› Forums › General Melanoma Community › 2nd biopsy shows braf wild type instead of the vc80001 mutation
- This topic has 15 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by
arthurjedi007.
- Post
-
- August 18, 2015 at 11:01 pm
Thought it was interesting my biopsy last January says the left supraclavicular tumor is braf wild type. Just found that out from my NIH records cause couldn't get the report from the saint Louis records folks. Well maybe I could have but they said they didn't have it so would have had to go to another building.
Anyway my first biopsy in June 2013 of the t10 vertebrae said it was the braf vc80001 mutation or something like that. Kind of explains why zelboraf in 2013 I was the docs only 2nd patient of over 1000 that progressed on it. Kind of explains why the taf Mek although it kept lots of tumors from growing some grew like crazy.
So I guess I have some tumors with probably a certain amount of the vc mutation or maybe that first test was not done right. The rest of my tumors are braf wild.
Kind of weird in my opinion but explains in my mind anyway why the braf stuff failed me so bad.
Justvthought some folks might find it interesting in their situation. Usually I heard it's the other way around. A person is braf wild and they become braf vc.
Artie
- Replies
-
-
- August 19, 2015 at 7:25 pm
Artie,
Just curious what is your wild type?
-
- August 19, 2015 at 8:35 pm
Not sure. The report from NIH detailing my history included that biopsy and just said BRAF wild type. I thought it was odd because the first biopsy said BRAF vc80001. I'll ask my doc about it Tuesday.
Artie
-
- August 19, 2015 at 8:35 pm
Not sure. The report from NIH detailing my history included that biopsy and just said BRAF wild type. I thought it was odd because the first biopsy said BRAF vc80001. I'll ask my doc about it Tuesday.
Artie
-
- August 19, 2015 at 8:35 pm
Not sure. The report from NIH detailing my history included that biopsy and just said BRAF wild type. I thought it was odd because the first biopsy said BRAF vc80001. I'll ask my doc about it Tuesday.
Artie
-
- August 26, 2015 at 12:11 am
They had no idea. Also no plans to test it unless I need it for a trial.
-
- August 26, 2015 at 12:11 am
They had no idea. Also no plans to test it unless I need it for a trial.
-
- August 26, 2015 at 12:11 am
They had no idea. Also no plans to test it unless I need it for a trial.
-
- August 19, 2015 at 7:25 pm
Artie,
Just curious what is your wild type?
-
- August 19, 2015 at 7:25 pm
Artie,
Just curious what is your wild type?
-
- August 22, 2015 at 3:49 pm
Hi Artie,
Saw this thread on MIF, Dr. Joseph from Mayo (Florida) talking about what is new for targeted therapy beyond BRAF. In particular, targeting either ERK or CDK4.
I pasted in 5 trial links. All of them have sites (in theory) in either Chicago (not UChicago), Nashville or Indianapolis. I know jet-setting / travel is difficult. I don't know if any of these are possibilities or even open. But maybe something else to look into.
– Kyle
-
- August 22, 2015 at 3:49 pm
Hi Artie,
Saw this thread on MIF, Dr. Joseph from Mayo (Florida) talking about what is new for targeted therapy beyond BRAF. In particular, targeting either ERK or CDK4.
I pasted in 5 trial links. All of them have sites (in theory) in either Chicago (not UChicago), Nashville or Indianapolis. I know jet-setting / travel is difficult. I don't know if any of these are possibilities or even open. But maybe something else to look into.
– Kyle
-
- August 22, 2015 at 3:49 pm
Hi Artie,
Saw this thread on MIF, Dr. Joseph from Mayo (Florida) talking about what is new for targeted therapy beyond BRAF. In particular, targeting either ERK or CDK4.
I pasted in 5 trial links. All of them have sites (in theory) in either Chicago (not UChicago), Nashville or Indianapolis. I know jet-setting / travel is difficult. I don't know if any of these are possibilities or even open. But maybe something else to look into.
– Kyle
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.