paperdetective

Here is the list.

http://www.melanoma.org/sites/default/files/u13882/Physicians%20for%20systemic%20OM_2.pdf

It may need some updating though. There are other internal medicine oncologists doing systemic treatments nowadays.

None in those areas, as far as I know though.

For systemic OM treatments we cannot be very picky. The utility of the treatment then comes before the location one resides. There are options of staying with host families though or in cbaritable lodges.

An important criteria is also, id no mets were found yet, to have the right oncologist who supports the most comprehnsive screening methods so earliest detection is possible. That varies a lot.

Peter L

Here is the list.

http://www.melanoma.org/sites/default/files/u13882/Physicians%20for%20systemic%20OM_2.pdf

It may need some updating though. There are other internal medicine oncologists doing systemic treatments nowadays.

None in those areas, as far as I know though.

For systemic OM treatments we cannot be very picky. The utility of the treatment then comes before the location one resides. There are options of staying with host families though or in cbaritable lodges.

An important criteria is also, id no mets were found yet, to have the right oncologist who supports the most comprehnsive screening methods so earliest detection is possible. That varies a lot.

Peter L

Here is the list.

http://www.melanoma.org/sites/default/files/u13882/Physicians%20for%20systemic%20OM_2.pdf

It may need some updating though. There are other internal medicine oncologists doing systemic treatments nowadays.

None in those areas, as far as I know though.

For systemic OM treatments we cannot be very picky. The utility of the treatment then comes before the location one resides. There are options of staying with host families though or in cbaritable lodges.

An important criteria is also, id no mets were found yet, to have the right oncologist who supports the most comprehnsive screening methods so earliest detection is possible. That varies a lot.

Peter L

I guess the anonymous author of the previous comment has no courage to identify herself, but I will answer teh insinuation of double standards. The truth is that socialized medicine is now everywhere, so one has no choice anymore. One just tries to navigate amongst the lesser of two evils in the global health options. Every few months it becomes hearder though. A few months ago I discovered that in Massachusetts most commercial imaging centers are now so heavily rergul;ated, that I can't get a lung CT scan at them anymore (as oppose dto last year) and the MRI procedures have become much more bureaucratic and slow to arrange compared with a year ago, again thanks to the new laws. It also meant that I had to do unnecessarily more expensice scans than the year before.

I guess the anonymous author of the previous comment has no courage to identify herself, but I will answer teh insinuation of double standards. The truth is that socialized medicine is now everywhere, so one has no choice anymore. One just tries to navigate amongst the lesser of two evils in the global health options. Every few months it becomes hearder though. A few months ago I discovered that in Massachusetts most commercial imaging centers are now so heavily rergul;ated, that I can't get a lung CT scan at them anymore (as oppose dto last year) and the MRI procedures have become much more bureaucratic and slow to arrange compared with a year ago, again thanks to the new laws. It also meant that I had to do unnecessarily more expensice scans than the year before.

I guess the anonymous author of the previous comment has no courage to identify herself, but I will answer teh insinuation of double standards. The truth is that socialized medicine is now everywhere, so one has no choice anymore. One just tries to navigate amongst the lesser of two evils in the global health options. Every few months it becomes hearder though. A few months ago I discovered that in Massachusetts most commercial imaging centers are now so heavily rergul;ated, that I can't get a lung CT scan at them anymore (as oppose dto last year) and the MRI procedures have become much more bureaucratic and slow to arrange compared with a year ago, again thanks to the new laws. It also meant that I had to do unnecessarily more expensice scans than the year before.

Kevin,

Do you have skin melanoma or ocular melanoma (this forum is for ocular melanoma).

I ask, because interferon has no effect on ocular melanoma. So it is useless for treating OM.

With skin melanoma I do not know how interferioon interacts, but it is possible it would work, since skin melanoma is an entirely different disease than ocular melanoma and spreads mainly via the lymphatic system (in contrast, OM spreads via the hematologic system).

Peter L

Kevin,

Do you have skin melanoma or ocular melanoma (this forum is for ocular melanoma).

I ask, because interferon has no effect on ocular melanoma. So it is useless for treating OM.

With skin melanoma I do not know how interferioon interacts, but it is possible it would work, since skin melanoma is an entirely different disease than ocular melanoma and spreads mainly via the lymphatic system (in contrast, OM spreads via the hematologic system).

Peter L

Kevin,

Do you have skin melanoma or ocular melanoma (this forum is for ocular melanoma).

I ask, because interferon has no effect on ocular melanoma. So it is useless for treating OM.

With skin melanoma I do not know how interferioon interacts, but it is possible it would work, since skin melanoma is an entirely different disease than ocular melanoma and spreads mainly via the lymphatic system (in contrast, OM spreads via the hematologic system).

Peter L

Tami,

PS:

Personally I would not just focus on MEK inhibitors solely, but on a combination of MEK inhibitors and PKC inhibitors, which is what that trial is about that you mentioned. IT is not only a MEK trial. There is some research with OM that shows that the MEK inhibitor enhances the effect of the PKC inhibitor.

See the Jan 2012 study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257235/

Also make sure to look at Delcath's Chemosat as a last resort treatment. It offers impressive survival rates with OM. Not all big clinics offer it, bexcaus ethere is a dispute with the FDA going on, but soem do and you can apply then for 'compassionate use' till it gets fully approved.  Don't underestimate this option, especially for helping in advanced cases. In Europe and Australia it has already bene approved and in the USA it was originally semi-apporved but teh FDA changed the rules of the game last minute. It has minor side effects (big plus!) and can be repeated every 4-6 weeks. See results of trial Phase III (NCT00324727)

Peter L

Tami,

PS:

Personally I would not just focus on MEK inhibitors solely, but on a combination of MEK inhibitors and PKC inhibitors, which is what that trial is about that you mentioned. IT is not only a MEK trial. There is some research with OM that shows that the MEK inhibitor enhances the effect of the PKC inhibitor.

See the Jan 2012 study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257235/

Also make sure to look at Delcath's Chemosat as a last resort treatment. It offers impressive survival rates with OM. Not all big clinics offer it, bexcaus ethere is a dispute with the FDA going on, but soem do and you can apply then for 'compassionate use' till it gets fully approved.  Don't underestimate this option, especially for helping in advanced cases. In Europe and Australia it has already bene approved and in the USA it was originally semi-apporved but teh FDA changed the rules of the game last minute. It has minor side effects (big plus!) and can be repeated every 4-6 weeks. See results of trial Phase III (NCT00324727)

Peter L

Tami,

PS:

Personally I would not just focus on MEK inhibitors solely, but on a combination of MEK inhibitors and PKC inhibitors, which is what that trial is about that you mentioned. IT is not only a MEK trial. There is some research with OM that shows that the MEK inhibitor enhances the effect of the PKC inhibitor.

See the Jan 2012 study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257235/

Also make sure to look at Delcath's Chemosat as a last resort treatment. It offers impressive survival rates with OM. Not all big clinics offer it, bexcaus ethere is a dispute with the FDA going on, but soem do and you can apply then for 'compassionate use' till it gets fully approved.  Don't underestimate this option, especially for helping in advanced cases. In Europe and Australia it has already bene approved and in the USA it was originally semi-apporved but teh FDA changed the rules of the game last minute. It has minor side effects (big plus!) and can be repeated every 4-6 weeks. See results of trial Phase III (NCT00324727)

Peter L

Tami,

Just in case you did not know, f you need to figure out what trials are available, the CollabRx site is teh best to search on. It also allows for looking for the mutation that needs inghibiting, before you choose the trial. Overall it is an easier interface. You can also search by drug.

See for MEK 162 http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/drug/MEK162 and

in general for GNAQ mutations: http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/lookup?results_3.2

Also useful is thsi site which keeps track of developments in molecular biology and corresponding treatments (it is reasonably up to date, although not perfect, so one need to cross match):

http://www.mycancergenome.org/content/disease/melanoma/gnaq/102

As you can see, MEK inhibitors are usuable for a limited type of OM patients (about 50%), not all. So it is wise to have a biopsy and genetic assessment done asap.

I would not wait till USCF/SFO has anything. It is not like it is one of main players for OM treatments. MD Anderson, Jefferson Kimmel and Sloan Kettering are specialized in that. In fact, I do not see any major OM publications by Dr Daud either. he seems more into skin melanoma, a different beast. For example: his publications on inhibiting BRAF mutations are typically skin melanoma studies as BRAF doe snot play any rol of significance in OM.

Peter L in Leiden, Netherlands (formerly in Windham, NH)

Tami,

Just in case you did not know, f you need to figure out what trials are available, the CollabRx site is teh best to search on. It also allows for looking for the mutation that needs inghibiting, before you choose the trial. Overall it is an easier interface. You can also search by drug.

See for MEK 162 http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/drug/MEK162 and

in general for GNAQ mutations: http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/lookup?results_3.2

Also useful is thsi site which keeps track of developments in molecular biology and corresponding treatments (it is reasonably up to date, although not perfect, so one need to cross match):

http://www.mycancergenome.org/content/disease/melanoma/gnaq/102

As you can see, MEK inhibitors are usuable for a limited type of OM patients (about 50%), not all. So it is wise to have a biopsy and genetic assessment done asap.

I would not wait till USCF/SFO has anything. It is not like it is one of main players for OM treatments. MD Anderson, Jefferson Kimmel and Sloan Kettering are specialized in that. In fact, I do not see any major OM publications by Dr Daud either. he seems more into skin melanoma, a different beast. For example: his publications on inhibiting BRAF mutations are typically skin melanoma studies as BRAF doe snot play any rol of significance in OM.

Peter L in Leiden, Netherlands (formerly in Windham, NH)

Tami,

Just in case you did not know, f you need to figure out what trials are available, the CollabRx site is teh best to search on. It also allows for looking for the mutation that needs inghibiting, before you choose the trial. Overall it is an easier interface. You can also search by drug.

See for MEK 162 http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/drug/MEK162 and

in general for GNAQ mutations: http://therapy.collabrx.com/melanoma/lookup?results_3.2

Also useful is thsi site which keeps track of developments in molecular biology and corresponding treatments (it is reasonably up to date, although not perfect, so one need to cross match):

http://www.mycancergenome.org/content/disease/melanoma/gnaq/102

As you can see, MEK inhibitors are usuable for a limited type of OM patients (about 50%), not all. So it is wise to have a biopsy and genetic assessment done asap.

I would not wait till USCF/SFO has anything. It is not like it is one of main players for OM treatments. MD Anderson, Jefferson Kimmel and Sloan Kettering are specialized in that. In fact, I do not see any major OM publications by Dr Daud either. he seems more into skin melanoma, a different beast. For example: his publications on inhibiting BRAF mutations are typically skin melanoma studies as BRAF doe snot play any rol of significance in OM.

Peter L in Leiden, Netherlands (formerly in Windham, NH)