Multiple Myeloma an incurable disease, but I have spent the last 25 years in remission using a blend of conventional oncology and evidence-based nutrition, supplementation, and lifestyle therapies from peer-reviewed studies that your oncologist probably hasn't told you about.
Click the orange button to the right to learn more about what you can start doing today.
Myeloma patients tell me over and over again. “My oncologist wants me to stay on induction MM chemotherapy until I reach complete remission (CR).” When it comes to multiple myeloma chemotherapy, more is not better, more chemotherapy can do irreparable harm.
If you click the links and read the info above, you will see that the terms overlap each other. You will see that conventional MM oncology has determined that low, regular doses of anti-Multiple Myeloma therapy give the longest, deepest remissions for MMers.
Further, more multiple myeloma chemotherapy means more toxicity and a greater risk of short, long-term, late stage side effects and secondary cancers.
This makes me wonder if the timing of a person’s multiple myeloma chemotherapy is more important than the dose of the chemotherapy.
Less is More
The study linked and excerpted below establishes the same thing. Basically that pumping MMers full of cytotoxic chemotherapy does NOT give the MMer longer remissions (PFS) or longer life (OS).
What if I told you that I have remained in complete remission from my MM since 4/99 with the help of non-toxic, low-dose maintenance and metronomic therapies?
I am a long-term MMer and MM Cancer Coach. The MM CC program incorporates the evidence-based info and therapies below:
Whether you are debating treatment options, currently undergoing treatment and experiencing painful side effects, or trying to figure out how to stay in remission, please watch the video below to learn more about the evidence-based, integrative therapies to combat treatment side effects and enhance your chemotherapy.
Scroll down the page, post a question or comment and I will reply to you ASAP.
“More treatment does not necessarily offer more benefit for patients—at least when it comes to multiple myeloma…
Although lenalidomide maintenance (low-dose Revlimid) after AHCT has improved PFS and OS, the role of additional interventions after AHCT, such as tandem AHCT or triple therapy consolidation, remains to be determined…
In the era of thalidomide analogs and proteasome inhibitors used in the initial therapy for myeloma and the use of prolonged maintenance therapy with lenalidomide (low-dose maintenance Rev.), posttransplant consolidation with cycles of RVD or a second transplant do not produce incremental PFS benefit,””
“The purpose of this Perspective is to highlight the most contentious issues in MM today and to put out alternative points of view. The issues we highlight are well grounded in the principles of evidence-based medicine and impact clinical trials and practice.…21–23
Survival for an individual patient with MM varies according to age, stage, and performance status, as in any other malignancy.7 Appropriately, therapy is usually adjusted based on these factors. However, the majority of patients are being approached with a uniform philosophical approach: achieve and maintain complete response (CR).26,27 This needs to change. The prognosis of MM varies considerably between cytogenetic categories and even within each cytogenetic entity.28,29…
More importantly, standard-risk patients who have expected median survivals in excess of 10 years,29,30when given full informed consent of the treatment options, may be reluctant to choose regimens that carry an early risk of irreversible toxicity. For such patients, even the route of administration and the number of monthly visits to a healthcare provider may be factors in choosing a regimen…
Several papers have emphasized the importance of CR in MM.26,27,31–35 This is a difficult topic to cast doubt on because, after all, who can be against CR? The main reason to be cautious in espousing CR is the correlation between increased response rates and increased toxicity. Striving blindly for CR may lead to unacceptable and unnecessary toxicity for some patients and come at too great a price. However, oncologists willing to say that CR is not an important endpoint can quickly attain the pariah status. Despite this, we wish to highlight some important caveats about CR and illustrate its limited use as a surrogate endpoint in a disease, such as MM…