NOT OC. I'M GOING IN SEARCH OF SUN AND DRYNESS

                                         Linda and Carolyn in Split Mountain gorge, 2007

This is merely to inform you that I am going on "vacation", in Borrego Springs, and so there will be fewer cancer-related postings.  It is hard to imagine taking a "vacation" from a life in which all one really needs to do is feed the cats, so maybe I'm just changing the locale of my lazy life-style.  I will continue to get stuff to read from the Hutch, but now I will be able to read it while sitting on my patio in shorts and a T-shirt.  I will be home by mid-May.

To orient those of you who know Split Mountain - when I took this picture my back was to "Anticline".

NOT OC. LINDA IN ECUADOR

                                                  You didn't know Linda was 6' tall, did you?

Well, of course, she wasn't.  This was taken at the famous Otovalo market in Ecuador, after our Galapagos trip.  The Indiginos in that part of the Andes tend to be very, very small - and they don't like their picture taken.  So, I took a picture of Linda just as a typical woman, carrying baby, happened to walk by. Insensitive of me, probably.  To make amends we spent lots of money.

Let me ask you once again to tell people about this blog.  Put it on Facebook.  Twit it (or is that tweet).  Write the URL on restroom walls.  I'm doing this (writing the blog) to spread the word about cancer research, as far and wide as possible.  Okay, yes, I also do it because it's fun.

FOR MEN ONLY: THE PROSTATE CANCER WARS

Never happier than when holding a baby.

The March 20, 2012 NCI Bulletin contains a short article that, in my mind, further muddies the waters insofar as prostate cancer is concerned.  The question muddied is as follows: should clinicians (your primary care physician and/or urologist) routinely use PSA to screen for prostate cancer in low-risk men? 

PSA stands for prostate-specific antigen.  For you biochemistry freaks this is a glycoprotein, called kallikrein-3, and is coded for by the KLK3 gene.  It plays several roles in reproduction.  It tends to be markedly elevated in the blood of men with some (most?) kinds of prostate cancer.  Heretofore many “clinicians” have ordered PSA analyses as part of routine physical exams.  Now, however, that practice has been called into question.

Apparently there have been two huge studies of the efficacy of PSA as a weapon against prostate cancer.  The earlier was conducted under the auspices of the NCI and involved 77,000 men who (so far) have been followed for at least  seven years.  In this study (the PLCO study) there was no statistically verifiable difference between the death rate of screened and unscreened participants.  However, there were enough “false positives” to generate needless medical activity, some of it uncomfortable and all of it expensive.   This moved the United States Preventative Services Task Force (what this is I haven’t a clue) to issue a dire warning, the gist of which was – don’t use PSA for routine screening of low-risk men.  My urologist thinks this is baloney. 

Now along come results from an even bigger trial, the ERSPC (European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer).  This study had about 182,000 participants, who were followed (to date) for eleven years.  The most significant result of this study was that there was a 21% reduction in prostate cancer deaths in the group that had their PSA checked regularly (as compared to the group who did not.)  However, regular PSA measurement did (as in the PLCO trial) result in a lot of “overdiagnosis”;  that is, about half the cancers detected by PSA screening would never have been fatal.  So, presumably, PSA in this group saved a lot of lives, but caused an equal number of people time, discomfort and expense – not to mention scaring the hell out of them!

So what is an old man with an enlarged prostate to do?  I’m absolutely not recommending anything, but I know I will damned well continue getting my PSA checked.  Chance of avoiding premature death is worth a good deal of discomfort – and, of course, under Obamacare it will be FREE!

STANFORD GETS IN THE ACT

Inverness, Scotland, 1999

As part of my “Cancer Cures in the News” series I’m going to refer you to an article in “Stanford”, a publication of the Stanford Alumni Association, March/April 2012 edition.  Most of you are lucky enough not to get this slick, slightly snooty publication, so if you want a copy of this article I will make one and send it to you; just ask.  Normally I never read it, although I have been getting it now for over 50 years (without ever once joining the alumni association.)  I think they are hoping I will leave them (Stanford) some money.  They will be disappointed.

The article details efforts to use certain characteristics of solid cancers to throttle them.  It appears that some solid cancers grow so fast that they outstrip their oxygen supply; that is, they become “hypoxic”.  To continue to grow, the cancer cells (the article mentions prostate, liver and ovarian cancers) must resort to a source of energy other than the usual one, which depends on an adequate supply of oxygen.    This alternate energy source is called “glycolysis”, and involves the rapid breaking down of complex sugar molecules.  As you might expect, from here the story becomes progressively more obscured in biochemical murk and gloom, and it would be better for you to follow it yourself.  However, overall this article is readable and gives you a fair peak at how this aspect of cancer research is conducted.  It also is moderately upbeat.  Moderately.

This article, by Kristin Sainani, also gives you some idea of how expensive this sort of research must be.  Even the mice they use (yes, our friend, the mouse) are sometimes genetically engineered to facilitate specific studies.  An eventual cure is sure to be costly, so be prepared to advocate for cancer research funding whenever you can.  I’m afraid the days of making fundamental, breakthrough scientific  progress by sitting under a tree, thinking, and being hit on the head by a falling apple are long gone.      

NOT OC. LINDA AT 7

I love this picture.  It’s Linda on her 7^th birthday, bubbling over with joy and zest for life.  If ever there was a person who deserved a good life, this little girl – all love, innocence and happiness – certainly did.  And, she did have a good life, just one that was far, far too short.

Anyway, I toss this in because I am going down to the Hutch in an hour or two, where no  doubt I  will write some ponderous blog-bit about cancer, biochemistry, or something else I don’t understand.  This is the picture that goes with that piece.  And besides, it does us all good to be reminded that, despite all the ugly stuff in the news, there still is innocence and goodness in the world.  

NOT OC. LINDA, CATS - AND A PLEA

             Linda, Murphy (the Prince of Darkness) and Whiskers, in our little Cowgill House, 1985.

Murphy is looking at me as I take this picture, wondering whether to rip the camera out of my hands, or just ignore me.  Thankfully he did the latter.

This picture is to make up for the one I didn't add to my last post.  I would like to add a plea, though, that those of you within striking distance consider doing the Rivkin Center Summer Run on July 22nd; for details, goto www.summerun.org.  Also, please go to the Rivkin Center web site and read the section "A tribute to Marsha".  This will help you understand what we are up against when we confront ovarian cancer.

THE SELFISH (CANCER?) GENE

               

England, probably 2008.  Pub grub

                I’m working at Fred Hutch today (3/22/12) and have just finished filing several cases of surgical records.  I hope all of the surgical outcomes were positive, but I’m afraid that’s unlikely.

                Earlier I spent some quality time reading this week’s NCI Cancer Bulletin.  There were several items of interest; right now, I want to comment on one, about pancreatic cancer.  I believe that was the type of cancer that Steve Jobs suffered from, but I may be wrong.

                The article states that pancreatic cancer is notoriously resistant to chemo and radiation therapy: apparently the 5-year survival rate is less than 5%.  Part of the reason for this dismal prognosis is that, as a pancreatic tumor grows, it provides itself with a thick “matrix” (protective layer?) that  exerts a powerful  pressure on the tumor, sufficient to actually flatten the blood vessels within it.  Without blood vessels to act as a delivery system the tumor just goes its merry way – unfortunately.

                There does appear to be hope just over the horizon, however.  Scientists here at the Hutch have found  (studying  our friend, the mouse) that an enzyme (PEGPH20 , if you must know) chops up a molecule forming part of the matrix, thereby relieving the pressure and allowing chemo to flood in, and save the mouse .  Too bad that wasn’t available for Jobs.  He was a creative, useful guy; who knows how many more clever but expensive gadgets we would have absolutely needed if he had lived!

                So, I ask myself, why does that tumor secrete that matrix?  Years ago I read a very interesting book by Peter Dawkins titled “The Selfish Gene”.   Dawkins is a famous English biologist, specializing in evolutionary theory.  His thesis in this book boils down to the gene being the fundamental “unit” of evolution; that is, evolutionary processes work so as to allow the genes for adaptive traits to survive and multiply.  So, if Dawkins is right, why does this damned tumor act in such a way as to kill the thing that contains it?  It is as if the tumor genome is protecting itself, much as (says Dawkins) the genome of the individual behaves to advance the whole organism?  Cancer cells are not attacked by our immune system because they are part of “us”; just wildly reproducing “normal” cells.  However, naively, it seems to me that the pancreatic cancer cell knows it isn’t welcome, and prepares that matrix for self defense.  More than likely I’m way off base, and the matrix has some other explanation.  However, if we could ever persuade our immune system that cancer cells aren’t “us”, what  a better world would result!

 

NOT OC. LINDA ON HER WEDDING DAY

                                                                    Thirty years ago today

I was a lucky guy.  Every day I realize just how lucky.  Yes, this is our 30th wedding anniversary, and I am going to write a little blurb about it and post it on her Tribute.  Please go there and read, and while you're there -write something yourself.  I know we all still miss her.

Now, about this blog.  It hasn't exactly gone "viral", has it?  As far as I can tell, there are only two people "following" it, and only two have written comments.  I'd hate to think it was intrinsic boringness on my part, or a lack of interest in cancer and its cures, that is to blame.  I prefer to think that it is just too danged hard to "comment".  It seems that you need a Google account, which entails grappling with those annoying "tests" - that is, reading a line of deformed letters that staggers around like the first few steps of a drunk outside a tavern.  It's a pain, but I guess you can't fault Google for trying to make money.  A Google account costs nothing, and you may even find it handy.  Anyway, please try, persevere, and write a comment or two - so I don't get discouraged and quit.  At the moment it seems to me that my blog is like the philosopher's tree that falls deep in the forest:  If nobody hears it fall, did it make any noise at all?

In case you've forgotten, Linda's Tribute web address is:  http://getinvolved.fhcrc.org/goto/lindajoycebeck

NOT OC. Torquemada is alive and well, and he works for the IRS!

Color-coordination!  About 1986 or 87.  The cat is Butch.  He later ran off with our cat Mitzi.

I'm glad Linda doesn't have to watch me in action today.  I am doing our income tax, and working myself into my usual towering rage.  The cats are cowering under the couch.  Birds have ceased to come to my bird-feeder.  I think even the house plants are nervous.  Linda would watch me get frustrated and then say, in her mild way, "Next year, why don't you take it to a pro?"  My kids would tell me to use Turbo Tax.  But, nuts, I'm stubborn.  I went to college forever; I should be able to fill out a simple government form.  I tell myself that every year.

The problem is, of course, that the forms are not simple, because the tax code is a total mess.  In an effort to solve all sorts of real or imaginary social problems the tax code has been tweeked this way and that, until the original form and purpose are hard to spot.  A couple of examples, and then I must head back to Schedule A: Why can I deduct my health insurance premiums, but not my Medicare Tax?  The deduction for real estate taxes is meant to contribute to home ownership; how, then, does it make sense for me to be able to deduct for my Borrego Springs vacation home?  Sometimes I think the IRS has subcontracted their work out to the Inquisition, and the overall goal is to extract the most possible effort from the tax-paying sinner, with the greatest possible annoyance.

And at the bottom of every IRS form there is a Paperwork Reduction Notice!

AS PROMISED, A PICTURE

                      Linda high in the Peruvian Andes, in front of an Inca wall, near Cuzco

As promised, another picture to make up for the lack in the previous post.  This was during our first sabbatical year, in 1985 or 86, I think.  The Inca stone walls were built without any modern tools, but the stones fit together exactly and the structures have survived the many earthquakes that have destroyed more modern buildings.  This was during her short-hair period.  Whatever her hair length, she shone!

FORGET DOGS: THE MOUSE IS MAN'S BEST FRIEND

Linda and cousin Elsie Rodney, on a good Borrego flower walk

I’m writing this while eating a pastrami sandwich at Fred Hutch. 

I have just returned from puzzling through a talk by a young man who is interviewing for a faculty position here.  He didn’t seem as nervous as your typical faculty candidate, possibly because he has been a post-doctoral  research fellow for at least six years and may have given this report or something like it  many, many times.  He gave what I judge to be an excellent talk, although you must realize that I understood perhaps 10% of it.  Its title was Regulation of Epithelial Growth in Development and Cancer.  I came away with the following observations:
 

1)      Mankind owes an immense debt of gratitude to the mouse.  I don’t know how many mice and mouse embryos bit the dust to further this research, but it was a lot.  With cancer researchers in full cry, who needs cats?
 

2)       Biology – at least the kind I’m involved with – seems to be largely in the data-gathering stage of scientific  development, even more so than geology tends to be.   They seem to test large communities of bio-things – proteins, mostly, I think – to see which ones are active in either turning on or turning off the rapid cell division that result in cancer.  These, then, they trace back to the genes that produce the proteins (oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, respectively.)    This, in turn, eventually may allow them to design treatments more specific to the type of cancer in question.  See, for instance, my latest posting about using intra-cellular DNA “computers” to recognize and destroy cervical cancer.

On another note entirely, there will be a fun-run/walk to raise money for (and awareness of) ovarian cancer on July  27, 2012.  It is sponsored by the Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research at Swedish Hospital. The race course wends its way through some of the more interesting parts of Seattle.  It is only 5 km long; even with my  two titanium hips and a cane I could do it, but likely won't.  For details go to www.summerun.org,  You can enter as an individual, or as a team.  I guess the idea is to get people to pledge contributions, perhaps contingent upon something happening or not happening:, e.g.   “Beck, if you can manage to finish the course in less than 90 minutes I’ll donate $90.  Otherwise, you do!”  It’s a good excuse to visit Seattle.  Free parking!

You people reading this on Facebook, r3member I wrote this two years ago.

 

CANCER CURES IN THE NEWS

Linda at a quilt retreat in 2010.  Cancer might take her hair, but it couldn't take her smile.  So beautiful.

Thursday, March 8th, 2012.  The Wall Street Journal for today (p. A3) contains an article entitled "Personalized Medicine Hits a Bump", which is both discouraging and encouraging.  It transcribes the contents of an article in the New England Journal of Medicine into language that even I can understand (I think).  It appears that our heroes, the cancer researchers, can at times design drugs that are specific to the kinds of mutations expressed by an individual's genome - in other words, designer (personalized) medicine.  However this article says that there are problems involving the complicated and varied makeup of the genomes of these cancers.  Caution is urged.  Well, too bad the process (of fitting the drug to the specific cancer of a specific person) isn't simple and straightforward - I guess, that's discouraging.  But, the mere fact that there is some hope - I gather, rather strong hope - of eventual success is encouraging, at least to me. Now I think I'll try to read the original article.  I need something to fill my spare time for the next couple of weeks.

RANDOM THOUGHTS ABOUT CANCER WHILE EATING LUNCH

                                                       Linda on top of the world.  1988

Full disclosure:  I know next to nothing about biochemistry, oncology, or just about anything to do with mammalian health.  Heck, I can't even tell when my cats are sick.  Take everything I say with a large grain of salt.

We all hate cancer and want it to go away.  To accomplish this there would seem to be two broad avenues of attack: prevention, and cure.  I suspect that complete prevention of all types of cancer is pie in the sky for the indefinite future, if not forever, although research on risk factors and efforts to eradicate them are of the first rank in importance.  Apparently cancers arise from mutations, and mutations in turn arise from a dismaying number of sources, over many of which we have little or no control.  (Others, of course, we can control.  Stop smoking!)  Somewhere or other I read the cheery pronouncement that, if we live long enough, we'll all get cancer.  (Of course, this is an intrinsically untestable hypothesis:  how long is "enough"?)

So, what about cure?  At the moment, apparently, we can cure some cancers absolutely, and others some of the time.  Still others are even worse.  For a readable, if at times horrifying, account of the history of cancer and attempts to cure it I recommend The Emperor of all Maladies, by Sidharta Mukherjee.  As an aside, I recently read a short blurb in The Economist magazine reporting that a group in Zurich (the ETH) has succeeded in engineering a molecular "computer", small enough to insert in a single cell, that can recognize the biochemical "machinery" of cervical cancer, and kill it.  Good news, indeed.  Go get 'em, guys!

However, for the most part we seem to be stuck with surgery, radiation, and chemo.  Often these merely postpone death, as was the case with Linda.  This may change.  Nevertheless, with some cancers ultimate cure or significantly increased longevity depend critically on early detection.  The research group I am trying to help is focused on early detection of ovarian cancer - something that might have given Linda and me many more years together.  We (my research group) have a "trial" going on right now, and if you (females, that is) would like to participate give me a call (360 676 8471) and I will tell you how to volunteer.

And if for reasons of gender or whatever you can't do that, look for other anti-cancer trials going on.  I did two; prostate cancer prevention.  They were downright fun.   And of course you can always give money.  The American Cancer Society leaps to mind, or the Ovarian Cancer Foundation.  Personally, I prefer to cut out the middlemen and donate directly to Fred Hutch.  One way to do this is to go to Linda's "tribute": http://getinvolved.fhcrc.org/goto/lindajoycebeck* and follow the instructions.

Rats!  I really did start writing this over lunch.  I got carried away, and now my soup is cold.  Oh well.

Myrl

*I don't know why this doesn't light up as a link.  There's lots about blogging I don't understand.

IN ECUADOR, MID-'80s

                            Linda (and Myrl) span the northern and southern hemispheres.

I'm just about to drive to Seattle to help out at Fred Hutch.  I thought youall  might be interested in some of the scientic literature they give me to read.  Here is a typical (well, not REALLY typical) article.  The title reads:

Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor 2 as a Marker for Malignant Vascular Tumors and Mesothelioma: An Immunohistochemical Study of 262 Vascular Endothelial and 1640 Nonvascular Tumors (by five different authors: four MDs and a Ph.D).

Now, I count 26 words in that title.  A month ago I would have recognized 14 of them, counting the numbers.  After diligent study and attending countless seminars I now recognize nearly all of them, although I could define only about half.  Progress, you say?  Well, the first paragraph drops the following biochemical  bomb on the unsuspecting reader: "Vascular endothelial growth factor 2 (VEGFR2) is a type V receptor tyrosine kinase mainly known to be expressed in vascular endothelial cells and encoded by the KDR gene."  Reading this paper reminds me of my days attempting to learn to read Russian. I gave up on Russian, but I will not give up on this stuff.  This is more important.  Besides, sometimes it's so obscure it's actually funny.

Woops!

                                                        Linda with Amanda Kelly, 1991

More than likely you have figured out that the title of my last "post" should have been LET'S FIGHT OVARIAN CANCER!  I wish I could figure out how to edit these things.

LET'S FIGHT OVARIAN CANCER!

1

                                          Linda astride the Eastern and Western Hemispheres.

I wish I had named this blog something like "Fight Back", because I intend the bulk of what I write to be about defeating ovarian cancer.  In fact, if "Blogspot" will let me, I'll change its name.

As most of you already know, my beautiful wife Linda died last year of ovarian cancer.  She lived 3 years post-diagnosis, and enjoyed life.  We had lots of fun, visited interesting, strange place\s (Egypt, Mexico, Michigan) and we fought her cancer cheerfully and optimistically.  Never once did I hear her complain.  Her last few months, however, were terrible.  I don't want to dwell on that period because it is too painful, and would make you feel bad.  I am sure that her sister Carolyn, who shared the care-giving with me, would agree.  Suffice it to say that my experiences then were such as to make me determined to do something - whatever little I can - to defeat ovarian cancer.  See below.

For those of you who haven't done so already, please go to Linda's blog on the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center's website:  http://getinvolved.fhcrc.org/goto/lindajoycebeck.  There you can read my pitifully inadequate attempt to memorialize her life, and seize the opportunity to donate to ovarian cancer research.  Even a few bucks will show you care.

Many of you know that I am volunteering several days/week at Fred Hutch, with a group working on a "protocol" to efficiently detect ovarian cancer before it has a chance to spread.  I do routine office work, proof research papers and proposals, and attend seminars (where the state of my ignorance demands that I keep my mouth firmly shut.)  Also, I am a "Research Advocate" - only, unfortunately, I have yet to figure out what that entails.  I have been helping round up women for our latest clinical trial - if you are female, over 35, and can get to Seattle once or twice/year give me a call and I'll show you how to enroll.  Probably this blog is part of my Advocacy.  Also, I am filling much of my spare time studying biochemistry and biostatistics.  I am making good progress, but as you can imagine, if I am to have the Nobel Prize in medicine by the time I'm 80 I've got to hustle!

Okay, this will give you an idea of what I'm about.  If you want to read my occasional blatherings, bookmark this URL.I may "post" on non-cancerous subjects from time to time - not politics, religion or sex, but anything else I think might be somewhat funny.  I will warn you by putting NOT OC in the title, so you can turn you attention elsewhere.

ONE OF MY FAVORITE PICTURES

This was taken back in the late '80s, at Hurricane Ridge in the Olympics.  I especially like it because of the way she has her hand on my shoulder.  Wasn't she beautiful?

Wow! I've got my own blog!

Two happy people on the Nile.

Pretty good for a guy who has trouble with a TV remote, don't you think?  I'm just writing this to see if everything actually works.  Eventually, I will have shaken out all the kinks, and my techno-level will have progressed to - say - the year 1990.  Next I may buy an IPhone!  Maybe if it costs enough I will usually remember where I left it.

The principal purpose of this blog will be to relay stuff I learn about ovarian cancer through my volunteer activities at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, in Seattle.  However, occasionally I will toss in other stuff, hopefully of an amusing cast.  And, as soon as I figure out to do it, I will add a picture of Linda.*

Now to see if it works.

Myrl

*As you can see, I figured it out.