Tag Archives: clinical trials

For the record: my contribution to medical research

First, a proposal. All you clinical trial sponsors, listen up. I really feel that upon enrollment in a clinical trial, each participant should be assigned a case manager as a perk of participation.

In reality, it is a necessity.

Take my case as an example. Thirteen going on fourteen years of surviving. A complicated treatment profile that involves surgery, four different chemotherapy regimens, as well as a TKI unrelated to ALK. Participation in three phase I clinical trials added into the mix.

When a protocol for a trial is established, it is viewed as a discrete event. IRB (internal review board) notwithstanding, there is currently no way to take into account individual circumstance. Say, how many clinical trials you’ve been in previously.

Or, do you have a cancer that is histologically different than the other clinical trial participants. Again, myself as an example. My cancer is invasive adenocarcinoma, mucinous, once referred to as mucinous BAC. Although every bit as lethal, it does have a distinct advantage in that it generally stays confined to the lungs–no distant metastases to deal with.

This histology makes me an odd peg when it comes to a one size fits all clinical trial. And it means that I have been subjected to excessive scans that were not clinically indicated and yet were mandated by protocol.

It is already well established that I have mutable cells. When I finally took a tally of all my scans, I became concerned and made a formal request that my scanning schedule be amended. I should add that at this point the schedule bore no resemblance to standard of care, with scans every six weeks. Part of what I was asking for was that scans be moved out to every three months once a participant had been in trial for more than a year. My request was denied.

And that is when I became officially noncompliant–refusing to get anymore abdominal CT scans. Per my insistence, my chest CT scans were also moved to every three months. Eventually, protocol was changed to my original request, with the scanning schedule changing to every three months once a participant had been enrolled for one year and I like to think my noncompliance made a difference.

However, for myself, the collateral damage has been tremendous. I have had a mind boggling number of scans, most of them medically unnecessary. It is infuriating, frightening and sad. Had I a case manager, I like to think this sort of thing would not have happened. At the moment, I am down to a chest CT every three months and brain MRI’s once a year. When you see how many scans I have had, imagine how many more there would be if I had not become noncompliant several years ago.

We’ll start with the small stuff. Keep in mind that this is only tests I’ve had done at MGH. It does not included x-rays (including those at a community hospital where I was diagnosed with lung cancer), scans, MRI’s prior to my time at MGH nor does it take into account dental imaging, colonoscopy or mammograms.

🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹🔹➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗➗✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️✖️⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕➕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕⭕☢️☢️☢️☢️☢️

The thirty-seven blue diamonds 🔹represent chest x-rays.

Brain MRI’s are represented by a division sign: ➗ and I have had forty-two brain MRI’s. In case you didn’t catch that, 42. And I have no brain metastases. 

The black multiplication sign ✖️ represents abdominal CT scans. I have had 54 CT scans of my abdomen. Plus six more, represented by the red circle ⭕ that were combination PET/CT scans (unbeknownst to me—the PET/CT combination). So, a total of 60 abdominal CT scans and no abdominal metastases. Yet. Abdominal CT scans have a formidable amount of background radiation and it pains me to know that I have had so many unnecessary scans due to my participation in clinical trials.

And now the really, truly impressive number. Represented by a plus sign ➕ . I have had 91 chest CT’s—plus an additional 10 PET/CT’s of my chest, again represented by the red circle ⭕ . One hundred and one chest CT scans. At least there is some clinical justification here, as I do have cancer in my lungs. However, even given that, had I not spent so much time in clinical trials, there is no way I would have had so many scans.

Oh and this symbol, the radioactive emoji: ☢️ . That’s a stand in for the full body PET scans and Bone Scans I have received. I should add that when I began this trial there was a requirement that a bone scan be given every three months. I told my oncologist that I would drop out of the trial before I’d get a bone scan that often and she contacted the sponsor and in that case the protocol was changed.

My calculated cumulative radiation exposure

For those who are curious, here is a graphic on the amount of radiation received by survivors of Hiroshima compared to other sources of radiation.

On the balance, there are patients who are underscanned. All of us would rather err on the side of caution. However, I would argue that in my own case, caution was thrown to the wind. As I moved from patient to participant, I lost my autonomy/individuality, as the need for data superseded my own clinical necessity.

There is no justifiable excuse for the fact that I endured 60 abdominal CT scans and 42 brain MRI’s and that as a result of this excessive scanning, I now have a gadolinium deposit in my brain–a finding with unknown clinical significance.

What is known is that no human being should receive as much radiation as I have unless it is absolutely medically necessary. And it is not hard to argue that given my lack of distant mets, those 60 abdominal CT scans and 42 brain MRI’s were not for my benefit.

Nope. I have, in so very many ways, already donated my body to science. And that’s why my gratitude is tempered.

My participation in clinical trials has been a privilege. But also a burden. In forthcoming blogs I shall reiterate my stance that clinical trial participants should be not only recognized for their tremendous contributions to medical research, they should also be offered support in multiple ways. A case worker. And compensation.

The down, the dirty, the skinny, the scat.

Gadolinium: heavy on my mind

You have no idea what’s going on in my head. Really. And, nor do they–the authorities.

That’s an MRI of my brain, demonstrating gadolinium deposition secondary to injected contrast. It is the rather faint, white, symmetrical ‘stain’ (it is actually referred to as a brain stain). Rorschach like. It’s been there since at least December of 2016, when it first showed up in my radiology report: There is nonspecific intrinsic T1 hyperintensity involving the globus pallidus and dentate nuclei bilaterally likely secondary to gadolinium deposition of uncertain clinical significance.

I had been aware of the possibility of gadolinium retention for at least a year prior to this finding and because of my concerns, had once again become non-compliant—in this case, refusing contrast.

To be clear, I have more latitude here than someone with either active or a history of brain mets. I’ve never had mets to my brain, which is part of the reason I have pushed back on scans that were mandated by protocol but not clinically indicated. Part of the rub when one is a clinical trial participant rather than a patient.

The day I found out about the gadolinium I was pissed. Really, really pissed.

As a requirement of the trial we took a cognitive test at each visit and part of that test was to write a simple sentence. I had a monkey in the cage/rage moment; threw a little scat at the keeper, if you will. My sentence that day read ‘Fuck you (sponsor of the trial), I have heavy metal on my brain.’

The jury is still out as to whether or not there already have been or will be side effects associated with gadolinium retention. Although everyone can certainly agree that it’s probably better not to have gadolinium in one’s brain.

And before anyone panics, know that it is still extraordinarily uncommon (and no, I did not want to be the poster child for this one). I believe I am Dr. Shaw’s only patient to date with this finding. And in discussion with her about this issue, she is adamant that a CT scan of the brain without contrast is basically useless.

My frustration was with the fact that I didn’t need the bloody MRI’s in the first place and I have had–at MGH alone–42 of them. That, my friends, is why I no longer hesitate to be noncompliant.

Filthy lucre

Screen Shot 2018-07-10 at 11.28.22 AMOk, let’s get real. I don’t expect to get paid $5000 a month to participate in a clinical trial and I deleted that rash comment from my last post. Fantasy, folks, that’s all. However, any sort of financial assistance in the form of compensation would be welcomed. When I met with the head of the cancer center, I also suggested that greater supportive services would go a long way. Free parking and a comped lunch, but also someone to help me navigate the financial morass while I’m on a drug with known cognitive side effects. Visits to a nutritionist, as just like everyone else on my therapy, my cholesterol is through the roof. How about some free massages—to make my life better/more relaxed? And I mean gratis—not billable to insurance.

In other words, there are ways to make the whole clinical trial experience more welcoming and sustainable. These are relatively new concepts as not so very long ago, most clinical trial participants were a one and done—in the most literal sense.

That was the expectation when I enrolled in my first trial ten years ago. That, best case scenario, my life would be extended for a few months. I am incredibly blessed that I have had the opportunity to go on to subsequent treatments and trials, extending my life far beyond what I ever thought possible. I am sensitive to the fact that my grousing about money is potentially  unseemly for those who would give anything to be in my position–alive.

Gratitude is far more palatable and it makes my disease/continuing survival easier for all to digest. However, the problems I face are faced by others as well and as an advocate/activist, I feel it is vitally important to discuss them—in a public forum.

Being alive is a good problem to have. But having to worry all the time about the expense associated with your medical care is not. I now have way more anxiety about my money than my cancer. How crazy is that?

And the thing is, I am not poor. However, with health costs exceeding a third of my income, it’s not doable.

What if (and I don’t feel this is unreasonable) trial sponsors covered all medical costs for participants, just as so many people already assume is true? If that was taken off my plate than I could pay my other bills. My financial situation would still be tight but it would be tenable. And that is all I’m asking for; (I’m talking to the medical establishment now) don’t make this already tough situation–living with a terminal illness–more difficult than it needs to be. Show some appreciation for the very real contribution I and other clinical trial participants make. Without us and our mutations (that’s right, we actually represent a rare commodity, not just an opportunity) these drugs would never make it to market. That would be a real loss, both in terms of lives and dollars.

So let’s keep this conversation going. My experience might be fairly unusual in terms of years spent in trial, personal finances and marital status, but it’s not unique. Clinical trials are the lynch pin when it comes to cancer therapeutics. Things have been done a certain way in large part because few have questioned the status quo. We, as consumers, have greater value than we sometimes realize and it is time we demand a better experience. As a society, let’s stop asking clinical trial participants for more blood, more sweat, more tears and instead find a way to support them as they lead the way. It’s the right thing to do from both a humanitarian and a business perspective—in a word, profitable.

Losing it

Earlier this week I made my morning cup of coffee immediately upon rising, just as I always do. But then I couldn’t find it. Anywhere. And I live in a one room loft. I also left my eyeglasses at a local restaurant over the weekend and as their staff’s search turned up nothing, I’m going to have to buy a new pair. Yesterday I misplaced the bra I was planning on wearing. I later found it in a bowl of oranges. Don’t ask, as I couldn’t answer, because I simply do not know.

Sometimes it’s funny, other times it’s frustrating as hell.

All these years of clinical trials and continuous treatment are catching up to me. Add in menopause and advancing age as well as the fact that I live alone, in itself a rather extraordinary thing for a person dealing with a terminal illness.

Yet there is an upside. I am now convinced that children have incredibly short attention spans by design (so to speak). That if they were able to mull, ponder and plan the way adults do, they might well waste the precious time allotted to childhood. There is a magnificent advantage to a wandering perspective–so incredibly well suited to experiencing the world with eyes wide open and without bias.

With my limited ability to recall, I am rather like a child. Everything feels fresh and seemingly brand new. My focus is short, but also incredibly intense. At times it as if I am tripping, my senses tickled by any stimulus at all. As an artist, this is a boon. Emotionally, it can also be of enormous benefit, as I am no longer prone to extensive rumination; once upon a time, losing my (beautiful and expensive) blue eyeglasses would have undone me, at least for a time. I regret their loss, but in the same way a child mourns a broken toy–briefly.

It is only when I need to function as an adult; someone with responsibilities and hard deadlines, that this lack of linear concentration becomes a true liability. I would in fact consider it almost a disability, although one that is neither obvious nor fully understood by those around me. I believe that might be because my cognitive challenges don’t reflect diminished intellect but rather the increasing inability to retain, recollect and organize information.

I could use some help–some sort of cheery task master. Someone who would commit to a couple of hours each week to assist me with those chores I now find so daunting (paying bills, taxes, getting my vintage clothing business up and running, managing my finances).

I already devote well over a third of my income to health care and I think a personal assistant is likely a luxury above my means. However, I would like to propose that there should be some sort of federal agency (yes, I’m dreaming) akin to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for clinical trial participants. That there be recognition (on the federal level) that in the war on cancer, clinical trial participants are serving on the front line. And that we, like veterans of other wars, deserve some sort of special consideration of both what has been given but also taken. Financially, emotionally, physically.

I’m committed to continuing to fight the good fight–and I do so gladly. With or without assistance. However, if anybody out there with mad organizational skills and a little spare time wants to come hang out, coffee’s included.

*if I can find it 🙂

When noncompliance is your best option

Last week Lungevity hosted the Scientific and Clinical Research Roundtable in DC and I was invited to be the keynote speaker. Really. I could be wrong but I have a sneaking suspicion that most of my invitations to speak will not be followed up with a second invitation. I have transitioned unequivocally from advocate to activist and I’m not sure everyone is ready to hear what I now feel the strong need to say. In a nutshell, I feel that clinical trial participants are the graduate students/sherpas/indentured servants of the cancer world. We do the heavy lifting–it’s all guts and no glory but we can’t say no because we’ve got nowhere else to turn.

I’ve shared the entire transcript of my talk here. It’s a long haul and for those of you familiar with my story, there will be some repetition in the first half. But then I get down to nuts and bolts (or screws and nails, the way I describe my neuropathy).

img_8503

Good afternoon. I am happy to be here today. In fact, I am happy to be here every day.

It’s not something I take for granted, ever. The first thing I do when I wake in the morning is to say ‘I’m alive.’

The wonder never lessens. And that is because a little over eight years ago, I heard the words ‘there is nothing else we can do.’ Never one to turn away from the truth I wanted to know more, I wanted to know how much time remained. The answer was three to five months.

And so I began to let go of my life—and to help my family do the same. Both I and my youngest, then eleven, started individual counseling. I travelled to Colorado, for a hastily organized and tearful family reunion. I said my goodbyes.

But then at my next oncology appointment something totally unexpected happened. A recent biopsy had been submitted for genetic testing and had come back positive for a newly identified target in non small cell lung cancer, an ALK translocation. A phase I clinical trial for an experimental agent targeting ALK mutations had begun recruiting at my hospital. So far there had been only one other participant and he had died within weeks of starting the trial, in part because of side effects of the experimental agent.

It was not a lot of information to go on but I liked the sound of targeted and my oncologist, though cautious, seemed enthusiastic as well. I hoped the drug wouldn’t hasten my death, but I knew that if I did nothing, my cancer would surely kill me. I was between a rock and a hard place but the way I saw it, this clinical trial offered at least a sliver of hope where now I had none. And I said yes.

On October 1st of 2008 I became the fourth person in the world with non small cell lung cancer to take crizotinib. Seven weeks later, as we went over my scans, my oncologist characterized my response as flipping amazing. And all those goodbyes became hello, I’m back.

I got lucky, really lucky. I was at the right place, in the right time, and with the right oncologist. And I’ve been lucky ever since, having now been an early participant in three phase I clinical trials. Innovative medical research has extended my life far beyond what I ever thought possible.

This has meant the world to me and my family. In June, almost eight years to the day after I was told I had three to five months left to live, I watched my youngest graduate cum laude from Phillips Exeter Academy. Four weeks ago he began his freshman year at MIT.

And me? I’m loving life, all of it. 45 when diagnosed, I will turn 57 in November. Between my three kids, art, writing, advocacy and my plethora of friends, I couldn’t be busier.

Of course, I do still have lung cancer. Although I have enjoyed two years of stability on my current therapy, my most recent scan showed progression. I have scans again in two days, and by next week, I should know if it is time to switch things up again.

I hope that medical research will stay one step ahead of me. I also hope my body will hold out.

It has been my privilege to participate in clinical research. But it has also been my burden. I have shared my joy, my gratitude. Now I would like to share my concerns and I feel I have rather a unique perspective for doing so.

There was an old paradigm for clinical trials, and that was that they were usually a one off.

When I enrolled in the trial for crizotinib in 2008, it was with the hope that it might extend my life for several months, nothing more than that. Because honestly, there was no precedence.

Even once it became clear that I’d in fact responded to the experimental therapy, my joy was tempered with the knowledge that I would eventually develop resistance to the drug and that when I did, I was once again out of options. Because that is where things stood in 2008.

I never imagined that I would go from trial to trial, and, at that time, I’m not sure anyone else could have imagined such a scenario either.

But I have and my participation has kept me alive. However, it has come at a price.

Enrollment in a clinical trial requires a greater commitment of time, resources, blood and tissue. And often, additional scans as well.

The clinical trial that I am now enrolled in initially had a protocol that required not only a Chest CT scan, but an abdominal scan, brain MRI, and echocardiogram every six weeks. I might point out that a schedule more akin to every three months is the standard of care when it comes to scans for a metastatic patient. I might also point out that my histology, invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma, almost always stays confined to the chest when it metastasizes, and that I have never had brain, bone or abdominal mets.

Initially my trial also required a bone scan, every three months. I had the first one, and afterward was handed the the same little card that you carry around for three days after every PET scan, just in case someone in law enforcement or at an airport picks up remaining background radiation. This struck me as ludicrous, and also an unacceptable risk with neither scientific justification nor personal gain. I told my oncologist that I wasn’t going to get any more bone scans even if it meant dropping out of the trial. Fortunately she is as invested in my future as I am and as a PI in the trial, was able to contact the sponsor and had the protocol changed.

Fast forward to July of 2015 when I happened to see a report in the Stanford Medicine newsletter regarding DNA damage seen in patients undergoing CT scanning. This line in particular jumped out at me ‘“We now know that even exposure to small amounts of radiation from computed tomagraphy scanning is associated with cellular damage.” I started to think about all the scans I’d had and would continue to get and wondered if anyone was keeping track. With access to my electronic medical records, I decided to tabulate the results myself and what I found shocked me. Now keep in mind that this only reflects care and clinical trial participation at my current hospital, and does not take into account previous imaging, such as the scans that led up to my diagnosis. Or workups for other health issues, or routine imaging such as mammograms or dental work.

When I sat down and counted I found that I’d had 19 chest x-rays but also close to 70 CT scans of my chest. For those of you who don’t know, each chest CT scan, even those that are low dose, has the equivalent radiation of 4-500 chest x-rays. Now multiply 400 times 70 and tell me if that is a number you are comfortable with. I was really surprised when I counted the number of abdominal scans I’d been given; 44. Given the complexity of the tissue in the abdomen, scans of that area of the body expose cells to an even greater amount of radiation. And keep in mind that I have no cancer in that part of my body. Yet. But I do have highly mutable cells.

The first CT scan of my chest saved my life. But is my scan schedule eventually going to lead to a secondary cancer?

I don’t know, but I can’t let that happen. And so I did what any reasonable person would do. I spoke not only to my oncologist, a PI in the trial, I contacted the sponsor personally. However, I really made no headway until I talked to the right person in a bar. That’s right. I have been a peer reviewer for the CDMRP for a number of years and after a session last fall I chatted up a fellow reviewer in the bar—told them my tale of woe. When I concluded he let me know that his wife worked for the sponsor and he was going to share my story with her.

Well sometimes the back door is the right one and this time the sponsor contacted me. I had a private phone conference where I spoke not only about my scans but about what I view as a rather prevalent disregard of the sacrifices clinical trial participants make. And I asked that they not only change the scan schedule, but that they pay for parking.

When I got my response it was from my scheduler. My scan schedule would not be changed. I told her to tell my oncologist that I now had no choice but to become noncompliant—that I would continue to get CT scans of my chest but there would be no more abdominal scans.

I am fortunate that my oncologist truly is as invested in my future as I am. She called me almost immediately and we discussed the situation. To my surprise, she was fully supportive, although she did explain what noncompliance put at risk for me personally as well as for the trial and my institution. I told her that if she asked me to go to Mars the next day I would do it, I trust her so implicitly, but that I simply could not keep getting scans every six weeks for the rest of my life.

The bottom line is this—currently clinical trials are monitored as discreet events, a residual of the old one-off paradigm. No one seems to be keeping track of patients such as myself, who are traveling from trial to trial. I am an outlier, an exceptional responder, and I am also a bit of an anomaly amongst the ALK positive population with my invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma histology.

But that is the point—I am first and foremost an individual, a human being. Participation in clinical trials does not cede my humanity, although it certainly does result in a certain loss of autonomy. And words like compliant and noncompliant only underscore that fact.

Per my scans—I really like to do things the right way. Also, as an advocate, this was never just about me but rather about everyone who participates in clinical trials. And so I would periodically contact the sponsor. What I didn’t realize is that my oncologist was also in continuing dialogue with them about the scanning schedule. Several months ago I got word that the protocol would be changed and that after a year on trial, participant’s scans would move out to every three months, the standard of care. When I spoke to my oncologist, I realized that it was her input, not mine, that made the real difference. But the important thing is, she respected my concerns which motivated her to request a change in protocol.

As for me, I moved to the every three month schedule as soon as I heard the news, even though it is not yet official. Jumping the gun a little, but then again, I remain noncompliant as to my abdominal scans, so what’s a skipped chest CT scan or two. And don’t think I am simply being cheeky—I donated my body to science a long time ago and I feel no guilt when it comes to a skipped scan or two.

I still wish I didn’t have to get brain MRI’s every six weeks—I’ve now had almost thirty and nothing causes me more anxiety than the loud clanking, claustrophobia of a brain MRI. Also, I am convinced that we don’t yet understand the risks—again, there is very little precedence for such a frequent MRI schedule in someone with healthy brain tissue. After reading that the contrast agent, gadolinium, is not readily cleared from the body I did request that we forgo contrast so that is one small victory.

The irony is, were this anything other than a clinical trial, say, a war or a sporting event, I and my fellow participants would not be fighting for our basic human rights. We would be decorated for our valor, celebrated, maybe even highly compensated. And we can’t even get our parking comped.

And yet, I am alive. It is a wondrous thing, and something most people take for granted.

I would do almost anything to stay alive. I already have. But I am also not willing to throw away this second chance at life by submitting to ridiculous requirements simply to satisfy the science and to speed drugs to market. As Richard Pazdur has said, ‘People are not for clinical trials. Clinical trials are for people.’ It’s imperative that we not lose sight of why trials exist in the first place. It is not to advance the careers of researchers. It is not to keep oncologists and hospitals in business. It is not to enrich sponsors and their shareholders.

Rather, it is to provide patients such as myself with an opportunity to hang onto our very dear lives.

*for a dose of happy/hopeful Linnea, check out this video interview about Clinical Trials from the Lungevity site.

Just doing it

Screen Shot 2016-03-10 at 9.41.43 AM

I had my six week scan review yesterday—twenty months of stability and counting. At these appointments Dr. Shaw always gives my lungs a listen and this time she kept her stethoscope pressed to my back a little longer than usual and I wondered what it was that she heard. Nothing, as it turns out. I’ve had a little wheeze in the bottom of my upper left lobe all along, but for the first time, she couldn’t find it. ‘Maybe I’m cured’ I said. ‘Maybe you are’ she replied. Or maybe that’s just what I imagined.

What she did say was that she was relieved as she’d been feeling a little anxiety as to what might transpire after my being off drug for a week. Me too. It might be coincidence but my progression on crizotinib followed a break from therapy when I had surgery on a shattered left ankle. And resistance to zykadia came in the wake of my second bout of liver toxicity and subsequent pause in drug.

My labs three weeks ago indicated elevated amylase. My liver enzymes have been only mildly elevated on PF-06463922 so I have continued to enjoy a glass of wine most evenings. Now alcohol was no longer an option.

And why the break in drug? Two weeks ago I began to feel really crummy. A virus, probably strep throat, and then several days later a sinus infection as well. I was also really constipated, an unfortunate side effect of treatment. But then I started to get really uncomfortable with a burning pain in my abdomen and super nauseous–combined with my elevated amylase these symptoms were highly suggestive of pancreatitis. I was in touch with Dr. Shaw, who had prescribed an antibiotic for the ear infection. She felt it would be wise to test my amylase again and as I had an appointment with my ear nose throat doctor on Wednesday we agreed to do it then. In the meantime I would fast and drink only clear liquids so as to give my pancreas a rest. By late Tuesday I was feeling so very bad that I texted Alice and asked her if I should consider going to the emergency room.

Alice called me back and when I told her I felt this represented pancreatitis her response was ‘Linnea, I really hope you don’t have pancreatitis because if you do, it would be grounds for exclusion from almost all further clinical trials.’ This was news to me. Just the day before I had spoken to a friend who’d been excluded from a trial for pancreatitis but I was under the impression that hers was a singular experience pertinent only to that particular trial.

So I told Alice I was not going to get my amylase tested again–that I hadn’t come this far only to learn that I had no more treatment options because of an elevated lab result. She said we’d see how I felt the next day. The following morning I received a text from her  asking me how I felt. My guarded and completely disingenuous response was ‘Hi. Better.’ She then gently but firmly urged me to come in for labs. And I responded with this message:

Alice, I guess I haven’t been paying attention but until I spoke to Margaret I did not know it was grounds for exclusion and it was only after speaking to you that I understood that exclusion meant virtually all trials. I have a very strong commitment to surviving and treatment options are part of my hope for the future. Under any other circumstances I would get that lab work done but as it stands, it is absolutely not in my best interest in the long run. I’m sorry. I would like you to advise me as to how long I can safely hold food for though. Thanks.’

Alice Shaw is a fabulous doctor and I consider her a friend as well. I admire her in so many ways and one of them is how she can just roll with the punches. She heard what I had to say and yet stood her ground. She advised me that if I were feeling better and merely had an elevated lab result it would not be considered pancreatitis. I needed greater reassurance–‘Would that protect my future options?’ She repeated what she had already said, that a lab test alone should have no impact.

So I assented. I got the lab work done and it came back completely normal. Only then did I acknowledge that I still felt absolutely awful. A quick reassessment of symptoms and Alice surmised that this was likely gastritis and possibly a peptic ulcer, which I could address with laxatives and anti-reflux medication.

We also talked a little bit more about what could have happened if I’d actually had pancreatitis. I told her that I felt these sorts of exclusions were patently unfair, and she said that the rationale behind the exclusions was that certain individuals were more likely to experience serious side effects.

I don’t buy it. When I entered my first clinical trial in 2008, I was taking on enormous risk–the only other person in the trial had died almost immediately, in large part because of the toxicity of the experimental therapy. Knowing this did not in any way deter me because I understood that if I chose not to enroll in the trial (my only hope and a thin sliver at that), I would be dead within a couple of months anyway. It was a no brainer.

My explanation to Alice was this: If I experienced life threatening side effects I might be fucked but at least I’d be fucked with options. But that having no treatment options meant that I was totally fucked as I would experience the most devastating adverse event of them all—I would be dead. And that it is my viewpoint that patient safety might be a secondary concern to getting drugs to market faster and without hitches (like adverse events).

I trust Alice implicitly and know that she is highly invested in my personal outcome. However, I hold no illusions about what it means to move from patient to participant in a clinical trial–the loss of autonomy can be really, really frustrating.

In the end, nobody loves this life of mine as much as I do and self advocacy is key to survival. Woody Allen once said that 80% of success is showing up and when it comes to tomorrow, I will not be a no show.

Linnea live (I like the sound of that)

This video was recorded at the annual LUNGevity Hope Summit in 2014 and fits in perfectly with the theme of clinical trials. When I refer to starting a new trial, it is for PF-06463922 or lorlatanib (which has kept my cancer stable for 18 months now–woohoo!). I’m a little breathless and hoarse as my cancer was advancing again. I noticed immediately how fast I am speaking– markedly slowed speech has been a side effect of PF-06463922.

Slow, fast, hoarse or not, the most important message here is one of hope (thank you LUNGevity). When I mention going from cure to living longer I am talking about accepting the fact that I would never be cured. That’s a difficult concept to embrace but in order to make it even remotely acceptable I found I needed to replace cure with a potentially obtainable goal—becoming an outlier. At ten plus years (eleven, in April) I am there.

Secondly, the importance of options. When diagnosed in 2005, the first hurdle I hoped to jump was qualifying for surgery. I had nineteen lymph nodes and most of my left lung removed followed by four rounds of adjuvant chemo and yet my cancer returned almost immediately. Two strikes, and I’d been informed that treating lung cancer was basically three strikes and you’re out. My first clinical trial in 2008 was a long shot. I was thrilled beyond belief when I responded to crizotinib, but also understood that it represented a temporary fix and that there was nothing else out there once it stopped working.

Thankfully, that’s no longer true. Sadly, there aren’t viable options for everyone with lung cancer. Medical research got me to where I am today (alive!) but we can’t stop now.