Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

CFL conference report

Expand Messages
  • VBradova
    Thank you Ronnie, for describing the conference so well. Too bad we did not meet. Most folks stayed home, but I did meet Joan Bailey off of this list, and
    Message 1 of 1 , May 5, 1998
      Thank you Ronnie, for describing the conference so well. Too bad we did not
      meet.

      Most folks stayed home, but I did meet Joan Bailey off of this list, and
      several people came to inquire about the list after I held up a sign NHL-LOW.
      The conference was most useful to newbies: it should have been billed as
      Lymphome 101. Well presented lectures. Dr Coleman in particular did a good job
      on the intro to lymphoma with good slides and a clarity of exposition.

      The one serious weakness was the very small amount of time allotted to
      questions, partly due to the fact that CFL planned too little time for them,
      and partly because the esteemed docs kept on yakking past their timelimits.
      CFL did seek feedback tho and I hope they will take things more firmly in hand
      in their future conferences.

      I just want to mention a few things that I found useful:

      -- The reasons for the new REAL classification: a need to speak a common
      language with the Europeans, to include recent developments and understandings
      (REAL will be replace by the "Pool"? "Cool?" classification.

      -- Cyclin D pushes the cell to divide more quickly; a problem arises when too
      much cyclin D is made (this is particularly pertinent to mantle cell lymphoma)

      -- LDH reflects total tumor cell turnover

      -- the staging system was really developed for HD, and is not very useful for
      NHL

      -- Low grade lymphoma is a disease of accumulation rather than of
      proliferation.

      -- Interferon of limited benefit to low grade NHL, but 2 recent Eur. studies
      have shown some benefit with large doses, including longer overall survival.
      It also seems useful in upregulating the CD20 antibodies for lymphoma types
      (such as CLL) in which the expression of CD20 is less, so that Rituxan then
      can be used.

      -- IDEC antibodies can have positive effect delayed up to 9 months!

      -- Previously untreated patients treated with rituximab: 100% response, 64%
      CR!

      -- New things being tried at MSKCC: IL-2 during watch and wait; IDEC plus
      interferon, iodine MABs for mantle cell, and others

      -- New approaches being studied: can abnormal stimulation lead to lymphoma?
      Can removal of the stimulant result in improvement? Can immunity be improved
      so that the immune system can control the disease? [what took'em so long?]

      -- No. Italy and So. Switzerland has a very high incidence of H. pylori and so
      also MALTomas associated with this critter, and new studies are being done
      there

      Well, that's about it. What I want now is an online conference! I think we are
      ready for Lymphoma 301.

      Vera
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.