wadvocator
![]()
Posts:79
I have been learning from GRACE for the last 2 years and have learned about EGFR, ALK, ROSI, etc. mutations. I don't know if those mutations occurred in other organs besides lungs. But giving the progression in targeted therapy and slicing/dicing types of lung cancer according to the genetic mutation, I am wondering if the cancer in general shouldn't be categorized by organ but by genetic mutation?
I have also been involved in fund raising for lung cancer. And within this fund raising community, the mission and driver is to find cure for lung cancer through research. Given the genetic mutation, I am wondering if this mission makes any sense. What seems to make sense is to make it a chronic disease that can be managed vs. cure?
Forums
Reply # - June 9, 2014, 08:54 PM
Reply To: Mutational disease vs. disease stemmed from organ?
There is a growing sense of the appropriateness of categorizing some cancers more by the driver mutation than by the "primary disease site", i.e., the organ in which a cancer originated. For instance, we are seeing that HER2/neu-driven cancers may respond well to HER2 inhibitors whether the cancer originated in breast, stomach, lung, etc., and the same may well be true for EGFR, ALK, BRAF, and other markers. This is a transitional time, and I think that we may well be thinking about and categorizing cancer in different ways in 2-5 years.
As for cure vs. chronic management, I certainly understand that cure sounds like a wonderful and lofty goal, but it may be far more attainable to transition survival of difficult cancers into the range of a chronic disease, and that would still provide a tremendous benefit. Unfortunately, I think most people would prefer to be pitched an unrealistic platitude than a realistic but more "mundance-sounding" improvement.
-Dr. West