 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / February 2008Standard Treatment of Prostate cancer may Encourage Spread of the Disease
If this research from John Hopkins has any validity it may throw a wrench into the standard treatment of advanced prostate cancer with androgen ablation. Maybe the increased in the gene called "nestin" has something to do with androgen deprivation being effective for up to about two years. It is only preliminary at this time but interesting never less. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-10/jhmi-stf092807.php Ron S. -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.cancer.prostate/ More information at http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/faq.html On February 7, Ron S wrote: > If this research from John Hopkins has any validity it may throw a wrench > into the standard treatment of advanced prostate cancer with androgen > ablation. Maybe the increased in the gene called "nestin" has something to > do with androgen deprivation being effective for up to about two years. It > is only preliminary at this time but interesting never less. > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-10/jhmi-stf092807.php This was published some four months ago, and I recall that there was discussion at the time, either here or on another group. The study abstract including what the research actually says is at http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/67/19/9199 Two things omitted from the press release, are: (1) "....the function of Nestin is poorly understood." and (2) Development of more information "....may lead to strategies to prevent and neutralize metastatic spread (of PCa)." In other words, it's good news of a possible means to save lives. One more time: go to the primary source! I am not critical of Ron, who is only trying to be helpful. Regards, Steve J >On February 7, Ron S wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> is only preliminary at this time but interesting never less. >> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-10/jhmi-stf092807.php >This was published some four months ago, and I recall that there was >discussion at the time, either here or on another group. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Steve J Steve - thanks for the research reference. I've read it. On the verge of hormone therapy, I find it profoundly disturbing. Nestin is identified as a stem cell in adult tissues. It is true the research begins: '....the function of Nestin is poorly understood'. And I am the proverbial layman. But layman or not I can understand the following excerpts - and they comprise the bulk of the report: 'Nestin mRNA was detected in cell lines from small cell lung, and breast cancers, and particularly elevated in cell lines derived from prostate cancer metastases.' And all this: '....the androgen-dependent line LnCaP expressed Nestin only on androgen withdrawal. We confirmed associations of Nestin expression, androgen withdrawal, and metastatic potential by immunohistochemical analysis of samples from 254 prostate cancer patients. Cytoplasmic Nestin protein was readily identifiable in prostate cancer cells from 75% of patients with lethal androgen-independent disease, even in cancer sampled from the prostate itself. However, Nestin expression was undetectable in localized androgen-deprived tumors and in metastases without prior androgen deprivation.' In brief, Nestin was in 75% of metastatic patients' cancer cells where androgen was absent; but Nestin was undetectable where metastasis had occurred where there was no androgen deprivation. Yes, it ends: '. Further dissection of this novel Nestin migration pathway may lead to strategies to prevent and neutralize metastatic spread'. Steve, with respect, I don't read the whole as good news at all. What they've uncovered NOW, is thoroughly disturbing - taking anti-androgens could increase the spread of metastasis; novel, positive, strategies may evolve from it IN THE FUTURE. I know there are fiercely held differing views in this NG on the efficacy of hormone therapy. But could we please look at this as a piece of independent research - not known to any proponents or opponents before. Is it not reasonable to allow that it is now shown that hormone therapy could have results the opposite to what is intended???? My thanks and best wishes to all MikeHi Hi Mike, I whole heartedly agree with your assessment of the article. The reason I posted the article was hopefully not for me but for my brother who has recurrence and is also anticipating ADT in the near future. There has been a lot of questions as to why ADT has a short half life so to speak and this information pertaining to nestin may be one of the answers. If this proves to be the case then one might want to reconsider ADT as a therapy option. As I read all of this research, I find that cause and effect is not as simple as some seem to believe. From some poorly derived information on testosterone and its effect on prostate cancer, it seems they have rushed to judgment in an attempt to block the hormone and starved the cancer cells. Then when it doesn't work they struggle to find a plausible explanation. It might also hurt the pharmaceutical industries bottom line. Ron S. -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.cancer.prostate/ More information at http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/faq.html Ron, sorry I did post this as a follow up, but I can't quite get Agent to follow my instructions - a similar disobedience I find evident in other computer programs. I can't get rid of the '@anon' either. To the point: You wrote, re your original thread starter above, same subject: >Hi Mike, > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Ron S. Ron, you're a good person. I raise my hat to everybody in this NG like Heather and others who spend lots of time keeping in touch to support the ones they love when they can't do so themselves. As for this issue, I am content, as ever, to look simply at the evidence and try to avoid judgements - simply so that discussion doesn't get off the point. For the moment, unless someone can tell me how the findings do not say what they seem to me to clearly say, I will have a bad feeling, and will require discussion, if advised to go on ADT. Thanks for bringing it to attention. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.