Wendy Harpham on Healthy Survivorship

The Story Behind the Overblown Story of Penicillin Allergiies -- Part II

My September 15th post in response to Penicllin Allergies Overblown introduced the problem of physicians over-prescribing broad-spectrum antibiotics when penicillin would be the more appropriate drug.

This week, the Washington Post relayed the CDC's warning of an impending catastrophe of drug-resistant infections.

Naked Statistics

You can hate math and not give a whit about statistics. But if you care about your health, you will finish up your summer reading with a fantastic new book: Naked Statistics. Stripping the Dread from the Data.

Doctors vs Computers

A front-page story in today's Science Times poses a provocative question in the rapidly changing world of medical diagnostics: Can computer software ever replace physicians to ensure timely, correct diagnoses?

How We Die: The Problem With Specialists

Most pages of my copy of Nuland's How We Die sport underlinings and check marks. On page 72, though, I drew a big question mark in the margin beside a paragraph that preceded another that earned a "great insight!"

Obesity Paradox (Part II)

In my last post, I introduced the Obesity Paradox: Overweight patients with certain chronic diseases do better than normal- or underweight patients with the same disease.

I wish we could do this trial:

Dietary Pattern for Health

After a cancer diagnosis, patients ask, "What should I eat? What foods should I avoid?

The answers found in magazines and offered by clinicians and purveyors of alternative therapies often paint a confusing picture of contradictions.

New Nutrition and Activity Guidelines for Survivors

Up-to-date, science-driven guidelines on nutrition and exercise after cancer were published in the April 12th issue of Ca - A Journal for Clinicians, a publication of The American Cancer Society. Although addressed to healthcare professionals, the material is accessible to patients (free, online) and includes a section written specifically for lay readers.

Revoking FDA Approval: Right or Wrong? - Part VIII

The case of the FDA revoking approval of Avastin for the treatment of breast cancer is complicated by the urgency of the need for better therapies. We’re not talking about treatments to decrease the sniffles of the common head cold. At issue is a drug to help patients who are suffering -- and dying -- from metastatic breast cancer.

Revoking FDA Approval: Right or Wrong? - Part VII

Let's tease apart some of the sticky-wicket issues of FDA approvals and revocations. For one, how does the FDA measure success?

Revoking FDA Approval: Right or Wrong? - Part V

Now let's look at the players who influenced the FDA's decision to revoke approval of Avastin for breast cancer. The complex process requires a book-length manuscript to fully explain. Rather than abandon my effort, here are the bare bones:

Revoking FDA Approval: Right or Wrong? - Part IV

My last post provided an outline of the FDA's approval process. I cringed while writing it, knowing 250 words couldn't capture the investment of time, people and capital. 

Revoking FDA Approval: Right or Wrong - Part III

In my November 28th and December 3rd posts I introduced the media storm regarding the FDA's recent revocation of approval of Avastin for the treatment of breast cancer. Today I'll provide an overview of the FDA approval process to help us talk about the controversy.

2011 Cancer Resource Guide

Cure in association with the American Cancer Society has published a superb booklet for people with cancer: the 2011 edition of their Cancer Resource Guide.

Talking With Your Doctors About News in the Media

In my last post I shared my response to a reader who was upset by the media reports of a new study. The commenter expressed ambivalence about discussing it with her physicians: "I don't know if it would be healthy or not to ask my doctors...if [knowing what we know today] I would have been spared this surgery."

Ultra-Rare Cancers

My recent posts discuss the trouble with the adjective "rare" when talking about types of cancer. What's a researcher, clinician or patient to do?

Good news for Healthy Survivors! Now, along with ultra-strong hairsprays and ultra-rich ice-creams, we have:

The Future of Cancer Research

In "The Cancer Sleeper Cell," oncologist Mukherjee shares his insights about the future of cancer research.

The Weed of Cancerous Tumors

When it comes to understanding cancer relapse, what is the significance of a cancer stem cell? According to a recent article by oncologist Siddhartha Mukherjee, maybe everything.

Riddle of Relapse

For all survivors, relapse means they weren't cured. For most, it means they never will be. Oncologist Siddhartha Mukherjee wrote a NYTimes article about tackling the challenge of cancer relapse.

Abigail's Alliance

On my recent post about clinical trials, commenter Steve Walker wrote, "The Phase III trial is being run primarily to satisfy the rigid, formulaic and in many cases scientifically obsolete requirements imposed by the FDA's Office of Oncology Drug Products for most cancer drugs...." 

Is the randomized clinical/controlled trial (RCT) obsolete?

Testing a Fast Track to Rx

Recently, I've pointed out the clashes between business and ethical considerations and beween clinicians' obligations to their individual patients and to the method that leads to advances. What if researchers can find ways to satisfy both the science and today's patients?

The Problem with Accelerated FDA Approval

In Phase I trials researchers test an experimental treatment in a few patients for the first time. The purpose is NOT to see if the treatment kills cancer cells, but only to:

• evaluate the drug's safety
• determine a safe dosage range
• identify side effects

What if the patients in a Phase I trial experience shrinkage of their tumors? Should this speed up FDA approval of the trial drug?

Witholding Rx in Clinical Trials

Sunday's NYTimes ran an article tackling a complex ethical dilemma in cancer care: The witholding of treatment in clinical trials. Because I was treated in 3 clinical trials in the 1990s, the topic is close to my heart.

HON

Patients wanting to learn about their illness used to search high and low for a few drops of patient-centered information. The dilemma for modern patients has become how to sort through the flood of information available on the Internet.

HON certification can help.

Reacting to Post-radiation Risks

How did I go from rattled to relaxed in a matter of hours after learning about my risk of carotid disease due to radiation therapy I received 18 years ago? First, by putting the piece of information in perspective, as outlined in my last post. Second, by making a plan of action.

Cancer Survivorship Research: Recovery and Beyond

What a three days I've had here at the 2010 Biennial Conference. While packing my suitcase for the return home, I'm thinking about all I've heard.

"Right" or "Best"

Healthy Survivors make the best decisions, not the right ones. They take the best steps, not the right steps.  Right? Best? Is there any difference?

Breakthrough Melanoma Drug: Hope or Hype?

NBC News health correspondent Robert Bazell introduces his report on a sensational new drug for the treatment of melanoma.

But then he explains that the new drug --  ipilimumab -- improves life expectancy from 6 months to 10 months. And it works well in only 20-30% of patients, the other 70-80% of patients showing no benefit at all. And it carries serious side effects, such as colitis and rheumatoid arthritis.

Is the fanfare hype? Are we celebrating too soon?

Placebos -- The Magic Cure

Your doctors evaluate your pain and conclude it is due to something benign (i.e., you don't have cancer, a broken bone or other health-threatening condition). Then they give you a prescription for a placebo. Should you sue these doctors? Or thank them?

PSA Conundrum

Imagine being diagnosed with cancer and having your doctor recommend you not undergo treatment and, instead, "Watch and wait."

What? Do nothing but watch and worry?

The Good News About Cancer

In the May 2010 issue of Ladies Home Journal,Susan Crandall begins her article, "When Wendy Harpham, MD, learned she had non-Hodgkin's lymphoma 19 years ago, her first thought was for her kids. She was only 36, but as a doctor she knew the scary stats: Her life expectancy was only about seven years. ...But advances in medicine transformed her prognosis and her future. Harpham is a member of a small but growing contingent of cancer patients who live with metastatic or otherwise-incurable disease for years, even decades."