Consider taking two hours of your time to donate platelets, and you may save a patient’s life.  Platelets are components found in your blood that help it to clot. Cancer patients may need transfusions of platelets because their bone marrow has become too crowded with cancer cells, or their cells become damaged from chemo- and radiotherapy.  In addition to cancer patients, organ transplant, trauma victims, and cardiac surgery patients can also benefit from platelet donations.  Donated platelets have a shelf-life of five days. Cancer patients need anywhere from two to 100 transfusions of platelets during their treatment, which is why there is a constant need for donations. Here are four tips to remember when donating platelets.

Sonja Vozniak, R.N. with the platelet donation machine

  1. Eat a healthy meal and drink plenty of fluids the day before and the day of your scheduled donation.
  2. Wear comfortable clothes. It takes about 1 ½ to 2 hours to donate, so wear clothes that are comfortable.
  3. Bring something to do.  Bring your laptop, magazine or book to keep you occupied while you donate. 
  4. No aspirin or Ibuprofen.  Do not take aspirin or ibuprofen at least one day prior to donating.

The Johns Hopkins Blood Donation Center is located on the first floor of the Johns Hopkins Outpatient Center (JHOC) 601 North Caroline Street, Room 1144, Baltimore, Maryland 21287. For more information about donating or to schedule a donation appointment, call 410-955-TIME.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
5 Comments

Evan Lipson

Evan Lipson, M.D.

For Carrie Wells, a powerful and positive part of surviving breast cancer was attending a retreat with women who shared similar journeys. Being surrounded by other survivors was a chance for connection, education, relaxation and healing. So moved was Carrie by the retreat experience, she felt compelled to help other cancer survivors find equally valuable opportunities. Carrie launched SurvivorsRetreat.com, a website that offers a comprehensive, searchable database of cancer survival retreats.

Click below to hear her story.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 4.0/5 (1 vote cast)
No Comments

We completed three days of filming for a new C-Answers video series on cancer survivorship. In one of the video segments, we feature nutritionist Lynda McIntyre discussing how to stay healthy through diet and nutrition. Each time I listen to Lynda speak on these issues, I feel like my diet needs a complete makeover. But when Lynda gave us her "power" list of fruits and veggies, I was happy to note that many of them are on my weekly grocery list. Are they on yours?

Lynda McIntyre's Power List of Fruits and Veggies

Apples
Berries
Citrus
Beans
Broccoli
Nuts
Seeds
Whole grains

Expect to see Lynda's video on our YouTube site in about a month. In the meantime, watch Kimmel Cancer Center director Bill Nelson discuss the role of diet and nutrition in cancer.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
No Comments
I entered uncharted territory when I began the feature story for the latest issue of the Kimmel Cancer Center's magazine Promise & Progress.  I was unaware that Johns Hopkins engineers had joined our cancer experts in the fight against cancer and equally unaware of the great body of work that was coming from this new kind of cancer collaboration.  With just a basic understanding of the principles of engineering, I was a kid in a candy story of science. We are talking amazing feats of technology, such as Kinect gaming systems used in cancer treatment, robots with snakelike devices that can get inside bones and dig out tumors, light-emitting cancer cells, blood cells transformed into heart cells, cancer-drug filled nanoparticles, and so much more.
 
I invite you to read the new issue to get a glimpse of some of these innovative approaches to cancer treatment and explore, for yourself, this exciting new world of cancer science and medicine.
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Rangos and Finalists

John Rangos Sr. (third from left); His Excellency Vassilis Kaskarelis, Ambassador of Greece (fourth from left); and finalists Brian Ladle, Kevin Cheung, Andrew Sharabi, Cheng Ran "Lisa" Huang and Diane Heiser.

Last Friday, the historic Hurd Hall at Johns Hopkins was filled to capacity with students, faculty and staff waiting to hear five scientists – all in the early part of their careers – describe their novel ideas on how to cure metastatic cancer.  It was part of a competition on creative thinking named for John Rangos Sr., chairman of the Rangos Family Foundation, who funded the awards.  Rangos worked with Johns Hopkins faculty members Donald S. Coffey and Horst Schirmer in the Department of Urology to develop the competition.

Each scientist had 10 minutes to present their idea and answer questions from a panel of Johns Hopkins faculty judges.

Master of creative thinking, Coffey, whose theory on killing cancer by weakening its DNA scaffolding continues to spur innovative research, opened the event, describing it as the “Olympics” of research competitions at Johns Hopkins.

The finalists were awarded the John G. Rangos Medal of Honor in Creative Thinking and the top three winners received cash prizes.

First up to the podium was medical oncology fellow and fifth place winner Kevin Cheung who proposed turning back the clock on cancer cells, reprogramming them into germ cells. He suggested that the reason testicular and other germ cell tumors have high cure rates is because of their undifferentiated state. Just as scientists have created immature pluripotent stem cells from adult cells, Cheung says that the same could be done with cancer cells.  By age reversing resistant cancer cells, he proposes to make them sensitive to conventional chemotherapy.

Third-place winner Diane Heiser, a doctoral candidate in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, proposed that more metastatic cancers can be cured by understanding how cancer cells repair their own DNA. She suggests that metastatic cancer cells are able to survive the severe DNA breaks that occur with DNA damaging agents like chemotherapy by repairing themselves quickly and efficiently. Heiser says that determining the specific proteins which help metastatic cancer cells repair their DNA could reveal new targets for drugs that sensitize cancer cells to chemo or radiation therapy.

Genetics postgraduate student and second-place winner Cheng Ran "Lisa" Huang described cancer as a “fight between two parasites – cancer versus transposons.” She noted that nearly half of the human genome is made up of “jumping” DNA – short sequences of DNA that get inserted into the genome at various points.  Too many transposons can lead to genomic instability and kill the cell.  Huang says that germ cell tumors have the highest level of transposon activity, making them more prone to cell death, and thus, more easily killed by chemotherapy drugs.  There is potential, she says, of using drugs to target proteins that normally suppress transposon activity in most cell types.

Brian Ladle, a pediatric oncology fellow and fourth-place winner, presented his idea that cancer cures rates depend on the level of uniformity between cancer cells.  Low-risk pediatric leukemias are mostly curable, he says, and most of the cells have uniform qualities and certain genetic abnormalities in common.  Cancers that are more difficult to cure are less uniform. Ladle suggests that targeting different populations of cells within cancers could result in fewer relapses and more cures.

The overall prize went to radiation oncology resident Andrew Sharabi for his idea entitled “Specific Immune Response against Testicular Cancer: A Proposed Mechanism for Long Term Remission.” Sharabi suggests that metastatic testicular cancer is largely curable in most patients because immune cells zero in on testicular cancer cells with far more accuracy than other cancers. He proposes that testicular cells are essentially recognized as foreign to the immune system because the testes are protected by the so-called blood-testis barrier, much like the blood-brain barrier. Testicular cancer cells can spread to the rest of the body and may initially go undetected by immune system cells. However, when patients receive chemotherapy, he believes that this causes testicular cancer cells to die, releasing many targets for the immune cells. At that time, the immune system kicks into high gear, generating large numbers of circulating immune cells, whose task is to seek the testicular cancer cells and destroy them. Sharabi believes that after chemotherapy, testicular cancer cells may be essentially recognized as foreign by the immune cells because the blood-testis barrier had, until then, kept testicular cells hidden from the immune system.

Sharabi proposes further investigations of how the immune system responds to testicular cancer cells to identify specific immune system targets common to testicular cancer as well as other types of cancer. The research could lead to development of vaccines that prime the body to defend against and fight cancers.

Just before Sharabi was announced the top winner, John Rangos Sr. called Hopkins a “beacon of light in the measurement of medicine.”  It is here, he said, that we’ll find the next generation of scientific leaders.

Congratulations to the Rangos award finalists and all those who value creativity and innovation.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
1 Comment

Evan Lipson

Evan Lipson, M.D.

Several years after Annie Applegarth battled sarcoma, she joined the Mermaids, a group of swimmers that raises money for cancer research. Before her diagnosis she had never spent much time in the water. Now her friends and family cheer as she finishes up a mile.

Click below to hear her story.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 4.0/5 (1 vote cast)
1 Comment

Vanessa Wasta

Vanessa Wasta

It's been a game-changing year in cancer research.  Doctors and scientists don't typically like to use those words, but here's why I think this is a turning point.  Scientists are churning out the genetic code of cancer cells as quickly as the cost of sequencing technology plummets.   Teams of researchers are looking for ways to add the new armory of cancer cell-targeted drugs with the traditional therapies of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.  Studies continue on ways to widen the pool of donors for bone marrow transplant patients -- work being led by Johns Hopkins investigators.  New collaborations are being formed between national and international institutions and within our own institutions, between departments such as engineering and mathematics, not ordinarily considered partners in cancer research.

These and many other advances bode well for a future of better prevention, tests, and therapies for cancer.  To get a better understanding of the direction of cancer research, I polled a group of Johns Hopkins cancer center members for their opinions on the top research trends this year.  

Researchers identified trends in creating molecular tests based on genetic and epigenetic profiles of patient that define whether a new drug may or may not be effective.  Some pointed to research questioning the value of screening methods for cancer, which made national headlines for its polarizing viewpoints by U.S. and Canadian task forces specifically on mammography screening.   Several studies, including those at Johns Hopkins, continue to validate so-called "active surveillance" programs for prostate cancer, which carefully monitor men who are at low risk for harmful cancers rather than treating them with surgery or radiation.

In breast cancer, experts pointed to results of a Canadian study that showed dramatic reduction of new breast cancer cases among post-menopausal women who took a drug called exemestane.  Doctors also pointed to improvements in treatment outcomes of early stage breast cancer by adding radiation to axillary lymph nodes.  This finding goes hand-in-hand with results published earlier this year on decreasing the use of axillary lymph node surgery for certain breast cancer patients. 

Finally, this year, six new cancer drugs were approved by the FDA -- all for treatment of advanced or metastatic cancers.  They include treatments for melanoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma, thyroid, prostate and lung cancers.   Melanoma specialist and Seize the Days blogger Evan Lipson, M.D., cited this year's approval of the immune-based drug ipilumumab (Yervoy) as a major milestone in cancer treatment, not just for melanoma, but for cancer treatment in general, he says.  There is likely much more to come from researchers seeking ways to use a patient's own immune system to attack cancer.  Listen to Lipson's podcast below discussing this topic. 

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 2.8/5 (5 votes cast)
2 Comments

Evan Lipson

Evan Lipson, M.D.

Jamie Galloway is a retired microbiologist who volunteers her time supporting other breast cancer survivors. She provides them comfort and companionship, just as she was supported during her own battle with the disease.

Click below to hear her story.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
No Comments

Evan Lipson

Evan Lipson, M.D.

Jeffrey Liss was a natural leader whose work as an attorney was often dedicated to advocating for the public interest. In addition to helping those in need, Jeffrey was passionate about music and, in it, found great comfort and empowerment, especially during his fight against pancreatic cancer. He shared his passion by creating a music library to benefit other patients being treated at Johns Hopkins.

Click below to hear Jeffrey's wife Susan tell the story.

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 4.0/5 (2 votes cast)
No Comments

John Fetting

John Fetting, M.D.

***The following post was written by Dr. John Fetting at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center.

Another successful Breast Cancer Awareness Month is coming to a close. We have raised the national consciousness, encouraged screening, touted the benefits of treatment, celebrated an ever-growing number of survivors, and honored those who fought bravely but died.
 
Still, the number of women around the world who have their lives suddenly and forever changed by this terrible disease continues to increase. This must stop. A steady increase in the incidence of breast cancer is not inevitable. Preventing breast cancer is not too hard, too big, or too expensive.

Curing breast cancer has a face. It is the face of our wife, our mother, our sister, our daughter. We take curing breast cancer personally. Not so, with prevention. For the most part, we can’t identify those who are destined to get breast cancer. Until they are diagnosed with it, they are faceless.

Preventing breast cancer will be hard work. First, we need to identify strong risk factors that predict who will develop breast cancer. Some of the risk factors we identify today, such as early onset of menstruation and first pregnancy after age 30, are not all that predictive or helpful. They are only indirectly related to the development of breast cancer and account for such modest increases in risk that most women with these risk factors will not develop the disease.
 
The strongest risk factors are biological and genetic changes occurring in the breast, which mark the path from normal breast to breast cancer. An example of a strong risk factor is a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. About five to ten percent of breast cancers are caused by a mutation in these genes. Most women with one of these mutations will get breast cancer. There is no doubt about their risk; there is no doubt about their need for prevention.  
 
Most breast cancers, however, will be caused by multiple genetic and biologic changes, and finding the right combinations of these changes for predicting high risk for the disease is our task.

Once we identify these changes and the women at highest risk, we can develop and test interventions to prevent the disease. Whether an intervention is a dietary supplement or drug, it can’t be burdensome—in cost or side effects. Prevention drugs used today, including tamoxifen, raloxifene, and exemestane, halve the risk of breast cancer but come with troublesome side effects.

Make no mistake, to prevent breast cancer we need to make the kind of single-minded, determined effort that has characterized our effort to cure breast cancer. Anything less will take a very long time or fail altogether. Support for basic and applied prevention research will be expensive, and government and pharmaceutical funding cannot be the sole sources of funding. Private philanthropy and grassroots fundraising will be essential.

I attended the Maryland Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure last Sunday. And as I watched the runners and walkers stream past the start line, I was impressed that this group was on a mission. They are out to cure breast cancer. As the T-shirts of one team proclaimed: “Defeat is not an option.”

There were thousands of girls and young women walking or running. Why were they there?  Some had a very personal stake because a loved one had been affected. Others supported a friend or classmate whose mother, sister, or grandmother was affected. I saw groups representing their school or church in an expression of commitment to this cause. They radiated enthusiasm and camaraderie. They did not seem afraid or to feel particularly at risk. But some of them are at risk. We need to figure out who they are and take steps to prevent their breast cancer. These are the faces of prevention. We owe it to them.

John Fetting, M.D.
Associate Director for Clinical Practice
Associate Professor
Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

***Note: The John Fetting Award in Breast Cancer Prevention has been established to fund the most promising research in breast cancer prevention. Applications will be granted to the most promising work for a two-year period.  The John Fetting Award is led by breast cancer survivor and advocate Leslie Ries.  Her video documentary, Letters to My Daughters, chronicles her inspiring story and mission to help prevent breast cancer. 

Additional Resources:

Preventing Breast Cancer

C-Answers video series: Dr. Fetting discusses breast cancer prevention

Support Breast Cancer Prevention Research at Johns Hopkins

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
No Comments