🌟 Join Us in Building a Paediatric Oncology Society! 🌟

Hey everyone! We're starting a new paediatric oncology society, aimed at bringing together passionate individuals to make a real impact for children and families affected by cancer. Our mission is to advance understanding, support, and advocacy in paediatric oncology through education, outreach, and research initiatives.

We’re looking for medics and like-minded individuals who want to play an active role in our society’s growth! Currently, we have openings for key committee positions, including Secretary, Treasurer, Events Coordinator, Outreach, and more.

If you're a medical professional (or in training) and want to be part of something meaningful, we’d love to have you onboard! Together, we can create a supportive network and make a difference in paediatric oncology. Drop a comment or DM for more info on roles and how to join!

My SIL was just diagnosed with LD after having lung cancer that spread to her brain and spine. Doctors thought she was doing well, nothing showed up on her MRI, but she was having back pain and after being dismissed, she went for a second opinion and the spinal tap confirmed LD.

We are devastated to say the least. As I was reading about LD, I saw that non-Hodgkins B-cell lymphoma is another cancer that can develop into LD. My husband was treated for NHL almost three years ago and responded well but now I’m panicking about a genetic mutation link with TTR. I know it’s rare but my husband got a rare form of NHL at 34 and now with his sister’s diagnosis, I’m just terrified.

Any information or advice on how to discuss this with his oncologist would be greatly appreciated.

I’m reading up on some clinical trials that my partner is likely to be participating in and often they have disease control rates which are quite high. I understand this is less preferable to complete or partial response but can someone tell me what that actually means in real-life terms?

I.e. does it mean it prolongs your life long enough to get more treatment, is it temporarily stopping growth but won’t have a lasting effect? Is it more for researchers so they know that maybe they’re on the right track but not quite there?

The bigger numbers obviously make me feel hopeful but I’m trying to be realistic.

I'm working on a deep dive analysis on a horror series involving a cancer patient. And I come to this subreddit for consult. This is for fiction and entertainment but I also want to make sure I'm as accurate as possible.

This character is first diagnosed with colon cancer. He lives with this for about 7-8 years. The cancer then spreads to his brain and he is diagnosed with an inoperable frontal lobe tumor. And he lives for about 2 more years.

My question is, is this believable enough for an audience to buy into over this period of time?

I understand this is fiction and not real life but I thought I would at least ask. Thanks and any help would be appreciated.

I’m looking for a story I read about years ago. It was about an immunotherapy clinical trial (I think it was a Bristol Myers Squibb Odivio/Yervoy trial but could be wrong) where they were following a protocol (meant for chemotherapy maybe?) that measured the success of the drug by tumor size. When scans (MRIs?) found that the tumors were actually increasing in size, the drug company wanted to end the trial, but the PI advocated to keep going. They eventually found out through other scans (PETs?) that the immunotherapy actually was working, and they had been increasing in size due to inflammation.

Does this story sound familiar to anyone?

My clinic recently changed the premeds for 1st dose rituximab and we had a reaction today. Just wondering how your clinics medicate for c1d1?

I found one major study and from what I’m understanding, results show that progression of metastasis is delayed by 12 months or so for pts with breast cancer with metastasis. What are you seeing out there? Also how’s the quality of life of the patients taking it this drug? I’m a resident with a loved one diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer. I don’t know any oncologists. My family is going for the let’s do everything we can including paying 20k out of pocket for this drug that I’m not convinced it will provide the survival benefit they think. I’m feeling so powerless rn. As a doctor I should be doing more.

Hi everyone,

As the title reads, I am looking for some feedback or advice because my sweet dog was just diagnosed with lymphoma and we plan to start chemo this week. The vet thinks she has a good chance at going into remission bc she is otherwise healthy, and according to her and my research, chemo doesn’t typically negatively impact the dog the way it does for humans so I feel like I’m doing right thing by her by at least giving her a chance to beat this. If I am wrong about this, her quality of life will of course take priority and we will do the right thing.

My concern though, is that I’m currently 14 weeks pregnant and Chemo medication is obviously very toxic to myself and my unborn baby.

I have spoken to my vet, a veterinarian oncologist, and my Obgyn who have all assured me that with some common sense precautions, my baby will be safe. But I am turning to my beloved Reddit community for some added reassurance and also any other advice or ideas to further bolster our precautions.

Below is our current plan to manage this for the next 5 months of chemo:

1. All chemo medication will be administered by IV at the vet office by the vet team (I will be nowhere near the office during this time).

2. NO chemo medication will be in my home at any time

3. My husband works from home and will be tasked to pick up any poop and in house accidents (feces, poop, urine, blood) with gloves and a double bag hazard bag that we safely dispose of in a separate trash can not inside our home.

4. My dog will be quarantined in her doggy bedroom downstairs for 24 hours after IV treatments (when the medication is most active). Husband will take her for walks and potty breaks as needed.

5. My dog will not sleep in our bed during the time of treatment

6. My husband will feed my dog her meals and treats in a special area that is gated off from the rest of us so avoid unnecessary food drippings and salvia contamination.

7. I plan to wear rubber soled shoes around the house for the first 72 hours after treatment (when the drugs are in her system) and will mop daily with a swifter and disposable wet jet pad.

8. We sold our cloth couch and got a leather couch. We will wipe it down with Clorox wipes if we notice any salvia or drool spots.

I know this seems like a lot, but we are absolutely committed to responsibly managing this situation so my dog can get the care she needs and my baby is safe. Is there anything else I am missing? Also, if this is overboard, please tell me bc it will only make me feel better lol.

Hello! How do you process emotions related to patients or difficult patients or families?

Ovary removal is promoted fairly often for cancer prevention, but testicle removal for cancer prevention appears to not be common. I'm wondering if there is medical reason behind the discrepancy, or if it is more culturally driven. Thanks!

I was reading about a "peptide drug conjugate" that allows chemotherapy to be administered at much higher doses than normal since it targets the higher acidity in cancer cells. Platinum resistant ovarian cancer is one cancer that highly meets this criteria.

There was a very successful phase one study(or so the experts are saying) that is now in phase two and has NCI funding due to the results. It's a small private company - not big pharma - at least not yet. I thought these were very compelling results from my knowledge of cancer (given my father) and how other studies targeting this cancer largely fumbled, with low Objective response rates, and toxicity. (Cediranib in Combination with Olaparib) where half patients had to stop the drug due to severe side effects. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35917514/)with ORR between 12.5-26.7 percent. The study didn't do well in phase one and was considered a failure and wipe out in phase two. Compare that with cbx 12 (https://www.biospace.com/press-releases/cybrexa-therapeutics-announces-positive-final-data-at-esmo-2024-from-phase-1-study-of-peptide-drug-conjugate-cbx-12-in-advanced-solid-tumors) there is a link to trial data there from a poster image as well.

I unfortunately have an aunt with ovarian cancer - it's not good - my dad died of pancreatic cancer. I don't know how much any of these companies are just pr pumping (but cybrexa is private - they'd have no real need to.) whereas half the patients on cediranib and olaparib had to discontinue due to side effects, only 4.3 did on cbx - 12 these drugs are completely different MOA s however. Cbx 12 binds with topoisomerase I inhibitor exatecan, allowing for what appears many times the delivery of the chemo in certain cancers withntgensame side effects. Cediranib is an oral chemo, olaparib is a PARP Inhibitor.

Since my aunt has this cancer especially, do any doctors /experts here independently think this drug may has promise? Or anyone here afflicted by the cancer or knows someone e who is? I know she does have platinum resistant ovarian cancer - she tried for clinical trials but were not accepting. Unfortunately I think she may pass soon unless she can try something new/different.

Good day, I am looking for Journal Reviewing Opportunities if anyone has any leads do not hesitate to contact me.

Hey there, I’m a medical student who is a co-president of our class’s oncology club. We’re in a small town with only one oncologist, so i was wondering if there is an online source that has seminars or talks about the latest in Oncology that we can discuss in meetings. I’d appreciate any input!

Would you be willing to share your salary anonymously if it unlocked the salary of your peers?

There are several posts looking for this kind of info to help understand what the market is - but this is always such a black box. Just aggregate reports from MGMA are not very helpful. To really understand compensation, we need to understand the full package - including shifts, schedule, PTO, benefits, etc. in an structured way - but it's too expensive for us individuals to be able to buy these kinds of reports

A few months back, an anesthesiologist friend of mine created a spreadsheet to collect anonymous anesthesiology salaries. It was incredibly helpful for them, so I have worked with him to extend the spreadsheet to capture salaries anonymously across all specialties.

Take a look here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yuHo2iHvrKayUYii4N01h4VtVh2Qmo40qCQ6qu1-CoA/edit?gid=1008702220#gid=1008702220

This is fully anonymous, so it really decreases the taboo of discussing our comp. You can see the data collected so far in the google sheet. If you are willing, please add yours too. The more data we get in there, the more useful it will be for everyone!

Once you fill the survey, it will unlock the full spreadsheet for you to see all the salary contributions so far.

PS: This is for physicians and APPs - practicing or students - in the US only

I am a second-year Internal Medicine resident in Mexico, where Hematology and Oncology are separate specialties and are considered by some to have different "schools of thought."

Over the past two months, I have been rotating in the Hematology service, and a particular case caught my attention. I thought it appropriate to ask here since I know in the U.S., Hematology and Oncology are one specialty, and I imagine you guys might have an interesting perspective for me.

Here’s the case:

A 67-year-old man was admitted for weight-loss and hoarseness that had been ongoing for one month. Upon evaluation in the ER, a cervical mass was found. A chest CT scan reported cervical and mediastinal masses. Initially, Hodgkin lymphoma was suspected and the patient was closely monitored by the Hematology service. A biopsy of the cervical lymph node was performed, with the pathology result pending for almost two weeks. During his stay, he developed dysphagia and dyspnea, for which he received methylprednisolone as cytoreductive treatment. While waiting for the pathology report, he developed superior vena cava syndrome, and given the oncological urgency, he was treated with a single dose of vinblastine (10 mg) and radiotherapy to the mediastinum (8 Gy). The patient continued to experience dysphagia, dyspnea, is dependent on oxygen, and has an endopleural tube due to a right pleural effusion.

Heme's plan was to confirm that it was Hodgkin lymphoma to treat him with ABVD (¿intensive chemotherapy?). However, today the preliminary path report says that it's not lymphoma; their differential diagnoses are melanoma and carcinoma, and they decided to expand the immunohistochemistry panel. Hematology suggested evaluation by Oncology, who considered the patient has a very poor functional status and would not be a candidate for systemic therapy (ECOG 4).

So my questions are:

1. If it turns out to be small cell lung carcinoma, the tumor is chemotherapy-sensitive. Could clinical improvement in dyspnea and superior vena cava syndrome be achieved? While it wouldn’t cure him and he would progress sooner or later, chemotherapy could improve his quality of life for a time and perhaps allow him to settle his affairs, maybe even leave the hospital for a bit?
2. Why would the hematologist consider giving chemotherapy but the oncologist would not? The chemotherapy doses do not seem that different (e.g., EP in small cell lung carcinoma and DHAP in lymphoma). The reason the patient has a bad functional status is the cancer, is it unreasonable to think that treating the cancer should make him better?

Thank you! I apologize for any mistakes, english is not my first language

Thanks in advance!

Anyone have experience prescribing imetelstat? Efficacy looks good but tox is concerning b/c in my experience it always ends up looking worse in the real world. Is pegfilgrastim prophy a good idea or just wait and see?

Does anyone have Esmo guidelines in pdf? I would love lung cancer, but anything wpuld be amazing. The more recent, the better. Thank you!!

Hello everyone!

I am kindly asking for assistance in scouting a keynote speaker for a webinar on November 6 8-11 am (Philippine time). The keynote speaker would be speaking about lung cancer, its risk factors, prevalence and physiology. They will be speaking for around 30-45 mins and participate in a short discussion with the students.

The speaker will be speaking to passionate Biology students and educators and raising awareness. Unfortunately we are not able to provide any meaningful compensation 💔. However a certificate of appreciation and thanks will be provided. Open to all knowledgeable professionals. If interested please email: psbs.plm@gmail.com

Thanks!

Your joint experiences matter.

NYU researchers are offering up to $70 each to cancer survivors and their family caregivers who participate together in an online research study.Take the first step by filling out this screener survey: https://nyu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_40mtQUXYPXcfSfQ or get in touch at gz2164@nyu.edu.

https://preview.redd.it/k4hx08hprkud1.jpg?width=1545&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=08c0126484618a665bf377cd051aeff6b84a9e89

I was reading some manuscripts on clinical trials and other studies and noticed a very worrying trend. Many of the analyses used in oncology research are either inappropriate for their data or lack the sample size necessary to possibly find significant results. The latter is particularly troublesome because negative results are often published in this field, and if the study lacked the appropriate sample size it would never be able to find a significant result even if it existed.

For example (hypothetical) say a study found that lack of physical activity did not negatively impact treatment outcomes. This is interpreted in their discussions as having medical meaning even if the analysis used could not have found significant results based on sample size.

What is going on here? Do medical researchers not have statisticians helping them with analysis? It’s not like power tests are an obscure practice.

Please advise this is really upsetting me. Just to clarify I am a Biologist in a tenure track professor position and do my own statistics and often do statistics for my colleagues, so I am very familiar with these sort of analyses but may be missing something since oncology is not my field. I have done the power tests myself using data from these studies and that is how I have come to this conclusion.

Here let's share some latest oncology trials data

Can we discuss latest oncology trials and their implications here

I think as a very young kid, I was always fascinated with body science and illness, and about the ways that people’s bodies cope with illness. I don’t know why I was interested, I just was. I remember watching shows like “Mystery Diagnosis”, about disease pathology, and epidemiology.

I found it fascinating about how this one disease can cause all different types of damage, and how all cancers are different from one another. All areas of science and medicine intrigue me, but as a kid, I think that medical science was what intrigued me more.

I thankfully never really had anybody close to me go through cancer that I can remember, though my late Grammy was a Breast Cancer survivor for over 30 years.

Then, what really sparked my interest was reading “The Emperor Of All Maladies” as a teenager, and being thrilled by the history and science of such a field.

Since then, I have been fascinated by the science behind it. What about you guys?

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adp2442

I am a masters student looking to predict how intra-tumoral heterogeneity is associated with increased therapeutic resistance in glioblastomas. From an evolutionary standpoint, I am wondering if there is a fitness cost associated with higher levels of tumor heterogeneity. I am hoping someone here may have some insight into this question.

I already have some small tattoos that I got years ago, but now that I’m thinking about getting a full sleeve I’m concerned about what I’ve read regarding tattoo ink increasing the risk of lymphoma. The study in question concluded that there doesn’t seem to be any correlation between the surface area of the tattoos and cancer risk, so what does that mean for someone like me who already has tattoos and just wants more? Has the damage already been done, or should I be concerned about incurring further risk from more ink?

As I read about cancer there is frequently reference to the idea that there is no single entity called “cancer” and instead there are very many different cancers (plural). At a seemingly more basic level there is an attempt to define the most basic aspect of all cancers, and here there is dispute about cancer as a disease of the nucleus vs. cancer as a disease of the mitochondria, cancer as a disease of cell division or cancer as a disease of cellular respiration. Can someone please describe the basic dispute here, and how to decide about this, without a diatribe either about ketones or about the nearly infinite possibilities of pathology in the genome. Thanks in advance!