Metastasis & Treatment

I met with my oncologist again after my PET scan and brain MRI. I knew what his reaction and strategy would be. At the risk of sounding arrogant because I am not a doctor, I did not fully agree with his gameplan. I will explain why. Many doctors, especially oncologists, are rather focused on a narrow set of tools at their disposal to help their patients. The reason I find this interesting is that medical studies are done on many cancer treatments other than the "standard" chemo, radiation, and surgery. In fact, there are dozens of clinical studies alone on the efficacy of a ketogenic diet on cancer treatment, as well as many other natural or naturally-based treatments. My doctor did not seem to care much for these. I don't blame him. This is what the profession creates.

The PET scan and MRI seem to show that there is some bone involvement and possibly brain involvement. In other words, metastasis to those areas. With that being said, the tiny shadow appearing on the MRI is 6mm in size. That is less than a 1/4 of an inch. There is no confirmation it is cancer at this point. My oncologist strongly recommended I get targeted radiation therapy to get rid of it. Here are my concerns with that. 1) That area of the brain is the speech part of the brain. We don't know what the side effects of shooting targeted radiation at the speech center of my brain might be. 2) Secondly, the tool used for radiation may not be able to target only a 6mm sized lesion/spot and this could potentially irradiate a larger area. 3) All of this is based on the assumption this tiny shadow on the MRI is, in fact, cancer.

I’m sure there are some reading this thinking "Who are you to question a professional about reading an MRI or treatments for cancer?" My answer is simple, this is my body and therefore I get to decide how it gets treated. I am not a doctor but I am a very intelligent person. Based on my current assessment (which could be wrong), I believe the risks of shooting radiation at the speech center of my brain outweigh the potential rewards...at least at this time.

As it stands, my oncologist favors only the standard drug, radiation, and surgery approaches and seemed to disregard other studies on less-mainstream therapies. I am not implying he is a bad doctor. I am simply pointing out his bias...which we all have.

The targeted drug he has prescribed me is one I favor. He even told me it has a 70% chance of success against brain tumors. Given this information, it seems illogical to immediately jump to radiation for a tiny spot that is not confirmed as cancer. My thought, which I communicated to him, was to begin the drug therapy, continue my dietary therapy, and we would see how the next MRI looks. He recommended against this but said it was my decision.

The PET scan showed some possible bone metastasis of one rib and possible a spot on the pelvis. Again, he recommended an additional aggressive drug therapy with some pretty severe side effects. The original drug prescribed is highly effective against bone metastasis as well. There are clinical reports and cases of complete remission using this drug alone. In my case, the drug would not be operating alone but combined with clinically proven diet and supplements.

Let me be clear though. I am not unreasonable or close-minded. Evidence can certainly sway my opinion. If, after new imaging or tests show that the current therapy is not effective at stopping or reversing the cancer, then I will certainly consider other options proposed by my doctor. I am simply not a fan of starting with a scorched earth strategy...most especially when the earth being scorched is me.

Let me reiterate this: the diet and supplements I am taking are not coming from disreputable or unknown sources. These are backed by clinical research in peer-reviewed medical journals. Also, this is not an isolated study but rather dozens and dozens of studies that in general reach the same conclusion. These therapies appear to be effective and safe therapies for cancer and deserve further study. That is about as high of an endorsement as you will get from a reputable academic paper. In fact, in some of the studies, the dietary interventions had better survival outcomes than standard treatment. Of course, in every study the circumstances are different, the study design is different, the patients are different, and so many other things are different. I don't presume to draw absolute and definitive conclusions from such studies. What I can do is infer best strategies with the least side effects.

Quality of life is super important to me. For many, the thought of eating a super strict ketogenic diet with fewer than 20 carbs per day seems like hell and that would qualify as a low quality of life. For me, I don't mind it at all and I enjoy the healthy and delicious food that both Becky and I now enjoy for every meal. I am not eager to introduce therapies that will quickly degrade my quality of life in the name of getting rid of cancer. I know many would disagree and that is okay. We each get to make our own choices when it comes to our own bodies. I simply encourage you to be mindful of the decisions you're making. I wasn't very mindful before this diagnosis, but I certainly am now.

If you have any questions, done hesitate to reach out to me or use the contact form.

-Jeremy