Guest guest Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 Hi Everyone, We've periodically come across this topic over the years. Some people have expressed a concern over the possibility that long term Gleevec use could perhaps cause us to develop a secondary cancer. This abstract deals with this very topic: http://ash.confex.com/ash/2008/webprogram/Paper10039.html I'm happy to report that there does not seem to be a significant increase in secondary cancers for those of us on Gleevec long term. After analyzing the charts of 1647 patients, they found that only 4% of patient developed a second cancer with the median age of these patients being 67 and the most common second cancer being non- melanoma skin cancer. I personally don't find these findings to be disturbing and surmise that similar numbers (if not greater numbers) can be found in the general population. This is great news for those of us who are looking at a the prospect of being on Gleevec for the rest of our lives. Tracey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 Tracey May I post this article on the Aussie LF talkbloodcancer bulletin board Please advise Sue > > Hi Everyone, > > We've periodically come across this topic over the years. Some > people have expressed a concern over the possibility that long term > Gleevec use could perhaps cause us to develop a secondary cancer. > > This abstract deals with this very topic: > > http://ash.confex.com/ash/2008/webprogram/Paper10039.html > > I'm happy to report that there does not seem to be a significant > increase in secondary cancers for those of us on Gleevec long term. > > After analyzing the charts of 1647 patients, they found that only 4% > of patient developed a second cancer with the median age of these > patients being 67 and the most common second cancer being non- > melanoma skin cancer. > > I personally don't find these findings to be disturbing and surmise > that similar numbers (if not greater numbers) can be found in the > general population. > > This is great news for those of us who are looking at a the prospect > of being on Gleevec for the rest of our lives. > > Tracey > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 Sure Sue. > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > We've periodically come across this topic over the years. Some > > people have expressed a concern over the possibility that long term > > Gleevec use could perhaps cause us to develop a secondary cancer. > > > > This abstract deals with this very topic: > > > > http://ash.confex.com/ash/2008/webprogram/Paper10039.html > > > > I'm happy to report that there does not seem to be a significant > > increase in secondary cancers for those of us on Gleevec long > term. > > > > After analyzing the charts of 1647 patients, they found that only > 4% > > of patient developed a second cancer with the median age of these > > patients being 67 and the most common second cancer being non- > > melanoma skin cancer. > > > > I personally don't find these findings to be disturbing and surmise > > that similar numbers (if not greater numbers) can be found in the > > general population. > > > > This is great news for those of us who are looking at a the > prospect > > of being on Gleevec for the rest of our lives. > > > > Tracey > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.