› Forums › General Melanoma Community › Request for your thoughts on new research..
- This topic has 18 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
rbruce.
- Post
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:19 am
So, I posted this about a week or so ago with the title Melanoma and viagra and did not get one response. Is it because of the stigma of viagra? I don't care what drug I take if it has the potential to increase my lifespan 2 fold like this research did in mice. Viagra was originally meant for heart disease and they found it worked for ED. Now, it looks hopeful for melanoma and yet no one would comment. I don't get it. The reason it's so interesting to me is that the drug is readily available. Here's my original post along with a link
So, I posted this about a week or so ago with the title Melanoma and viagra and did not get one response. Is it because of the stigma of viagra? I don't care what drug I take if it has the potential to increase my lifespan 2 fold like this research did in mice. Viagra was originally meant for heart disease and they found it worked for ED. Now, it looks hopeful for melanoma and yet no one would comment. I don't get it. The reason it's so interesting to me is that the drug is readily available. Here's my original post along with a link to the study just completed in Germany. Please take a moment and check out the link and comment. Thanks, Robert
Has anyone seen this? http://www.tgdaily.com/health-features/59537-treating-cancer-with-viagra I heard in my support group that viagra was being used by some with breast cancer but this is the first time I've seen anything about it's use with melanoma. I sent the article to my Oncologist at UCSF and he said for me to check with my trial coordinator to make sure it doesn't interfere with the Clinical Trial I'm on and then try it! Has anyone heard of this? Does anyone have an idea of doseage? It's obviously an off label use and I'm just wondering (please don't laugh) if I can take a low dose so as not to cause me to be have the full "Viagra" effect but have some therapeutic effect. Anyone have info? Thanks, Robert
- Replies
-
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:38 am
Robert,
My thoughts are, Viagra is safe unless someone has a cardio issue, so why wouldn't people start taking this. I'm tired of hearing things like this will need to go thru clinical trials and maybe in 5-years it will be used for Melanoma. Plus there is really no big $$ to be made here by pharma so this may never get to U.S. clinical trials. There seems to be many drugs that have existed for some time now being discovered to have effectiveness against melanoma I.e. Beta blockers, Leflunomide, and now Viagra. Why not give the Viagra a try, one might get double bang for their buck, no pun intended, well maybe a little.
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:38 am
Robert,
My thoughts are, Viagra is safe unless someone has a cardio issue, so why wouldn't people start taking this. I'm tired of hearing things like this will need to go thru clinical trials and maybe in 5-years it will be used for Melanoma. Plus there is really no big $$ to be made here by pharma so this may never get to U.S. clinical trials. There seems to be many drugs that have existed for some time now being discovered to have effectiveness against melanoma I.e. Beta blockers, Leflunomide, and now Viagra. Why not give the Viagra a try, one might get double bang for their buck, no pun intended, well maybe a little.
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:38 am
Robert,
My thoughts are, Viagra is safe unless someone has a cardio issue, so why wouldn't people start taking this. I'm tired of hearing things like this will need to go thru clinical trials and maybe in 5-years it will be used for Melanoma. Plus there is really no big $$ to be made here by pharma so this may never get to U.S. clinical trials. There seems to be many drugs that have existed for some time now being discovered to have effectiveness against melanoma I.e. Beta blockers, Leflunomide, and now Viagra. Why not give the Viagra a try, one might get double bang for their buck, no pun intended, well maybe a little.
-
- November 19, 2011 at 3:47 am
First blush; I really don't think a lot of people here are delving that deeply inside the mechanisims of melanoma because they are new and as such simply do not have a working knowledge of the intracies or subtle nuances of this disease.
This is not to say that they do not want to. Rather, they are consumed with what doctors and clinicians are telling them and simply have not had the time or volition given their immediate concers.
There are many clues about melanoma but too many questions and certainly not enough answers.
From a personal standpoint, yes, I have read the quasi-associative conceptual premise of the mechanism of viagra and how it might correspond to melanoma relevance. But honestly, with such a casual relationship that is premised with breast cancer and by an enourmous leap of faith that by extension it is directly pre-immenent, worthy of study and relevant to melanoma…………..well to me, it is a stretch given the current environment of research.
Nothing to do with stigma from my experience. I have seen over the years posts here about chemically induced itreatment mpotence and sexual dysfunction, from both men and women………….so I don't think stigma has anything to do with it.
Viagra, as a drug, deals with blood flow , capillary and vascular extension (no pun intended).
Although these elements are a component of melanoma as well, does not, in my mind , mean they are directly related in either causation or prevention of anything in particular beyond the basic premise.
I am alllllllllllllll for looking at, and embracing outside the box working tools to deal with melanoma.
Honestly though, I just cannot see the science of association with Viagra. as a tool of warfare against melanoma.
I would like to though if you can show some science.
Cheers,
Charlie S
-
- November 19, 2011 at 3:47 am
First blush; I really don't think a lot of people here are delving that deeply inside the mechanisims of melanoma because they are new and as such simply do not have a working knowledge of the intracies or subtle nuances of this disease.
This is not to say that they do not want to. Rather, they are consumed with what doctors and clinicians are telling them and simply have not had the time or volition given their immediate concers.
There are many clues about melanoma but too many questions and certainly not enough answers.
From a personal standpoint, yes, I have read the quasi-associative conceptual premise of the mechanism of viagra and how it might correspond to melanoma relevance. But honestly, with such a casual relationship that is premised with breast cancer and by an enourmous leap of faith that by extension it is directly pre-immenent, worthy of study and relevant to melanoma…………..well to me, it is a stretch given the current environment of research.
Nothing to do with stigma from my experience. I have seen over the years posts here about chemically induced itreatment mpotence and sexual dysfunction, from both men and women………….so I don't think stigma has anything to do with it.
Viagra, as a drug, deals with blood flow , capillary and vascular extension (no pun intended).
Although these elements are a component of melanoma as well, does not, in my mind , mean they are directly related in either causation or prevention of anything in particular beyond the basic premise.
I am alllllllllllllll for looking at, and embracing outside the box working tools to deal with melanoma.
Honestly though, I just cannot see the science of association with Viagra. as a tool of warfare against melanoma.
I would like to though if you can show some science.
Cheers,
Charlie S
-
- November 19, 2011 at 3:47 am
First blush; I really don't think a lot of people here are delving that deeply inside the mechanisims of melanoma because they are new and as such simply do not have a working knowledge of the intracies or subtle nuances of this disease.
This is not to say that they do not want to. Rather, they are consumed with what doctors and clinicians are telling them and simply have not had the time or volition given their immediate concers.
There are many clues about melanoma but too many questions and certainly not enough answers.
From a personal standpoint, yes, I have read the quasi-associative conceptual premise of the mechanism of viagra and how it might correspond to melanoma relevance. But honestly, with such a casual relationship that is premised with breast cancer and by an enourmous leap of faith that by extension it is directly pre-immenent, worthy of study and relevant to melanoma…………..well to me, it is a stretch given the current environment of research.
Nothing to do with stigma from my experience. I have seen over the years posts here about chemically induced itreatment mpotence and sexual dysfunction, from both men and women………….so I don't think stigma has anything to do with it.
Viagra, as a drug, deals with blood flow , capillary and vascular extension (no pun intended).
Although these elements are a component of melanoma as well, does not, in my mind , mean they are directly related in either causation or prevention of anything in particular beyond the basic premise.
I am alllllllllllllll for looking at, and embracing outside the box working tools to deal with melanoma.
Honestly though, I just cannot see the science of association with Viagra. as a tool of warfare against melanoma.
I would like to though if you can show some science.
Cheers,
Charlie S
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Not a fan of anonymous postings, but I'll use it here. I, for one, took this seriously and asked my onc about it. I was told it won't interfere with my treatment. So, I will be starting it. Being happily married, side effects with full dose are OK for me. But my primary doctor will only prescribe 6 pills per month. Looking into getting that extended, so I will ask about a lower dosing (or maybe splitting pills in half).
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Not a fan of anonymous postings, but I'll use it here. I, for one, took this seriously and asked my onc about it. I was told it won't interfere with my treatment. So, I will be starting it. Being happily married, side effects with full dose are OK for me. But my primary doctor will only prescribe 6 pills per month. Looking into getting that extended, so I will ask about a lower dosing (or maybe splitting pills in half).
-
- November 21, 2011 at 6:43 pm
…one has to remember that researchers are not gods and like any other prestigious job, there is a lot of 'gaming' (backstabbing, false results, false statements, false anything to get ahead) involved…if you latch onto something then find 3 seperate studies done by 3 seperate teams and if their results points to 'promising' then you are on the right track towards taking it…
-
- November 21, 2011 at 6:43 pm
…one has to remember that researchers are not gods and like any other prestigious job, there is a lot of 'gaming' (backstabbing, false results, false statements, false anything to get ahead) involved…if you latch onto something then find 3 seperate studies done by 3 seperate teams and if their results points to 'promising' then you are on the right track towards taking it…
-
- November 21, 2011 at 6:43 pm
…one has to remember that researchers are not gods and like any other prestigious job, there is a lot of 'gaming' (backstabbing, false results, false statements, false anything to get ahead) involved…if you latch onto something then find 3 seperate studies done by 3 seperate teams and if their results points to 'promising' then you are on the right track towards taking it…
-
- November 19, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Not a fan of anonymous postings, but I'll use it here. I, for one, took this seriously and asked my onc about it. I was told it won't interfere with my treatment. So, I will be starting it. Being happily married, side effects with full dose are OK for me. But my primary doctor will only prescribe 6 pills per month. Looking into getting that extended, so I will ask about a lower dosing (or maybe splitting pills in half).
-
- November 24, 2011 at 9:11 pm
Found some more info on the issue from Johns Hopkins and it goes towards dosing. Here's a link to it: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/otolaryngology/for_physicians/Departmental_Newsletter/Headway_spring09_article1
Apparently Cialis is preferred as it has a half life twice that of Viagra. It's use here is for throat and neck cancer. A friend in my support group called Johns Hopkins and spoke with the Dr doing the research.
I'll update more as I find out more. Robert
-
- November 24, 2011 at 9:11 pm
Found some more info on the issue from Johns Hopkins and it goes towards dosing. Here's a link to it: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/otolaryngology/for_physicians/Departmental_Newsletter/Headway_spring09_article1
Apparently Cialis is preferred as it has a half life twice that of Viagra. It's use here is for throat and neck cancer. A friend in my support group called Johns Hopkins and spoke with the Dr doing the research.
I'll update more as I find out more. Robert
-
- November 24, 2011 at 9:11 pm
Found some more info on the issue from Johns Hopkins and it goes towards dosing. Here's a link to it: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/otolaryngology/for_physicians/Departmental_Newsletter/Headway_spring09_article1
Apparently Cialis is preferred as it has a half life twice that of Viagra. It's use here is for throat and neck cancer. A friend in my support group called Johns Hopkins and spoke with the Dr doing the research.
I'll update more as I find out more. Robert
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.