merit. But there is much work to do.


A cure for CML will come along some day in the relatively near future.


Here are some links to general info on leukemia vaccine research:

http://www2.mdanders...apr/4-05-1.html
http://www.medicalne...hp?newsid=48990
http://www.cancer.go...s_CDR0000067600



#7 CallMeLucky

CallMeLucky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • LocationCT

Posted 10 August 2011 - 08:51 PM

I find the mechanism by which they are getting the modified cells into the body interesting.

"Using a modified, harmless version of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, they inserted a series of genes into the white blood cells."

The term harmless and HIV don't usually go hand in hand.  I may be stretching my knowledge here but it sounds like they are using the retrovirus capabilities of the HIV virus as a trojan horse to get the modified T-Cells into other cells to modify their DNA and populate the new "army" of assasin white blood cells. Maybe I've been watching too many sci-fi movies, but wasn't this the beginning of 'I Am Legend'?  Hopefully this will have a better ending.


Date  -  Lab  -  Scale  -  Drug  -  Dosage MG  - PCR
2010/Jul -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 1.2%
2010/Oct -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.25%
2010/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.367%
2011/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.0081%
2011/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2011/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.00084%
2011/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.004%
2012/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2013/Jan -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  50-60-70  - 0%
2013/Mar -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  60-70  - 0%
2013/Apr -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.036%
2013/May -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.046%
2013/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.0239%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0192%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0034%
2013/Oct -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0054%
2014/Jan -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0093%
2014/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.013%
2014/Apr -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0048%
2014/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2014/Nov -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.047%
2014/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0228%
2016/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Dec - Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  100 - 0%
 

 


#8 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:06 PM

I went today to City of hope in Duarte California and they have this like a new treatment.

http://www.cityofhop...recurrence.aspx

Check the link I not really familiar with all this but sounds intereting.

Thank you



#9 lthouse612

lthouse612

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:06 PM

It's funny you mentioned the movie "I Am Legend" Lucky,... I myself was thinking "T-Virus" ... hmmm "Resident Evil".. lol ..



#10 Trey

Trey

    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:22 PM

Blimber,

The City of Hope study is related to drugs called histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDAC).  The theory is that these drugs might possibly be able to kill higher level leukemic cells, possibly originating leukemic stem cells.  Just one of the possibilities being researched. 



#11 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:33 PM

Thank you Trey, I have a local Dr. and he really don't know a lot about CML ofcourse you know more than him, but I am going to move there to City of Hope is like 10 minutes from my home. My platelets has been low 132 and they are up and down sometimes they are Ok, but it looks like he worry too much about the platelets, and I know for you in some of your articles that while on gleevec they are up and down, I have been on gleevec for 7 months and he still schedule me for every two weeks and is only for Comp Methabolic Panel and CBC w/Diff (hgb, hct,RBC,WBC,Plt, Diff) this is every two weeks and he always said everything is ok excep your platelets. This has been for 7 months I don't know if he really is doin a good job.

Can you advice me on this Trey ?

Thank you



#12 Trey

Trey

    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:53 PM

Your platelets are fine.  Your Onc seems to monitor them closely, but that is better than not monitoring.  Hope he is doing FISH or PCR every 3 months.



#13 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 10:21 PM

He hasn't done any of those no FISH  and PCR I not even know what it is. Do you think is better to change to City of Hope there is a lot of specialist for CML. Another thing Trey what do you take while having the flu.



#14 Trey

Trey

    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:23 AM

If there has never been a FISH or PCR (you should ask your Onc) then that is very poor procedure.  If true, I would definitiely find another Onc.  City of Hope has a good reputation overall.

FISH/PCR info:

http://community.lls.org/docs/DOC-1273



#15 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:28 AM

Thank you Trey and god bless you, you give all the time motivation here in this forum to keep fighting and honestly you know more thatn some doctors, by the way are you a Dr.? Thanks again Trey.



#16 John

John

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:41 AM

We can all answer for Trey on this one.

He is NOT and doctor...

He did, however, sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

But we all agree the Trey and Phil are as knowledgeable as any doctors that any of us have seen.

Really, think about it, how would you like to be the Onc for Trey or Phil???  The Oncs must get nervous when those guys come in instead of the other way around for the rest of us!

John



#17 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:56 AM

I wish he could be my Onc. honestly he knows more than the one I have right now. I never comment on this forum but I am always reading what Trey write so thanks Trey.

By the way I was diagnostic 7 months ago and been on gleevec for 7 months as well, no side effects yet, but 2 times I have a racing heart that I don't know what it is, the Cardiology did a EKG, ECHO, Stress Test, and the LDH blood test and everything was fine. I don't know if is only anxiety or something else, but is a feeling that something came from my stomach to my throat and thats when my heart start racing for 15 minutes or more, no other side effect while the heart is racing. I hope is not the Gleevect that is causing this.

Thank you all you guys that help in this forum.



#18 CallMeLucky

CallMeLucky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • LocationCT

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:01 AM

I had the same issue with Gleevec, went through all the cardio exams and they said everything was fine.  For the most part it has passed and I have not had it as often, once in a while I feel like it is there a little, but not as bad as it was a few months ago, which was also around that 6 mo mark that I was on the drug.  I would not worry about it too much and just be aware if it gets worse.


Date  -  Lab  -  Scale  -  Drug  -  Dosage MG  - PCR
2010/Jul -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 1.2%
2010/Oct -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.25%
2010/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.367%
2011/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.0081%
2011/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2011/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.00084%
2011/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Mar -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0.004%
2012/Jun -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Sep -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Gleevec  - 400 - 0%
2012/Dec -  MSKCC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2013/Jan -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  50-60-70  - 0%
2013/Mar -  Quest  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  60-70  - 0%
2013/Apr -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.036%
2013/May -  CUMC  -  Non-IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.046%
2013/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 50 - 0.0239%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0192%
2013/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0034%
2013/Oct -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0054%
2014/Jan -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 70 - 0.0093%
2014/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.013%
2014/Apr -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0048%
2014/Jul -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2014/Nov -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.047%
2014/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2015/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0.0228%
2016/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2016/Dec -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Mar -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Jun -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Sep -  Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  - 100 - 0%
2017/Dec - Genoptix  -  IS  -  Sprycel  -  100 - 0%
 

 


#19 Shalom

Shalom

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:11 AM

I am glad to heard that positive comment from you CallMeLucky, I hope this goes away I am really scare is like when is a eartquake after the earthquake you are all scare waiting for the aftershocks is really scary living like that but this last time that my heart start racing I was really calm and I did a couple of things to control it, somebody told me to cough, put water with ice in my face and it went away but it took minutes. What it could be that racing heart???????

Thanks to all



#20 scuba

scuba

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts
  • LocationHouston, Texas

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:31 AM

http://online.wsj.co...0215152596.html

News is coming out all over on the immune research out of Univ. of Penn on the "cure" for Leukemia.

Of course this is for CLL - but perhaps it applies to CML.

Now to get on my high horse (again).  The body (as discussed in this paper) is able apparently to recognize leukemic cells as different from normal cells and and then kill the leukemic cells using the T-cell response.  Since this is apparently true then I draw the conclusion that the only difference between us CMLers and the normal people is that we have lost this ability for some reason - and the researchers have found a way to get it back.

Which means:  t(9;22) happens in the normal population ALL OF THE TIIME without disease because the body can defend against it.  Translocations are normal.  They just never get detected because the body gets rid of it (or keeps it in check) naturally.  We get sick when that ability is lost.

This line of research - bless it - will lead to a cure.  Finally.

o.k. - start throwing stones


Diagnosed 11 May 2011 (100% FiSH, 155% PCR)

with b2a2 BCR-ABL fusion transcript coding for the 210kDa BCR-ABL protein

 

Sprycel: 20 mg per day - taken at lights out with Quercetin and/or Magnesium Taurate

6-8 grams Curcumin C3 complex.

 

2015 PCR: < 0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale)

2016 PCR: < 0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale) 

March        2017 PCR:     0.01% (M.D. Anderson scale)

June          2017 PCR:     "undetected"

September 2017 PCR:     "undetected"





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users