|May-June '03 | briefing | mail | don't say this | flakers' jargon | flaker creativity | articles | other places | archives | send mail | ed dewke | legal stuff | order | search | ©2001 Ed Dewke|
Therapy User Says “No” to Amevive
Good Results from Combo Therapy
Ed, I wrote
late last summer describing spectacular results with Dovonex/Ultravate
therapy — from 70+% coverage to near clear within one week.
The great results lasted for about 6 months of two applications per
day, Dovonex in the morning and Ultravate in the evening.
And then one day the lesions slowly began to return.
They were not as large or as angry (crusty) as pre-treatment, but
the effectiveness was clearly diminishing.
Thanks to an insurance issue that took a couple months to resolve I
spent that period of time with no treatment, and interestingly enough,
basically held at a steady state.
I've begun a combination of Dovonex/DermaZinc (0.25% zinc pyrithione).
After about 5 weeks into this, results are looking good.
Lesions are considerably smoothed and with tanning treatments,
reasonably camouflaged (my daughter says if I was a rap star I should be
named "Cheeta"). Perhaps
we're on the front edge of another 6 month cycle.
I received an
information packet in the mail today regarding Amevive, and dug into this
with great interest. I was
predisposed to jump at this therapy from the previous readings, but after
reviewing their clinical data, this is not for me.
The response versus placebo is good, with decent probability of
significant improvement. But
for me, the malignancy rate (almost 2%, 25/1357) is totally unacceptable.
Psoriasis might not be pretty, but it isn't life threatening.
Side-effects of possible dizziness and headaches for significant
cosmetic improvement is one thing. Lymphoma
is another. We'll all have a
different calculus for our given situations.
For me, this isn't even close.
Keep up the
good work with this site. You
are providing an invaluable service and sounding board, and for that I
thank you again. -Don H.
Response: Thanks, Don.
I hate statistics for two reasons, (1) they’re only important if
they’re self-defeating, and (2) they’re meaningless to the fellow who
wins the lottery. Cuteness
aside, statistics, I feel, provide a very narrow macro-view of reality.
They’re only good for planning large things, like government
said all that, I tried to use some statistics myself.
From The American
Cancer Society I learned that about 1.334 million cases of cancer in
the U.S. are projected for 2003. From
Census bureau (where statistics are absolutely a Mysterious Art, to
which I am not allowed knowledge) I sort of concluded the U.S. population
is predicted to be about 279 million in 2003.
Playing at the uncertain art myself, this would suggest almost one
half of one percent of the population will have cancer (1.334/279=.0047 or
.47%). If this is anywhere
near accurate, Amevive’s predicted 2% malignancy rate would seem to mean
an Amevive user is a little over four times more likely to have cancer
than a non-Amevive user in America.
this kind of calculus becomes
very personal. But I think it
only fair to suggest this picture is rendered in very few shades of gray.
For a better “understanding” we would want to ask lots of
questions about other cancer predispositions that might make the potential
Amevive-user population not
representative of the population at large (that is, more likely to get
cancer than population averages).
I don’t even know, and it would be interesting to know, what the
percentage of flakers with cancer is.
(I know it just increased by one case — me.)
you’re actually using a three part
combination therapy, Don. It’s
three if you add the “tanning treatments” to the Dovonex and DermaZinc.
I’m glad you
brought the DermaZinc combo to our attention.
Others who might be having little or no luck with Dovonex alone,
and who don’t want to spring for another expensive topical (like
betamethasone), might want to try the DermaZinc.
(And, just for that lucky edge, a little “tanning treatment”
might not hurt, either.)
Stay in touch, Don — er, Cheeta. -Ed