Learn how you can manage and alleviate your current side effects while actively working to prevent a relapse or secondary cancer using evidence-based, non-toxic therapies.
Click the orange button to the right to learn more.
I understand that multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable blood cancer. I understand that MM patients who have relapsed several times are running out of therapy options and are dangerously close an end-stage diagnosis. And I understand that oncologists are searching for more chemotherapy regimens that may buy time for those RR/MM survivors.
I get all that.
At the same time, since my conventional treatment concluded in 1996, I have struggled with long-term and late stage side effects from the very chemotherapy and radiation prescribed to me by my oncologist. From nerve, brain, heart, bladder, skin, etc. damage, I continue to work to manage my long-term and late stage side effects.
The question then, is how additional time afforded to RR/MM patients justifies the additional pain and suffering from toxic chemotherapy?
The oncologists mentioned below have been studying melflufen for RR/MM patients. Dr. Paul Richardson is featured on OncLive talking about the side effects of melflufen.
But in June of 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved melflufen. Only to put a “partial hold” on it about a month later???
All those oncologists who authored the study, linked below, finding that melflufen is okay: “melflufen plus dexamethasone resulted in sustained long-term clinical benefit in patients with RRMM…”
All the oncologists receive money, perhaps a lot of money from drug companies that make chemotherapy drugs. Particularly the drug company, Oncopeptides AB, that makes melflufen.
I can’t help but wonder if money paid to the oncologists in the form of honoraria, consulting fees, research funding, advising fees, personal fees, and stock options sway or in some way bias these oncologists in favor of the highly toxic chemotherapy at the expense of multiple myeloma patients?
Do you think it is possible that money and self-interest bias’ the oncologists below to put their self interests over the pain and suffering of multiple myeloma patients?
I would like to know what you think. Scroll down the page and post a comment or a question. I will reply to you ASAP.
March 11, 2021
“Paul G. Richardson, MD… discusses the toxicity profile of melphalan flufenamide (melflufen; Pepaxto) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma…
Regarding safety, myelosuppression is a challenging toxicity observed with melflufen, says Richardson…
…neutropenia appears to be well managed with growth factor support. Moreover, romiplostim (Nplate) can help control melflufen-associated thrombocytopenia, Richardson explains…
As with any cytotoxic chemotherapy, the risk of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is concerning, says Richardson…”
“Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen, Pepaxto®) is a peptide conjugated alkylating drug developed by Oncopeptides for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) and amyloid light-chain amyloidosis…
Like other nitrogen mustard drugs, melphalan flufenamide exerts antitumor activity through DNA crosslinking. In February 2021, melphalan flufenamide, in combination with dexamethasone, received its first approval in the USA for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory (r/r) MM who have received at least four prior lines of therapy and whose disease is refractory to:
July 8, 2021
“The FDA has requested a partial clinical hold on all trials of melphalan flufenamide (melflufen; Pepaxto) following updated results of the phase 3 OCEAN study (NCT03151811), which examined the agent in combination with dexamethasone vs pomalidomide (Pomalyst)/dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, according to a press release from drug developer Oncopeptides AB.1…
Oncopeptides plans to cooperate closely with the FDA in order to perform the needed analysis to fully assess the risk/benefit profile of melflufen and get a better understanding of which patients with multiple myeloma will benefit from treatment in earlier lines of therapy within the relapsed/refractory setting…”