Archive for the ‘Politics and Finance of Child Cancer research’ Category

UK Regulator Gives Takeda Bone Cancer Drug (Mifamurtide) Final Backing

By Sten Stovall

Published October 25, 2011

| Dow Jones Newswires

Published October 25, 2011 | Dow Jones Newswires

LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.’s (4502.TO) drug mifamurtide has secured final backing from the U.K.’s health-care cost-effectiveness regulator for use on the state-funded National Health Service in treating bone cancer in children and young people.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE, said more patients are effectively cured of osteosarcoma, the most common form of bone cancer, when taking mifamurtide along with the usual treatment of surgery and chemotherapy.

“For the small number of patients who benefit from mifamurtide, the health benefits continue over the rest of their lives, effectively being a cure,” NICE Chief Executive Andrew Dillon said in a statement.

In September, NICE reversed a previous position opposing use of mifamurtide, which has the brand name Mepact, after Takeda offered to reduce its price for supplying the medicine. Under a revised patient access scheme from the Japanese firm, mifamurtide’s incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was cut to GBP56,000 from GBP67,000. NICE Wednesday said it consequently considers the medicine a cost-effective use of NHS resources.

“Today’s recommendation of mifamurtide will help children and young people with this very painful and distressing disease,” Dillon added.

La tumor registry gets $794,000 pediatric grant

JANET McCONNAUGHEY, Associated Press
Published 02:55 p.m., Monday, October 3, 2011

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is giving the Louisiana Tumor Registry a three-year, $794,000 grant to develop a system to quickly collect and report children’s cancers.

Hospitals often take six months or more to report cancer cases because they want to include information about treatment, said Dr. Vivien Chen, director of the registry at LSU Health Sciences Center New Orleans.

She said the grant will let the registry work with pathology laboratories, which diagnose cancers, and get that information within a couple of months. Regional registry workers will go to hospitals in their areas each month to get more information, she said.

Chen said the tumor registry will collaborate with state pediatric organizations and with doctors and hospitals treating children with cancer. Key partners include Lafayette, Baton Rouge and Shreveport clinics affiliated with St. Jude Research Hospital, large out-of-state children’s hospitals, and the LSUHSC-New Orleans pediatric oncology program at Children’s Hospital in New Orleans, where about half of the new pediatric cases in Louisiana are diagnosed or treated.

LSUHSC’s registry will also link to birth records, since a baby’s birth weight and any other abnormalities noted on the birth certificate, and even the parents’ ages may be linked to cancer, she said.

“As we move on, we might explore some other information. Medicare might be another thing we might link on,” she said.

This grant is the second awarded to the tumor registry since December and brings its federal support to about $3.5 million a year, according to LSU.

Moffitt Cancer Center and Columbia Restaurant group team up for ‘Dining for Life’ Oct. 1 – Nov. 6, 2011

Comments Off
Posted 28 Sep 2011 — by James Street
Category Foundations, Osteosarcoma, Politics and Finance of Child Cancer research

Add one part research, one part education, mix in community support and you’ve got a recipe to fight cancer!

September 27, 2011 / YBOR CITY, Fla

Moffitt Cancer Center and Columbia Restaurant Group will kick off “Dining for Life,”a partnership to raise money and awareness in the fight against cancer.  The “Dining for Life” campaign will run from October 1 – November 6 in Columbia’s seven locations: Tampa’s Historic Ybor City; St. Armand’s Circle in Sarasota; the historic district of St. Augustine; The Pier in St. Petersburg;  Sand Key in Clearwater Beach; Celebration; and the Columbia Café on the Riverwalk at the Tampa Bay History Center.

Richard Gonzmart, fourth generation family member and president of the Columbia Restaurant Group, created the “Dining for Life” promotion to raise awareness for adolescent and young adult (AYA) osteosarcoma cancer, to help Moffitt find a cure, and to give hope to those fighting cancer.

  • Osteosarcoma is the second most common cancer in children.
  • More than half the number of osteosarcoma diagnoses in the U.S. are in children.

During the “Dining for Life” campaign, Columbia’s customers can donate any amount they wish in addition to their check.  Columbia and the Gonzmart family will match the donation, and donate more than $500,000 in the fight against AYA osteosarcoma.

Gonzmart was particularly inspired by 8-year-old Josalyn Kaldenberg, who is the first pediatric cancer patient in the United States to have her entire upper arm bone replaced with one made of chrome and titanium.  Last May, Moffitt Cancer Center surgeon Dr. Douglas Letson became the first American surgeon to remove an entire humerus in a child and insert an expandable prosthesis in its place.  Before her parents brought her to Moffitt, other doctors recommended amputating her arm.

Artificial limb replacement is not an uncommon solution for bone cancer patients; it’s been done in the United States for roughly 15 years. Also, most replacements involve tumors invading just 20 percent to 30 percent of the bone. In Josalyn’s case, Letson replaced the entire humerus, as well as the elbow and shoulder joints in Josalyn’s 48-pound body.

“AYA cancer patients are typically between the ages of 15-30, and don’t respond to the treatment traditionally used to fight sarcoma,” said Gonzmart.  “I want to focus on raising money for this area of cancer research because pharmaceutical companies believe there‘s a ‘low return on investment,’ and that it is not worth it for them financially to invest dollars even though lives are on the line.”

Columbia Restaurant Group and Moffitt established the campaign to demonstrate how we can bring an end to cancer by working together. “Dining for Life” will help researchers and physicians in their quest to eliminate cancer through education and outreach programs.

Gonzmart selected the month of October for the promotion for a reason. After hearing Josalyn’s story, he was so inspired by her courage that he decided to run the Marine Corps Marathon in Washington, D.C., on October 30.  Gonzmart has been a marathon runner for the last 20 years, but had decided not to run any more marathons since the Stockholm Marathon in 2007. He hopes to present Josalyn with a medal from his run in the Marine Corps Marathon.

The “Dining for Life” campaign ends on Sunday, Nov. 6.  Gonzmart extended the campaign from October to coincide with the anniversary weekend of his 10th annual “Richard’s Run for Life” 5K, taking place on Friday, Nov. 4at 7:00 p.m. in Ybor City’s Centennial Park with  100 percent of the proceeds benefiting the adolescent and young adult (AYA) initiative for sarcoma research at Moffitt Cancer Center.
For more information, see www.richardsrunforlife.org

For more information about the “Dining for Life” campaign, please visit www.InsideMoffitt.com/Giving.

About Moffitt Cancer Center
Located in Tampa, Florida, Moffitt Cancer Center is an NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center – a designation that recognizes Moffitt’s excellence in research and contributions to clinical trials, prevention and cancer control. Moffitt currently has 14 affiliates in Florida, one in Georgia, one in Pennsylvania and two in Puerto Rico. Additionally, Moffitt is a member of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, a prestigious alliance of the country’s leading cancer centers, and is listed in U.S. News & World Report as one of “America’s Best Hospitals” for cancer.  Moffitt marks a very important anniversary in 2011 – 25 years committed to one mission: to contribute to the prevention and cure of cancer.

About Columbia Restaurant
The Columbia Restaurant was founded in 1905 in Ybor City and is Florida’s Oldest Restaurant.  Additional locations include St. Armands Circle in Sarasota, the Historic District in St. Augustine, The Pier in Downtown St. Petersburg, Sand Key on Clearwater Beach, Central Florida’s town of Celebration and the Columbia Café on the Riverwalk in Tampa. All Columbia Restaurants are owned and operated by 4th and 5th generation members of the founding family. Please see www.columbiarestaurant.com for more information.

For more information, contact:
D. Shenell Reed
Moffitt Cancer Center Foundation
DShenell.Reed@MOFFITT.org
(813) 745-1413

Angela Geml
Columbia Restaurant
a.geml@columbiarestaurant.com
(813) 248-3000 ext. 17

Direct Link:  http://www.prnewschannel.com/2011/09/27/moffitt-cancer-center-and-columbia-restaurant-group-team-up-for-dining-for-life-oct-1-%e2%80%93-nov-6-2011/ SOURCE:  The Columbia Restaurant Group

This press release is distributed by PR NewsChannel. Your News. Everywhere

The Empowered Patient

units Non-members Members Members
1 Retail price
$15.00 each
Save 30%
$10.50 each

The Empowered Patient

by Elizabeth S. Cohen
paperback, 240 pp.

Item Catalog Number: 33825

How to get the right diagnosis, buy the cheapest drugs, beat your insurance company and get the best medical care, every time.

Navigating the labyrinth of the medical establishment can be extraordinarily difficult, especially in the current climate of health care uncertainty. Fortunately, CNN Senior Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen has written The Empowered Patient (Ballantine Books, 2010), a book that is a virtual GPS to help guide you through the byzantine maze.

Her goal is simple: to help you get the best care humanly possible should you unfortunately fall ill. In order to jar you into taking action and, as the book’s title says, become an Empowered Patient, she first lays out some startling facts.

Fact 1: Medical errors kill more people each year than AIDS, breast cancer, or car accidents

Fact 2: 99,000 Americans die each year from infections they acquire in the hospital

Fact 3: As many as 98,000 Americans die from medical mistakes in the hospital.

With chapter headers like “How to be a “Bad Patient,” “How to Avoid a Misdiagnosis,” “Don’t Fall for Medical Marketing,” and “Don’t Let a Hospital Kill You,” Cohen stakes out her claim early on that from the moment you enter the medical world, your head needs to be on a swivel. The surest way to do that is to stay constantly informed about what is happening around you. Simply accepting what a doctor is telling you is unacceptable.

The beauty of Cohen’s book is that she writes from experience in dealing with hospitals and from the perspective of being an expert. Yes, the facts, when you first hear them, are scary, but once you accept that these days, “medicine is more of an art than a science,” you are able to sit back and think with a clear head. And thinking with a clear head is paramount to getting what you want.

“Despite what Michael Moore says, the United States has some of the best care in the world,” Cohen writes in her introduction, “And my family and I have been grateful recipients of it on many occasions. But getting that excellent care takes know-how, and I want to share with you what I’ve learned through my reporting and my personal experiences with doctors.”

One such doctor, Sanjay Gupta, who recently appeared on the cover of Life Extension Magazine®, says that The Empowered Patient is “a book no household should be without”. And he’s right. From the starting point of getting the right diagnosis for an ailment, to how to buy the cheapest drugs, to how to beat your insurance company, The Empowered Patient is an invaluable resource.

Elizabeth Cohen is a senior medical correspondent for CNN and author of the popular “empowered patient” column on cnn.com. She received her master’s degree in public health from Boston University and her bachelor’s degree from Columbia University in New York. She lives in Atlanta, Georgia with her husband, Tal Cohen and their four daughters.

*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 

Cancer break-through has man hiking up peaks instead of pushing up daisies

2011-04-21 10:40:10

dead-summit-grayback-supp

Six months ago, John Murphy found out he had less than six months to live.

Undetected skin cancer had lodged in the 65-year-old retired lawyer’s hip, and the tumor was spreading cancer through his blood like dandelion fluff in the wind.

It was full-blown, stage IV melanoma. By the time Murphy saw his family doctor in October, the deadly slurry had planted tumors in both lungs. One was the size of a hockey puck.

“It was a death sentence,” Murphy said on a recent afternoon as he gasped for breath, his face gleaming with sweat.

Advanced melanoma is the worst kind of cancer. It spreads like kudzu to vital organs and has long resisted radiation, chemotherapy and every other treatment. Most patients die within nine painful months.

By November, Murphy, long been an avid hiker, was drained of energy, limping on two canes, short of breath and wincing from pain.

“I was not sure I would make it to see Christmas,” he said. “I started making up my bucket list.”

But as he told his story recently, Murphy wasn’t panting because he was fighting tumors in a hospital bed. He was panting because was hiking a steep, remote trail to one of his favorite mountain summits.

In the last three months, Murphy’s tumors have almost melted away. His pain is gone. And he is flush with renewed vigor.

“I feel incredible, like I have been given my life back and appreciate it for the first time,” he said as he trudged up the path.

Murphy has been granted what he calls a “secular miracle.” He is taking a new combination of experimental cancer drugs that leading cancer researchers describe as ground-breaking and revolutionary.

The treatment — a type of targeted drug therapy — involves no radiation, no surgery, no chemotherapy, and no harsh side effects. Patients  take a few pills per day.

The pills are packed with carefully crafted molecules designed to block certain cancer cells’ ability to divide by disrupting their mutated DNA. When the cells can’t divide, they die, and tumors start to shrink within weeks.

“It’s like you are removing the gas from the car so it can’t run,” said Dr. Bruce Chabner, clinical director of the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and  former director of cancer treatment at the National Cancer Institute. “In the past, we could only put roadblocks in its way, and it would always find a way around. … This is really game-changing.”

About 8,000 people die in the United States every year from melanoma. Murphy is one of about 200 patients nationwide participating in the clinical study of these new drugs.
The story of how the experimental drugs — called B-RAF inhibitors and MEK inhibitors — reached clinical trials stretches back almost 10 years and includes an estimated $1 billion in research. The story of how Murphy reached the trials stretches back even further.

A FAMILY CONNECTION

It starts in 1959 with Murphy’s older brother Martin.

“He is the real hero of my story,” said John Murphy. The family also includes well-known local developer Chuck Murphy.

Martin Murphy was always fascinated by medicine. In high school, he worked summers helping with autopsies at what is now St. Francis Health Center. During his junior and senior years, he would get up before dawn to take care of a gang of rats he was using to test if radioactive testosterone affected the creation of red blood cells.

“Marty was a sound sleeper but I wasn’t,” John Murphy said. “I can remember setting my alarm for four to get up so I could wake him up to take care of the rats.”

In 1959, the rat experiment won Martin Murphy first prize at the regional science fair, and then at the national science fair.

The front page of The Gazette from June 12, 1959 shows Martin Murphy being congratulated by President Dwight Eisenhower for his win.

“It was always about medicine for me, helping people,” Martin Murphy said when reached by phone recently at his home in North Carolina.

He earned a degree in experimental medicine from New York University and a handful of post doctorate degrees, all focused on cancer. Before long he was a leader in the field. He founded the Institute for Hipple Cancer Research Center in 1977 and cofounded the journal “Stem Cells” in 1981 before most people knew what a stem cell was. He also started the journal “The Oncologist.”

Today, he is respected and influential in the increasingly complex and intertwined worlds of drug developers and cancer researchers.

When John Murphy learned about the tumor in his hip, his brother was the first person he called. Martin was at a cancer congress in Italy when the phone rang at 2 a.m.

On the other end, his brother in Colorado Springs sounded drained of hope.

“John, cancer treatment today is not the same as it was when we were kids,” he said reassuringly. “It isn’t even the same as it was last year. Exciting things are happening.”
Martin Murphy started devising a strategy, plucked from his encyclopedic knowledge of the cancer world.

He got in touch with his close friend Bruce Chabner, who is also editor-in-chief of “The Oncologist.”

Chabner immediately brought up the experimental drug trial that had the potential for striking results.

If John Murphy had not had one of the leading cancer researchers as a brother, and had stayed in Colorado for treatment, he would likely have gotten chemotherapy, which might have extended his life a few months, but would have heaped on its own toxic side effects, including hair loss, nausea and fatigue.

“John Murphy was very lucky,” said Chabner, “Because Marty knew me and I knew about this very promising study.”

Within weeks, John Murphy was on his way to Boston.

But cancer patients should not think they can’t get the best care unless they have connections, Martin Murphy said.  Any cancer patient can do what he did for his brother.

“They just need to be committed. They need to work to find the very best care.”
PROMISING RESULTS

By the time John Murphy joined the experimental drug study in December 2010, work on targeted gene inhibitors had already been progressing for a decade, but they were just starting to prove their worth.

In 2002, a group of British scientists studying cancer tumors noticed that among the thousands of genetic mutations in cells, one showed up over and over:  a mutated gene called B-RAF.

“It’s one of the genes that drive cell growth,” said Dr. Donald Lawrence, Murphy’s oncologist at Mass General. “When B-RAF is mutated, it acts like a switch stuck in the ‘on’ position. Cells keep spitting and splitting out of control. What researchers began looking for is a molecule to get inside the cancer cell and shut the switch off.”

It was easier said than done. Trials of the first generation of B-RAF inhibitors started in 2004 but met with little success. The cancer continued to grow and the drugs interfered with some healthy cells as well, causing nasty side effects. All of the terminal melanoma patients taking the new drugs died.

In 2009, Lawrence began testing a more concentrated version of the drug made by the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline, and saw something surprising. At first, tumors in terminal melanoma patients with the B-RAF mutation would melt away.

“It is almost miraculously effective,” he said. “We saw tumors shrink in 80 percent of patients in six months with very few side effects. These people get their life back.”

But within a year almost every patient relapsed and died.

In 2010, Lawrence and the other doctors leading the GlaxoSmithKline studytried something new. They theorized that when cancer cells found the B-RAF gene blocked, some started using a molecular back door known as MEK to continue to multiply.

So the researchers devised a new drug trial that would give patients the B-RAF inhibitor that had proved so effective in the short term, as well as a MEK inhibitor to block the back door.

That is the study Murphy joined a few months ago.

“It is really a new paradigm. For the first time science is starting to understand different cancers at a molecular level and devising individual treatments tailored to them,”  Lawrence said.

But will it work? Or, with the metaphorical front and back doors blocked, will melanoma find a molecular window?

“That’s what we don’t know,” said Martin Murphy. “How durable is it? How long will it last?”

ALMOST BACK TO NORMAL

John Murphy started the drug trial on Dec. 27, 2010. Each day he takes five pills: Four vitamin-sized red ones for the B-RAF and one little white one for the MEK.

“I couldn’t believe that was it,” he said. “If this study works, people will be able to fight stage IV cancer by going to the pharmacy.”

Within weeks, he noticed his strength returning. He put away one cane. Then the other.

Then he was able to snowblow his driveway. By the end of January he was snowblowing his neighbors’ driveways.

He even felt strong enough to start hiking in the mountains with friends again.

He stated calling the pills “Smith and Wesson.” They were his secret weapon.

Feb. 24 he went in for a CT scan and found that all but the biggest of his tumors had disappeared and the remaining one — once the size of a hockey puck — was smaller than a pea. Another scan last week, showed it is now just a speck.

“I’m almost totally back to normal. I do 45 minutes on the StairMaster several times a week,” he said recently.

He knows he could relapse, but the drugs have already given him months of healthy living he never though he would have.

B-RAF inhibitors could be approved by the Food and Drug Administration for general use in the next year, said Chabner, the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center clinical director.

They are not a cure for cancer, Martin Murphy said, just a treatment that patients have to continue indefinitely. And they do not work on all cancers, just those caused by a B-RAF mutation. But they are a major advance.

“I don’t know if there is any bigger deal,” Martin Murphy said. “Right now the expectations of these drugs is the most important thing happening in cancer medicine worldwide.”

His brother is just happy to have his life back.

“When you thought it was all lost and you suddenly get it back, everything changes,” John Murphy said. “I hug people a lot more now.”

Contact the writer: 636-0223

Influx of funding impels collaborative explorations to study sarcoma as behavior model for other cancers

Oncology NEWS International. Vol. 19 No. 9

News & Analysis
By FRAN LOWRY | September 1, 2010
This rare cancer finally sheds its FDA designation as an orphan disease.

 

FDG-PET/CT fusion image of the legs
FDG-PET/CT fusion image of the legs, frontal section, showing liposarcoma of the left thigh. Liposarcoma is a malignant tumor that develops in deep soft fatty tissue.

Sarcoma accounts for just 1% of all cancers in the U.S. annually, so its designation by the FDA as an orphan disease is not surprising. Despite its rarity, these bone tumors have emerged as an important model for how more common cancers behave. In fact, drugs in development for sarcoma treatment are proving to be effective in ovarian, lung, and breast cancer. This orphan disease is finding a home in the cancer care continuum and experts told Oncology News International that there has never been a better time to be engaged in sarcoma research.

“The U.S. government has identified sarcoma as one of the diseases they are going to help, over the next several years, to find ways to treat and ways, hopefully, to cure,” said Gary K. Schwartz, MD, chief of the Melanoma & Sarcoma Service at Memorial Sloan- Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in New York. Dr. Schwartz’s lab is currently working with grants from NCI and the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to learn more about the molecular pathways of the disease.

“I would say there is a great deal of hope,” said Lee Cranmer, MD, PhD. “Sarcomas are very tough nuts to crack, but we are making progress. Future generations—and I don’t mean many generations, I mean the next generation—will not have the same burden of this problem as we experience now.” Dr. Cranmer is an associate professor of clinical medicine at the Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona in Tucson.

GARY K. SCHWARTZ, MD
GARY K. SCHWARTZ, MD

Oncology News International spoke with sarcoma specialists for an update on the current treatment options and what the future holds.

Genetic blueprint

Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery have been the primary treatment modes for sarcoma. Researchers have begun to look at the molecular biology of the different sarcoma subtypes in order to pin down targets that can be inhibited with drugs.

“That’s the tack we’ve been taking for the last two or three years, to really dissect the sarcoma cell and begin to see the proteins and the pathways that are critical for those sarcoma cells to survive and find ways to block or interrupt those pathways with new small-molecule, targeted agents,” said Dr. Schwartz, who is also a professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York.

LEE CRANMER, MD, PHD
LEE CRANMER, MD, PHD

With the NCI and ARRA funding, Dr. Schwartz and colleagues at the MSKCC Laboratory of New Drug Development are conducting studies on an antibody that blocks the insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-1R) that is commonly found in sarcoma cells. The antibody is being studied in combination with the mTOR inhibitor temserolimus (Torisel). “Other studies are being planned that will target the sonic hedgehog pathway and the notch pathway in patients with metastatic sarcoma,” Dr. Schwartz said.

Researchers have begun to do gene arrays and DNA examinations to discover the actual genes unique to each sarcoma subtype. “We have to look at each subtype, and then at the specific genes, and then discover if there is a drug that can block those genes—and do this for every specific sarcoma subtype. That’s the next step in refining sarcoma research, and those studies are just about to begin,” Dr. Schwartz added.

JONATHAN TRENT, MD
JONATHAN TRENT, MD

About half of sarcomas are caused by specific, well-defined genetic events, such as a mutation or deletion or amplification, explained Jonathan Trent, MD, an associate professor at Houston’s M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. “We are finding now that each different sarcoma is caused by a specific genetic event, and treatment of those specific tumors has to be individualized to the specific histology. This highlights the importance of getting a sarcoma patient’s genetic blueprint.”

“If there is one gene that is causing this cancer, surely we can develop therapies to target these genes. We can develop a therapy to target the gene that causes the cancer and then we stand a good chance of helping a lot of people. That is a very attractive prospect to me,” he added.

Targeted agents

The oncogene KIT or CD117 is responsible for gastrointestinal stromal tumors and the targeted agent that has proven most effective in treating this subtype is imatinib(Drug information on imatinib) (Gleevec). The drug has been useful in dermatofibrosarcoma, which has an amplification of the PDGF gene. When the latter is inhibited with imatinib, it becomes possible to shrink the tumor and convert patients from inoperable to operable.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor inhibitors such as sunitinib (Sutent) and sorafenib(Drug information on sorafenib) (Nexavar) have emerged as therapies for angiosarcoma and hemangioendothelioma. Response rates in patients with hemangiopericytoma who are resistant to standard chemotherapy are in the 70% range, Dr. Trent said.

Danosumab (Prolia), a RANK ligand inhibitor, is turning out to be active in patients with giant cell tumor of bone while the IGF-1R inhibitor R1507 shows promise in Ewing’s sarcoma that has been heavily pretreated with chemotherapy.

“I think that sarcoma, although it is a rare entity, is one of the better, if not the best, model systems to study new targeted therapies because the 60 or so different types of sarcomas are caused by specific genetic events. Targeting those pathways has been proven to help patients with a number of different sarcomas,” he added.

Collaborating to overcome challenges

TABLE

Sarcoma subtypes

Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) Angiosarcoma
Chondrosarcoma Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberens
Desmoid sarcoma Ewing’s sarcoma
Fibrosarcoma Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST)
Nonuterine leiomyosarcoma Uterine leiomyosarcoma
Liposarcoma Malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH)
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) Osteosarcoma
Rhabdomyosarcoma Synovial sarcoma
Source: Sarcoma Foundation of America

Because of sarcoma’s rarity and multiple subtypes (see Table), it is difficult for any single institution to mount clinical trials. As a result, sarcoma researchers are joining forces both in the U.S. and internationally, most notably through the Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC), the World Sarcoma Network, and the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS).

ROBERT MAKI, MD, PHD
ROBERT MAKI, MD, PHD

“SARC is a stand-alone group that coordinates centers to perform clinical trials together,” said Robert Maki, MD, PhD, section chief for adult sarcoma oncology in the department of medicine at MSKCC. “It’s led by Denise Reinke, MS, NP, and a board of scientific directors, and is an excellent example of a successful collaborative sarcoma clinical trials effort” (see Related Reading).

The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has had a longstanding interest in sarcoma through its Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Other international groups that have been active in sarcoma research include the French Sarcoma Group, the Italian Sarcoma Group, the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group, the Australasian Sarcoma Group, and the Spanish Sarcoma Group (GEIS).

“More and more we are trying to coordinate these groups to perform clinical trials worldwide, which is the only way we will be able to move the field forward efficiently,” Dr. Maki said. These collaborative groups are filling a gap left by bigger collaborative cancer trial groups, he added.

“Sarcoma subgroups have been cut out of the research budgets of the cooperative trials groups. The RTOG is presently the only cooperative group that still has a dedicated sarcoma committee,” he said.

History of SARC

The Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration was formed in 2003 by sarcoma specialists at five major medical facilities to address the lack of attention paid to the disease by NCI and other research organizations. SARC currently has a dozen clinical trials in various sarcoma subtypes. SARC’s goal is to “further scientific knowledge regarding diagnosis and treatment of sarcoma, collaborate with experts to design cost-effective and efficiently executed clinical trials, and provide up-to-date information to physicians, patients, and caregivers.”Visit www.sarctrials.org/home for more information.

An example of international collaboration is the phase II SARC study that found that R1507 monotherapy was active in patients with metastatic lesions in the Ewing’s sarcoma family of tumors (American Society of Clinical Oncology [ASCO] 2010 abstract 10000).

Another pivotal player in sarcoma research is the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. CTEP contracts with the pharmaceutical industry to examine specific drugs, which allows single studies involving drugs from different companies to be done.

“CTEP makes it possible to combine drugs in research studies, which is exceptionally difficult to do as an investigator-initiated study or as an industrial study because it is hard to get two industrial concerns together on one study,” Dr. Maki explained. “CTEP is able to put out requests for proposals for research studies, and researchers can submit applications to test a given combination.”

Dr. Maki’s trial on the IGF-1R inhibitor and the mTOR inhibitor combination is a CTEP endeavor. “Kudos to CTEP for allowing us to put together this study,” he said. “They have access to different companies’ drugs and it does allow us to put them together for the first time. Everybody, including pharma, recognizes that this is a win-win situation.”

Improving current therapy

Targeted agents are no doubt the future, but efforts are still ongoing to improve standard chemotherapy regimens for sarcoma. A study that generated buzz in the sarcoma community was the PICASSO trial, a phase II randomized, controlled trial of palifosfamide plus doxorubicin(Drug information on doxorubicin) vs doxorubicin alone in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (ASCO 2010 abstract 10004).

GEORGE DEMETRI, MD

“Sarcomas are telling us just how darn complicated all cancers are going to be. That’s the message of sarcomas. They really are the canary in the coal mine.”
— GEORGE DEMETRI, MD

Palifosfamide (ZIO-210) is a stabilized metabolite of ifosfamide(Drug information on ifosfamide) (Ifex), but without that drug’s toxicity. “Ifosfamide has been used in sarcomas since the 1980s,” explained George Demetri, MD, director of the Ludwig Center and the Sarcoma Center at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston.

“It is a pro drug that the body has to metabolize to the active form. Different people metabolize it differently, so there is not a lot of reliability. Also, one of the metabolites of ifosfamide is toxic itself and causes bladder bleeding. Palifosfamide does not have this toxic metabolite; that is a huge advantage.”

In PICASSO, combining palifosfamide with doxorubicin extended progression-free survival by a median of 3.4 months in patients with soft tissue sarcomas compared with doxorubicin alone. “In PICASSO, there was a nice signal that adding palifosfamide to regular old doxorubicin improved disease control,” Dr. Demetri said. A phase III version of PICASSO has been launched with Dr. Maki and Dr. Demetri serving on the trial’s board of directors.

Chemotherapy still has tremendous value in sarcoma, Dr. Demetri stressed. “I actually think that palifosfamide highlights how research is trying to use modern chemistry to make chemotherapy better,” he said.

“I’m a huge fan of molecular targeted agents, but as cancers get more mutations and become more complicated, we are seeing a trend back to chemotherapy, because it actually works in the most mutated cancers. So maybe it’s not a cure, but I would be hesitant to throw the baby away with the bathwater. If we can use the most modern chemistry to make chemotherapy safer, more tolerable, and maybe even more effective, I wouldn’t be too negative,” he added (see Related Reading).

An orphan no more

Sarcomas represent a true picture of the complexity of all cancers, Dr. Demetri said. “Sarcomas are telling us just how darn complicated all cancers are going to be. That’s the message of sarcomas. They really are the canary in the coal mine,” he said.

Of course, this newfound enthusiasm for sarcoma research has been welcomed by the oncologists who take care of these patients. “Sarcoma may have been a neglected disease 10 years ago, but there is an awful lot of research interest in sarcomas right now. The Internet and patient communities banding together have made it possible to do some of the very best, most cutting-edge research in sarcomas,” he said. “The orphan status per the FDA definition is never going to go away, but the neglected orphan status is changing.”

Sarcoma: A patient’s perspective

BY NEIL OSTERWEIL

As a medical journalist I often use the passive voice: “The regimen was well tolerated.” The reader has no way of knowing from that sentence just who is doing the tolerating, but I had the chance to find out last year when I was diagnosed with a stage III synovial sarcoma of the femur.

I live in greater Boston and have my pick of sarcoma centers, a privilege not afforded to most patients. I was also lucky to have a tumor that is sensitive to chemotherapy. After nearly a year of treatment—44 Gy of intensity-modulated radiation interleaved with three cycles of inpatient neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and three cycles of inpatient adjuvant chemotherapy, interrupted by febrile neutropenia, wound-healing problems, the red man syndrome, and infection—I am on follow-up care and hope to have put the worst behind me.

As an educated healthcare consumer, I wonder what others do when confronted with a diagnosis like mine. I attended a sarcoma oral abstract session at ASCO 2010 and heard several presenters dismiss the regimen I underwent, the MAID protocol, as too toxic. True, the anthracycline-based regimen carries risks of long-term cardiotoxicity and near-term risks such as, well, death, but isn’t that the point? It’s an aggressive regimen for a tumor with a high propensity for recurrence and metastasis, and despite the risks I wanted my medical team to throw everything they had at it.

I learned that some sarcoma centers use chemotherapy rarely, while others use fewer drugs for only a few cycles, because they’re not convinced that any of it does any good. Hard data are hard to come by in sarcoma, but patients deserve the chance to choose the higher risk, higher reward option for themselves.

It’s my tumor. Show me the data. Let me decide.


Mr. Osterweil is an award-winning freelance writer with more than 26 years of experience covering medicine and science. He can be reached at www.osterweilbaron.com.

Cancer research takes center stage at MIT symposium

Thursday, March 17, 2011

By Lori Valigra, Mass High Tech correspondent

 

Cooperative nanoparticles, vaccines, and targeted “cancer bomb” therapies were among the research discussed at a cancer symposium at MIT Wednesday that focused on conquering cancer by converging science and engineering.

“There are still major things we don’t know about cancer,” said Phillip Sharp, an institute professor in the new David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT, which opened in 2010 and was dedicated on March 4 of this year.

The new Koch institute, according to MIT President Susan Hockfield, has 27 faculty labs with 100 undergraduate, 150 graduate, and 150 postdoc students. The cancer symposium was the second of six such events celebrating MIT’s 150th anniversary.

Sharp and other speakers talked about the difficulty of tackling cancer, which can spread rapidly — such metastasis are responsible for about 90 percent of cancer deaths — and that can become resistant to treatment, which is difficult to get into the cancer cells in the first place.

“Worldwide, about two-thirds of cancer deaths are preventable, theoretically, and a significant percentage are manageable or curable,” said Nancy Hopkins, biology professor at MIT and also with the Koch center. She pointed to vaccines that are coming along and could prevent upwards of 90 percent of cervical cancer and eliminate the need for pap smears. Cancer research has come a long way since President Richard Nixon declared the war on cancer in 1971, she said. “We are chipping away at it effectively,” said Hopkins, herself a cancer survivor, but “the discoveries we’ve made need to be exploited better.” This can be done by bringing engineers into biological research projects.

Douglas Lauffenberger, head of MIT’s biological engineering department, said advances can be made with a new type of engineering — biological engineering — that thinks about biology as molecular circuits and systems. He pointed to Cambridge-based Merrimack Pharmaceuticals Inc., where he sits on the scientific advisory board, as a “poster child” for the fusion of engineering and biology. The company’s lead product, MM-121, is currently in Phase 1 clinical trials for treating oncology patients.

“Biology is a different type of science than physics or chemistry, which have laws and known variables. The variables aren’t known in biology, so it’s hard to develop a preventative engineering model. It’s a brand new type of thinking,” Lauffenberger said.

One engineer with a long track record in biological research is Robert Langer, Koch member and professor of chemical and biological engineering at MIT. Langer began his work in the lab of Judah Folkman, noted for his research on stopping angiogenesis, the formation of new blood vessels that spreads cancer.

“Folkman thought if you could stop angiogenesis, maybe you could stop a tumor,” said Langer. They initially worked with cartilage they got from a meat packer in South Boston but later changed to the rabbit eye and isolated the first angiogenesis inhibitor in 1976, and described it in a paper in Science magazine that year. It wasn’t till about 20 years later that the first angiogenesis inhibitor drug was approved — Avastin, for colorectal cancer, in 2004, he said.

Langer subsequently formed his own lab, from which dozens of startup companies have sprung, including Cambridge-based Bind Biosciences Inc., started in 2007 with backing from Flagship Ventures, Polaris Venture Partners, ARCH Venture Partners, NanoDimension and DHK Investment. The company targets cancer drugs to tumor cells to improve the efficacy of chemotherapy and reduce its side effects. It uses engineered nanoparticles to deliver drugs to specific cancer cells. Langer said the company started its first clinical trials this January of its lead compound BIND-014.

Another approach uses two cooperative nanoparticles that communicate, one binding to the tumor and the other carrying a payload of therapy in an effort to deliver more drug to molecular “zip codes” or peptide sequences, said Sangeeta Bhatia, MIT professor and director of the Laboratory for Multiscale Regenerative Technologies.

“Most cancer drugs are poisons with side effects, and less than 1 percent of them are absorbed,” she said. “So we can use nanotechnology to decrease the side effects and get more drug into the tumor.”

Asked if there has been a game-changing technology, Langer related a story told by David Koch at the opening of his institute. Koch said that as a young man he went to the Kentucky Derby and wanted to win, said Langer, so he bet on every horse to win. “I think that’s a good approach to cancer,” said Langer.

New Study Details Increasing Cost Of Cancer In Texas And Economic Impact Of Texas’ Cancer Prevention And Research Institute

24 Feb 2011

A new report recently released by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) confirms the devastating effects of the cost of cancer in the state of Texas. Annual direct medical costs and the costs of morbidity and mortality losses associated with cancer in Texas now total $25.3 billion, a 15.8% increase since 2007. In contrast to this spiraling increase, the report also estimates that CPRIT-funded programs in cancer research and prevention in the state have a total economic impact in Texas of $852.3 million in output.

“None of us are surprised by these findings. Unfortunately, cancer affects the lives of more and more Texans each year. This report confirms that the state of Texas is attacking this unrelenting disease head-on – by funding research and prevention efforts to eradicate cancer in our lifetime,” stated Jimmy Mansour, chairman of CPRIT’s governing board.

The report, prepared by The Perryman Group, also points out that funds expended for CPRIT operations and programs are estimated to generate $265.6 million in annual state revenue, as well as $169.7 million in annual revenue to various local governments. These gains, though focused specifically on business activity through CPRIT investments, might be just the beginning. Research could lead to better prevention, diagnoses and treatments that lessen the cost of cancer and yield spinoff companies.

“Once again, Texas leads the country in its commitment to defeating cancer,” said CPRIT Executive Director Bill Gimson. “We are saving lives, preventing cancer cases and bring a return back to our state.”

Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment in 2007 establishing the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) and dedicating up to $3 billion to invest in groundbreaking cancer research and prevention programs and services in Texas. CPRIT’s mission is to expedite innovation and commercialization in the area of cancer research and to enhance access to evidence-based prevention programs and services throughout the state. CPRIT accepts applications and awards grants for a wide variety of cancer-related research and for the delivery of cancer prevention programs and services by public and private entities located in Texas.

Source:
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)


Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/217328.php

Main News Category: Cancer / Oncology


Childhood cancer research needs urgent boost, study shows

[Date: 2011-02-09]

Illustration of this article

Funding for childhood cancer research is too low and too dependent on short-term grants to maintain the improvements in survival rates seen in recent decades. This is the stark warning issued by EU-funded researchers who also highlight the steps needed to improve the way clinical trials for childhood cancer drugs are organised in Europe.

EU support for the work came from the EUROCANCERCOMS (‘Establishing an efficient network for cancer communication in Europe’) project, which has been allocated EUR 1.25 million under the ‘Science in society’ budget line of the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).

The study is published in the journal Ecancer and the findings were also presented at an event at the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium on 9 February to mark International Childhood Cancer Awareness Day.

The researchers note that paediatric oncology is ‘a vibrant and growing research community which has delivered major advances across many childhood cancers in terms of survival and quality-of-life outcomes’. Today, 80% of childhood cancer patients can expect to survive the disease thanks to massive improvements in diagnosis and treatment over the last 4 decades.

However, childhood cancer research is not getting the attention it deserves; the researchers say paediatric oncology papers received are cited less often than other papers in the journals in which they are published.

The team also looked into collaboration between countries and regions. As expected, there is close collaboration between researchers in Canada and the US, and researchers in the EU are increasingly working together. However, there is relatively little collaboration between North America and Europe, and this should be addressed, the researchers say. They also call for greater research cooperation between developed and transitional countries. Within Europe, countries in eastern Europe, where the incidence of cancer is high, rarely collaborate with colleagues in countries with a stronger research infrastructure, and this affects the care they can give to young patients.

A large part of the study is devoted to detailed analyses of the situation in 10 countries. ‘Paediatric oncologists from 10 countries were asked about their national situations and the differences were striking,’ said Professor Kathy Pritchard-Jones, Cancer Programme Director at the University College London Institute of Child Health in the UK. ‘For example, a respondent from Bosnia-Herzegovina cited lack of hospital space, no specialist paediatric oncology radiologists, and inadequate diagnostic facilities, with everything adapted to adult patients. The Czech Republic said research grants were usually for only three years and there was little support for young scientists to attend international courses and congresses which could help harmonise the level of knowledge across European states.’

Elsewhere in Europe, Italian doctors expressed their concern over the fragmentation of childhood cancer care, while Swedish participants lamented the lack of experienced staff and difficulties finding funding for their countries paediatric oncology units. In the UK, worries focused on the impact on children’s cancer care of cuts in the health service budget, among other things.

The report reveals that the European Commission is playing an increasing role in funding childhood cancer research. ‘The enhanced support of paediatric oncology research by the EU is a positive step forward, however, the perception is that this still remains inadequate for the scale of the problem,’ the researchers write. ‘Furthermore, at national level funding is either too low or too fragile with significant activity reliant on short-term “soft” funding. National level funding needs to be more sustainable and coherent.’

The private sector could also do more. The authors state: ‘There is a strong case for a private global fund for paediatric oncology to be established, that could support transnational collaborative research efforts that are necessary in these rare diseases.’

In their recommendations, the researchers call for sufficient EU funding to support a Europe-wide clinical trials network, and a reduction in the bureaucracy that slows the initiation and establishment of clinical trials. The team also highlights the importance of monitoring treatment outcomes and calls for the creation of a European Childhood Cancer Epidemiological Registry.

‘With these tools we can maintain the enormous progress that has been made in the past,’ emphasises Professor Pritchard-Jones. ‘Without them, we run the risk of jeopardising that progress and failing children who are dependent on us for their survival.’

The team also writes: ‘There needs to be a better understanding by regulatory policymakers of the level of risk for children with cancer participating in clinical trials (currently overestimated by insurers as well). It is essential that the EU Clinical Trials Directive (CTD) is modified if investigator-driven clinical trials are to have any future.’

Patient information is another area where improvement is needed. ‘When a child is sick, the provision of accurate information to the patient and family is essential,’ said Professor Richard Sullivan of the Centre for Global OncoPolicy in the UK. ‘We believe that the establishment of a European Common Information Portal could do much to tackle major deficiencies in information in countries with few or no patient organisations, or where the existence of a large number of languages makes access to such information difficult.’

For more information, please visit:

ECCO – The European Cancer Organisation:
http://www.ecco-org.eu/

Ecancer:
http://www.ecancermedicalscience.com/

EUROCANCERCOMS project:
http://www.eurocancercoms.eu/