Last month I was featured in a Nature Magazine article about multiple myeloma and stem cell transplants:

If I have time, I will report on some important myeloma related presentations at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meetings here in Chicago Sunday.  But first, I would like to share a some thoughts about a reception I attended Saturday evening at the Field Museum on Chicago’s lakefront.

Here is a link to a University of Arkansas Medical Sciences (UAMS) site, featuring testimonials from a pair of myeloma survivors from Florida who are ecstatic about their care at UAMS:

The last couple of days, two of my readers have shared their frustrations with the slow pace of myeloma research.

There was a very large controversy last December at ASH in Orlando.  Two studies which followed long-term Revlimid users found they had an 8% risk of developing a form of Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML).

A fellow multiple myeloma patient blogger and good friend, Nick van Dyk, shared his views about the recent secondary cancer scare for long term users of Revlimid today: 
Some thoughts on this Revlimid situation…perhaps a false alarm?

What our doctors read in medical journals and publications which summarize research results and new therapy trends greatly influences how they are likely to act.

Good evening from the Grand Ballroom at the Peabody Hotel in Orlando, Florida.  I’m covering the IMF’s ASH kick-off event, Key Myeloma Questions for 2010: Latest Developments int Diagnosis, Prognosis and Risk Assessment in Multiple Myeloma.

Happy Thanksgiving! As many of you may already know, I write a weekly column in the Myeloma Beacon every Thursday—today!

Yesterday I wrote an article about UAMS researcher’s attempts to harness the power of “killer cells.”  Here are links to several other articles about killer cell research I have written this past year: 

This is potentially great news from DR. Frits van Rhee and other researchers at UAMS, focusing on ways to attack high risk multiple myeloma:

Before we move on, I wanted to share some of Dr. Ravi Vij’s thoughts about UAMS—the University of Arkansas Medical Center. Myeloma docs and researchers there have been developing an aggressive form of anti-myeloma treatment called Total Therapy (TT).

I received this e-mail from a reader of my new weekly column in The Myeloma Beacon Friday:

Mayo Clinic has come up with a name and treatment map for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients called mSMART. mSMART (Mayo Stratification for Myeloma And Risk-adapted Therapy) is a consensus opinion by 26 of Mayo Clinic’s myeloma specialists, which takes into account genetically determined risk status and the various treatment strategies currently available.

I wanted to share this e-mail “rant” I recieved from Barbara, a nineteen year multiple myeloma survivor this weekend, about an often discussed topic on this site–patient survival statistics:

Here is a link to a timely press release, Scientists Find New Genetic Clue for Multiple Myeloma Diagnosis, Treatment, Released: 4/12/2010.  
Source: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Newswise

Here is the third and final installment of David and Lori Puenti’s “Personal Testimonial For Care Recieved At The University of Arkansas Myeloma Research Center:”

Here is the third and final installment of this series. Well, maybe not the final installment. One of the perks associated with writing your own blog is that you always get the last word! So, since this third part is so long, I will post a short commentary tomorrow:

Monday I was critical of claims made on the University of Arkansas Myeloma Research Center Website, touting “tandem stem cell transplants double the rate of both event-free and overall survival.” The site goes on to explain that “Event-free survival means there is no relapse.” Does this means those myeloma patients are considered cured? Check-out this conclusion about the efficacy of tandem stem cell transplants from the National Cancer Institutes’s Website this past January:

From time to time I have written about differences of opinions between oncologists and hematologists from mainstream, more conservative institutions which specialize in treating multiple myeloma such as the Mayo Clinic, Cedars Sinai and Dana Farber, and the more aggressive approach advocated by doctors at the University of Arkansas Myeloma Research Center. Since I tend to personally support the former, I only thought it was fair to link you directly to the UAMS site. Yet as I read the first page of a question and answer forum for myeloma patients, I couldn’t help but find glaring inconsistencies between data I have seen presented at nationally recognized multiple myeloma conferences and data I found quoted on the UAMS site. Here is an example: