Anthony's 4mnth CT scan after clinical trial

Enrollment complete, no new patients accepted.
Post Reply
argonaut
New Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:33 pm
Location: Oregon

Anthony's 4mnth CT scan after clinical trial

Post by argonaut »

Please read the update from November 16 (below) regarding Anthony's tumors.

FYI Anthony did 3mnths of the vaccine trial. No negative side effects.

I need to edit this because I have found out that the scans that the radiologists used for a comparison were 15mnths old. So the results are not useful to determine if growth or spreading has occurred after the trial.
Last edited by argonaut on Fri Sep 29, 2006 4:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
argonaut
New Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:33 pm
Location: Oregon

Post by argonaut »

To answer the questions,
Anthony got the minimum 6 shots during the clinical trial. His mets grew from 2 to 4mm. Original size 8mm. Sorry, but our consultation was shortly after the CT scan so the results told us were sketchy. I will ask the doc. for a copy of the report. Anthony only has tumors in his lungs, unfortunately there are so many of them the radiologists don't count them they just say hundreds or imnumerable. So, I don't know if there are any new mets. My understanding was the few they compared grew.

As far as future treatments go, we have the anti-angiogenic options that Dana Farber gave us. Our doctor mentioned they were doing a study at OHSU using inhaled GMSCF. That study is for a different type of cancer, but it may compliment the GVAX trial. Other, then that we feel we are back to square one with all options, limited as they may be, on the table.

Sorry for the sketchy details but Anthony coughed up some blood the night before the scan for about an hour. So, we spent a lot of time discussing that. This is the first time this has happened, and we are not sure of the cause. We have another consultation in two weeks and will ask for copies of the radiologists reports.

Thanks for your concern,
Scott
Bonni Hess
Senior Member
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:32 pm
Location: Sammamish, WA USA

Post by Bonni Hess »

Dear Scott,
Thank you for graciously responding to the questions several of us had regarding Anthony's scan results. While we were all hoping that the scans would show disappearance or at least shrinkage of the exisitng mets, we are grateful that, as with Brittany and another Clinical Trial patient who we are in contact with, there were no new tumors in other parts of the body, and only very minimal growth of the lung mets. Of course we don't know if this is a result of the Vaccine stabilizing the disease progression, or if it is just the nature of this relatively slow growing disease, and only time and future scans will tell. We remain Hopeful that the Vaccine is working to prevent the growth of new tumors and that it will continue to work in the body, eventually shrinking and destroying the remaining mets. It would be extremely helpful if other ASPS patients who have received the Immunotherapy Vaccine would share their post Clinical Trial scan results, and then we would have a better basis for comparison and understanding of the possible effectiveness of the Vaccine. I hope that Anthony's recent concerning coughing up of blood is from a benign cause that has now been resolved, and which is completely unrelated to his ASPS. Please keep us all updated on the outcome of his upcoming oncology appointment, the findings of the radiologist report, and any further treatment decisions.
With special caring thoughts and continued Hope,
Bonni Hess
argonaut
New Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:33 pm
Location: Oregon

Got a misleading report

Post by argonaut »

I have edited my original post. The scans compared the wrong CT's. I asked for a copy of the CT report as the doctor was handing it to me he noticed they compared scans from June 2005 to scans from Sept 2006.

Anthony started the trial in Jan 2006 so these results don't tell us much of what we need to know.

Scott
Bonni Hess
Senior Member
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:32 pm
Location: Sammamish, WA USA

Post by Bonni Hess »

Dear Scott,
Thank you for writing to clarify this. We will be anxiously waiting for the correct scan results and hoping to hear GOOD NEWS that Anthony's lung mets are disappearing and shrinking. It is extremely frustrating that the doctors made such a serious mistake in comparing the scan results, and it is similar to what we once experienced when Brittany's former oncologist read us the results from her previous scan! Fortunately we had copies of all of Brittany's scan reports and we informed the doctor of his mistake, He then sheepishly retrieved the correct and most current results. Yours and our experiences demonstrate how extremely important it is to be pro-active and informed, to request and keep copies of all scan reports, and to know that doctors are human and that they can, and do, make mistakes.
With special caring and continued Hope,
Bonni Hess
argonaut
New Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:33 pm
Location: Oregon

Post by argonaut »

Here's the new info I got.
Sept CT scan showed slight growth compared to last CT scan from clinical trial no new mets(as far as they can tell due to # of mets). 5 month interval.
Nov 8th CT scan showed no growth from Sept. CT scan. 2 month interval.
Nov. 13th MRI was clear.

So far the results after the clinical trial appear to be slight growth only 1-2mm. Possibly w/in the margin of error.
Olga
Admin
Posts: 2349
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

CT scan deviation

Post by Olga »

Scott - we are glad to hear that there is no growth. The 1-2 mm growth shown by the Sept. scan may be just a normal deviation based on a breath hold diference, we had the same situation a year ago when our radiology department actually corrected themselves - they said a 1 mm growth and the said a "normal deviation".
Bonni Hess
Senior Member
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:32 pm
Location: Sammamish, WA USA

Post by Bonni Hess »

Dear Scott,
Once again thank you for writing to share the results of Anthony's post Immunotherapy Vaccine scans. I agree with Olga that the very slight increase shown in the size of the lung mets could be within the margin of error for the slicing of the scan or a breath hold, and I find Anthony's results very encouraging in terms of the minimal, if any, amount of growth, and the fact that there are no new mets. Of course it is still too early to tell given the unpredictable and slow growing nature of ASPS, but it seems that the Immunotherapy Vaccine may be working to stabilize the progression of the disease. Brittany is currently traveling on an incredible five month backpacking adventure in India 8), and will not have her next scans until she returns in February unless she becomes symptomatic, but thankfully she seems to be feeling good at this time :D. It would be very helpful to all of us in the ASPS Community who are closely and very Hopefully following the results of the Immunotherapy Vaccine Clinical Trial if all of the other ASPS patients who have participated in the Trial would write to share and update the results of their post treatment scans. Please tell Anthony "HELLO :lol:" from all of us Hesses, and know how deeply appreciative we are of your continued faithful updates and invaluable sharing.
With special caring and continued Hope,
Bonni Hess
Post Reply

Return to “COMPLETED - Dana Farber Vaccine Clinical Trial (GVAX)”