New neuro
Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 5:39 pm
My neuro moved to to be director of the Stanford MS center (Jeff Dunn)
I had to get a new guy so I got a local person instead of making the big trip to Seattle all the time.
Wow, different having a neuro who is not an MS center! he was against everything beyond regular CRABS including revimmune "That'll hurt your kidneys". (He had prescribed novantrone to 4 people and all of them got heart damage, one dying, so thus you get a caring guy who is against everything pretty much. He is really negative about how toxic the treatments are and how awful it is we thrust this on people)
Hmmm I thought as far as cytoxan, it was bladder cancer, and they knew about it and protected it with a drug.......
Anyway he did suggest since I have RA too that I might try rituximab as it is approved for that disease. It is a b-cell depletor that is being trialed in MS but it is still early, like a stage 2. What they see in the stage 2 is that the b cells are depleted and it results in dramatic reductions in lesions and relapses, showing the b cells are partially mediating MS.
Interestingly at 48 weeks, the end of the MS trial, the b cells were still depleted, treatment effect still going with that only one treatment of 2 IV's.
Since revimmune also knocks out b cells it should work at least as well, but by one year a person should have a normal and functional immune system, not one that does not work yet. I expect with time there may prove to be issues with infection in those rituxan patients.
I can see little advantage to going for this first, can anyone else? The one advantage I can think of is that it will make it clear I have tried more than just copaxone and methotrexate and prednisone, plus raise my "expenses" so the cost of revimmune looks better.
I've refused avonex and can't see any reason to go for that at this point because copaxone controls my RA too, as the pred and the MTX did. So the rituxan would be good for the RA and maybe for both diseases.
If I went for it I also guess I would possibly not be eligible for the revimmune as the long term immune suppression would probably still be there for a long time it appears?
And revimmune wipes out both b and t cells, plus gives you stems to boot, so in my mind it is superior.
This offer of rituxan based on the fact I have RA is probaly not a good idea.
thoughts?
marie
I had to get a new guy so I got a local person instead of making the big trip to Seattle all the time.
Wow, different having a neuro who is not an MS center! he was against everything beyond regular CRABS including revimmune "That'll hurt your kidneys". (He had prescribed novantrone to 4 people and all of them got heart damage, one dying, so thus you get a caring guy who is against everything pretty much. He is really negative about how toxic the treatments are and how awful it is we thrust this on people)
Hmmm I thought as far as cytoxan, it was bladder cancer, and they knew about it and protected it with a drug.......
Anyway he did suggest since I have RA too that I might try rituximab as it is approved for that disease. It is a b-cell depletor that is being trialed in MS but it is still early, like a stage 2. What they see in the stage 2 is that the b cells are depleted and it results in dramatic reductions in lesions and relapses, showing the b cells are partially mediating MS.
Interestingly at 48 weeks, the end of the MS trial, the b cells were still depleted, treatment effect still going with that only one treatment of 2 IV's.
Since revimmune also knocks out b cells it should work at least as well, but by one year a person should have a normal and functional immune system, not one that does not work yet. I expect with time there may prove to be issues with infection in those rituxan patients.
I can see little advantage to going for this first, can anyone else? The one advantage I can think of is that it will make it clear I have tried more than just copaxone and methotrexate and prednisone, plus raise my "expenses" so the cost of revimmune looks better.
I've refused avonex and can't see any reason to go for that at this point because copaxone controls my RA too, as the pred and the MTX did. So the rituxan would be good for the RA and maybe for both diseases.
If I went for it I also guess I would possibly not be eligible for the revimmune as the long term immune suppression would probably still be there for a long time it appears?
And revimmune wipes out both b and t cells, plus gives you stems to boot, so in my mind it is superior.
This offer of rituxan based on the fact I have RA is probaly not a good idea.
thoughts?
marie