SCT Secondary Cancer

“We describe baseline incidence and risk factors for new cancers (treatment-related secondary cancer) in 4161 persons receiving autotransplants for multiple myeloma in the United States from 1990 to 2010.”

Having undergone a stem cell transplant in 12/95, I figure my risk of a treatment related secondary cancer is now almost 25% annually and growing.

After an alternative therapy from 11/97-4/99, I reached complete remission. After my diagnosis of multiple myeloma in early 1994 I consider myself fortunate.

But, according to the study below, maybe not for long. I’m no bio-statistician. I just took the information discussed below about the growing risk of treatment-related secondary cancer risk and multiplied it by 25 years. I am open to corrections.

My long-term and late stage side effects that I’m currently living with are:

Possible treatment-related secondary cancer
Chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy
Radiation-induced lumbosacral plexopathy
Chemoradiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis
Chemotherapy-induced cognitive dysfunction

To add insult to injury, one of my oncologists, Hillard Lazarus M.D. was one of the authors of the study linked below. Dr. Lazarus is an expert on the toxic adverse events of autologous stem cell transplant for multiple myloma patients.

You know the other kick in the pants? Since ASCT became the “standard-of-care” for myeloma in 1996, there has never been a study showing that transplantation extends the life of a myeloma patient. Never. MMers may achieve a longer first remission but not longer overall survival (OS).

My point is that thousands of dollars, extensive toxicity and a lifetime of long-term and late stage side effects buys the MM patient longer average first remission…but not a longer average survival.

To be fair, the study below wasn’t published until 2015-about 20 years after my ASCT. I’m one of the 4,161 patients described in the study. But then again, a great deal of information was known about the toxic side effects of the chemotherapy regimens used in an autologous stem cell transplant. Even in 1995, Dr. Lazarus knew of this toxicity better than anyone.

Is it ethical or moral for an oncologist to give a patient lots and lots of toxic therapy if that oncologist knows that short, long-term and late stage damage will be done to the patient? Even if that oncologist doesn’t understand all of the long-term damage caused by that toxic therapy? High-dose chemotherapy can kill patients.

The study below and my long-term survival are about as much proof as I can give for newly diagnosed cancer patients using caution when considering toxic therapies as well as when considering evidence-based, non-toxic complementary/integrative therapies as well. Yes, there are a host of evidence-based but non-toxic therapies that can reduce or eliminate toxic side effects of chemotherapy and radiation.

Don’t misunderstand me. MMers benefit from the judicious use of chemotherapy and radiation for multiple myeloma. The challenge is knowing when and how much toxicity to use. Dr. Lazarus overdid the chemotherapy and radiation in my case. He overdid it by a lot.

In case you’re wondering, I relapsed twice after my ASCT and my third oncologist in three years, Ann Rassiga M.D., told me that “they could do nothing more for me…” No, my long-term MM remission is not due to my ASCT or high-dose cardiotoxic chemotherapies. I underwent a controversial cancer therapy called antineoplaston therapy. End-stage myeloma to complete remission in 17 months.

Have you been diagnosed with multiple myeloma? Are you considering an autologous stem cell transplant? If you would like to learn more about the short, long-term and late stage side effects of ASCT for MMers and how to possibly prevent them, please scroll down the page, post a question or comment and I will reply to you ASAP.

Thank you,

David Emerson

MM Survivor
MM Cancer Coach
Director PeopleBeatingCancer

New cancers after autotransplantations for multiple myeloma.

Lazarus HM¹³

We describe baseline incidence and risk factors for new cancers in 4161 persons receiving autotransplants for multiple myeloma in the United States from 1990 to 2010. Observed incidence of invasive new cancers was compared with expected incidence relative to the US population. The cohort represented 13,387 person-years at-risk.

In total, 163 new cancers were observed, for a crude incidence rate of 1.2 new cancers per 100 person-years and cumulative incidences of

2.6%,
4.2%, and
6.1%

at 3, 5, and 7 years, respectively. The incidence of new cancers in the autotransplantation cohort was similar to age-, race-, and gender-adjusted comparison subjects with an observed/expected (O/E) ratio of 1.00 (99% CI, .81 to 1.22).

However, acute myeloid leukemia and melanoma were observed at higher than expected rates with O/E ratios of 5.19 (99% CI, 1.67 to 12.04; P = .0004), and 3.58 (99% CI, 1.82 to 6.29; P < .0001), respectively. Obesity, older age, and male gender were associated with increased risks of new cancers in multivariate analyses. This large data set provides a baseline for comparison and defines the histologic type specific risk for new cancers in patients with MM receiving postautotransplantation therapies, such as maintenance.

6,9,12,15,18,21,23,25,27,29,31,33-

Recently Diagnosed or Relapsed? Stop Looking For a Miracle Cure, and Use Evidence-Based Therapies To Enhance Your Treatment and Prolong Your Remission

SCT Secondary Cancer

“We describe baseline incidence and risk factors for new cancers (treatment-related secondary cancer) in 4161 persons receiving autotransplants for multiple myeloma in the United States from 1990 to 2010.”

Recommended Reading:

New cancers after autotransplantations for multiple myeloma.

Leave a Comment:

Popular posts

Multiple Myeloma Diet

Multiple Myeloma Survivor- A Different kind of Second Opinion-

C-B-D Enhances Velcade (BORT)

Are Endometrial Polyps Overtreated?