Whether you were just diagnosed or navigating treatment decisions, here you’ll find clear, verified guides – therapies, clinical trials, modern protocols, and everything your oncologist may not have time to explain.
When I was diagnosed, I discovered that information in oncology changes faster than any person can keep up with. I put Artificial Intelligence (AI) to work and turned what I found into this site.
In short: I am the patient behind this blog. In this first story I tell you how I went, in a few weeks, from back pain to a complete diagnosis of stage IV lung cancer – and what I learned along the way, so it can be a little easier for you. Who I am I’m not going to use my name here. Not because I’m ashamed, but because this blog is about you, the reader, not about me. The message matters, not the messenger. ...
In short: I’m the patient behind this blog. Five months after diagnosis, my treatment is going well – and that’s exactly why I found myself asking a question I didn’t expect: what do you do with good news, when you know it won’t last forever? This article is about what I’ve understood, from the inside, about the difference between “standard treatment” and personalized medicine – and about the options I’m exploring now, while I have a good window. ...
In short: I had my six-month follow-up PET-CT. The big news is good: no new lesions, anywhere. But the main tumour looks a little more intense than in April, and the lymph nodes that had shrunk are still, at a millimetre scale, a little active. This article is about what the numbers actually show, about why the comparison between two scans did not come out as clean as I had planned – even though I used the same machine – and about the decision I made: stereotactic radiotherapy on the lung tumour, as soon as possible. ...
In short: I have spent the last few months reading, asking questions and writing to centres that make therapeutic cancer vaccines. This article is the map I wish I had had at the start: what types of vaccine exist and how they differ, what worked and what did not work in trials, what the real limits are, what the ideal vaccine for my case would look like – and the list of centres I found, sorted by how well they fit my biology. It is written both for patients and for doctors or oncology navigators running into this subject for the first time. ...
In short: This is a follow-up to my main piece on personalized cancer vaccines . That one was about which vaccine could fit my biology. This one is about a much more basic thing that almost stopped me before biology even mattered: tissue. A personalized vaccine can need far more tumour material than the test that first diagnosed you — often fresh-frozen, not paraffin — and if your treatment works well, there may be nothing left to biopsy when you finally need it. I am writing this because I wish someone had told me at the first biopsy. Maybe it reaches you before yours. ...
In short: As a cancer patient, you end up reading a lot. Some of what you read is solid science. Another part is the grey zone: observations from individual doctors, stories from other patients, mechanisms demonstrated in mice but unproven in humans. This article is about that second category. I’m not asking you to believe anything that follows – I’m just showing you six ideas that have stuck with me, with links, so you can see I didn’t invent them, and with an honest label on each one: how much is science and how much is story. ...
In short: In the previous article I wrote about the grey zone – anecdotal observations, honestly labeled as such. This article is the opposite: an idea backed by randomized trials, one I believe patients hear far too little about. The idea: the total amount of tumor in your body is not just a staging number. It’s a strategic variable – and there are serious arguments that reducing it as much as possible, as early as possible, with every tool available, changes your odds. Including the uncomfortable part: the trials that say otherwise. ...