IS THIS NEWS TO ANYONE: ABRAXANE

[Janette]

Thanks Petra,
That is very interesting.

[petra001]

BTW I found this video on how abraxane works on Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cQ2xO8g7UE

[petra001]

I also started on Abraxane last month - I am accessing via the free program the company Specialised Therapeutiocs offer. What a relief - no need for steroids and only 30 mins in the chair. So far so good - I seem to be tolerating much better than the taxol i was on. The nursing staff heard from the company that it will be on the PBS from May 1 but i am getting it for free. I hope this new chemo helps me.

[gallopinggranny]

thanks Jules - let's hope it doesn't take as long to subsidise as herceptin did

[mistikal]

GG,
I haven't had a chance to review the information, but I hope this info helps.
Abraxane® is approved in Australia for the treatment of metastatic carcinoma of the breast after failure of anthracycline therapy.
http://www.specialisedtherapeutics.com.au/abraxane.html

I found this on the breastcancer.org site: http://www.breastcancer.org/news_resear ... ion_04.jsp
Jennifer Griggs, M.D., M.P.H.: "We are getting smarter about how we select chemotherapy agents, not just the work of Dr. Slamon. We have longer term results of patients who were treated with a regimen that did not contain an anthracycline. There was a clinical trial with long term results presented that compared Taxotere (chemical name: docetaxel) with Cytoxan (chemical name: cyclophosphamide), compared to Adriamycin (chemical name: doxorubicin) with Cytoxan. You'll notice that the Taxotere-Cytoxan combination does not include an anthracycline. Patients who got the non-anthracycline regimen did not have a worse outcome and survival may actually have been higher in the patients who got Taxotere-Cytoxan. The work from Dr. Slamon and his group suggests that not all patients need anthracyclines, and we may be able to use characteristics of the tumor to decide who does and who does not need an anthracycline. But the medical community is not yet willing to make a flat statement against the use of anthracyclines. This class of drug, the anthracyclines, is extremely effective in treating women with metastatic breast cancer and to discard their use in earlier stage breast cancer seems premature. Nonetheless, because of the possible damaging effects to the heart of the anthracyclines, reserving the use of this type of drug for people most likely to benefit just makes sense. My guess is that within the next 2-3 years we will have a clearer idea of who is most likely to need the anthracyclines and who does not need them."

[gallopinggranny]

I was sent this one by a friend this morning, maybe i am wrong about it too:

"I have often explained the need to get rid of Taxol with its horrible side effects. I recently started with an article on nanochemistry and ended up learning about a modified form of Taxol that had little or no side effects. I have tracked it right down now and find that it is even approved for use here. I have contacted the MD of the agents and arranged for the documentation to go to the hospital pharmacist and for supplies of Abraxane. It is not on the PBS scheme yet but may be in June/July. Meantime I have a next to zero price for the supply. It is also up to four times faster to infuse and is doubly as effective as well.

One of the helpful sources has suggested that I look for a new oncologist. As he has my documentation and has not called me as requested, that seems to be an inevitable step and I have a recomendation from the Abraxane people.

All in all, I am happy with the success and the time it took to resolve the issue. xxxxxxx has a break after next Thursday and I expect she may start on the new treatment soon after."