Neuroendocrine Cancer: a needle in a haystack


needle in a haystack

It’s no secret that Neuroendocrine Cancer can be difficult to diagnose. Although earlier diagnosis is improving (as reported in the SEER database report issued in 2017), there is still a lot of ground to cover. It’s also no secret that certain cancers are difficult to diagnose (NETs is one) and there are a number of reasons why this happens, including but not limited to: – they grow silently, they often produce vague symptoms which can be mistaken for much more common illnesses, and their complexity is not fully understood.

I wanted to cover two different aspects of the problem of finding NETs. Firstly, in finding the primary tumour so that the type of NET can be properly established – this drives the best treatment regime. Secondly in finding all the tumours, as this establishes the correct and most detailed staging declaration – this drives treatment plans and surveillance regimes that need to be put into place.

Hunting Tumours – Primary vs Secondary

It’s really important to determine which tumours are primary and which are secondary (metastasis). There’s a number of ways to help work this out and knowledge of NETs epidemiology studies can help.

Specialist Knowledge – certain things are known about the behaviour of NETs

Specialists and in particular NET specialists will be aware of the vagaries of NETs in terms of what tumours are normally a primary and which are normally secondary and many of the pitfalls involved in working that out. Many NETs will have metastasized to the liver at diagnosis, so whilst it is not impossible to have a primary liver NET, the vast majority of liver tumours found will be secondary (metastases). NET Specialists are more likely to have the experience than generalists. They know that the varying metastatic potential depending on the primary site clearly indicates differing biology and genetics across sites and they know that NETs are indeed a heterogeneous group of tumours. The differences cannot be explained by whether the NET is situated in the foregut, midgut, or hindgut. For example, Appendiceal NET is known to be less prone to metastasis. This may be due to the high rate of incidental findings during appendectomies, or because the appendix is an immunological organ where malignant cells can therefore be expected to be frequently recognized by the immune system.

The majority of the digestive tract is drained by the portal venous system, explaining the dominance of liver metastases in this group of tumours. This also explains our finding that many nervous system and bone metastases originate from NETs in the lungs. Disseminated tumour cells may directly reach the systemic circulation from the lungs, whereas if originating from the midgut region, they need to first pass both the liver and the lungs.

As an example of this heuristic knowledge, one Swedish study indicated that two-thirds of peritoneal metastases will be attributed to Small Intestine NETs (SI NETs). SI NETs and Pancreatic NETs (pNETs) are the most likely to metastasize. The least likely sites to metastasize are the Appendix and Rectum. The same study indicated that in addition to the common metastatic locations of lymph nodes and liver, Lung NETs are more likely to metastasize to the brain and bone than other types. I believe the findings from this study more or less correlates to other information I’ve had access to and also confirms the technical behaviour paragraph above.

Multiple Primary Tumours

With NETs there are two scenarios:

1. Multiple primaries in same organ/location (multicentric). This is fairly common in small intestine (SI NETs), stomach/gastric NETs (gNETs), and also found in Lung and pNETs too. NET experts will be aware of the issue and know to look for the possibility. This is an important point with SI NETs as it’s quite long although held together by the mesentery, so a ‘Mark 1 eyeball’ can be more efficient in finding NETs in this organ than scans.  There is a very well known surgical technique called “running the bowel” where they check the small intestine for signs of other primary tumours – they can do the same with the large intestine.  Additional surgeries due to this lack of knowledge could come with significant morbidity. Multiple ‘nodes’ and ‘lesions’ are common in the thyroid.

2. Multiple primaries in different locations. This is common with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia (MEN) syndromes (the name gives it away) and these may be metasynchronous. MEN1 for example can have tumours in what is called the ‘3 P’ locations, pituitary, pancreas and parathyroid. Of course MEN guys may also have multiple primaries in the same organ (multicentric).  Read more about MEN by clicking here.

There’s probably a third scenario (for all cancers) and that is multiple primaries with different cancers (i.e a second, third and fourth cancer etc). Synchronous would be really unlucky but metasynchonous is more likely and there are many NET patients with a second cancer.

What else helps find a NET? 

There are many other clues open to those involved in diagnosing a NET:

Patient. Very often the patient plays a big part of determining where the primary and other tumours might be by carefully describing symptoms.

Incidental Finds. NETs are very often found incidentally during trips to the ER/A&E and also during tests for something else. This is particularly the case with Appendiceal NETs and might explain why the average age of a patient is significantly lower in this type of NET.

Blood tests and Hormone Markers. We are not yet in a position where these types of tests can diagnose (but we are moving in that direction). In the case of unknown primaries (CUP), sometimes test results can help to find where some of these cancers started. With NETs, symptomatic patients can often test to confirm an elevated hormone marker which may narrow it down to a specific organ or gland. Read more here.

Scans and Endoscopies. Most cancers of a certain size may show up on conventional scanning such as CT, MRI and Ultrasound. Nuclear scans are now playing a bigger part in finding tumours which betray their location through functional behaviour by lighting up or glowing on these imaging devices. Endoscopies (e.g. gastroscopies, colonoscopies, even gastro intestinal pill cameras can be used) can help but like scans are not foolproof). Generally with NETs, if you can see it, you can detect it. Read more here.

Hereditary Conditions. Around 5-10% of NETs are hereditary in nature, mostly involving the MEN group of syndromes. Many of those people will know they are at risk of developing NETs and their doctors should know the most common locations for primary tumours associated with each gene. So a declared or suspected hereditary syndrome is useful in finding primary tumours if they exist and are proving difficult to find.

Biopsies. “Tissue is the issue”. Pathology can very often give really strong clues as to the type of NET and therefore the likely location of a primary tumour, for example additional tests such as immunostains. Many biopsies will come from secondary cancer (metastases), mostly the liver.  Despite all the potential diagnostic routes above, the place the cancer started is sometimes still not found and this may lead to atypical diagnostic/treatment plans and in certain cases this might even include exploratory biopsies via surgery (invasive/minimally invasive), perhaps combined with opportunistic tumour removal if found during the procedure.

Staging. Simple staging can be given if locations of metastases are known. For example in the case of Liver metastases, the stage is automatically Stage 4. However, the full staging definition relies on knowing distant metastases, loco-regional metastases and the full Tumour/Node/Metastases (TNM) definition (size, spread, etc) cannot be fully complete without a primary. Read more here.

Cancers of Unknown Primary

Cancer is always named for the place where it started, called the primary site. Sometimes doctors can’t tell where a cancer may have started. When cancer is found in one or more places where it seems to have spread, but the site where it started is not known, it is called a cancer of unknown primary (CUP) or an occult primary cancer.

When you look at the ratio of all cancers, the figure for cancers of unknown primary (CUP) is quite startling. Depending on where you look the figure is around 2-10%. That doesn’t seem a lot but when you consider the amount of people diagnosed with cancer, the total figure must be staggering. Interestingly, Cancer Research UK say that 60% of CUP cases are in the over 75s. In another interesting Swedish study, doctors claimed that the rates of metastatic cases were higher with certain NETs than they were in their anatomical counterparts, reinforcing the dangerous and sneaky nature of NETs.

Despite quite advanced scanning and diagnostic testing currently in place, and the extensive knowledge of NET specialists, there can still be reasons for not being able to find the primary tumour:

  • The primary is just too small to be seen and is growing quite slow. Very small cancers might not cause symptoms or be seen on scans. This is a particularly relevant point with NETs.
  • The primary could be hidden in tissue in between different organs causing confusion about the actual primary location.
  • The body’s immune system killed the primary cancer. It’s also possible (but not common) that any secondary cancer (i.e. metastases) is still growing.
  • The tumour has become loose from its primary location and exited the body, e.g. from a wall of the bowel and excreted out in the stool.
  • The primary cancer was removed during surgery for another condition and doctors didn’t know cancer had formed. For example, a uterus with cancer may be removed during a hysterectomy to treat a serious infection.

Summary

I hope this is useful for many NET patients, particularly those who are looking for a diagnosis or looking for a primary tumour.

Neuroendocrine Cancer – at times, it can really be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook. Like my page for even more news. I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

patients included

Please Share this post

 

Neuroendocrine Tumours: a spotlight on Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas

spotlight on pheo para

I spend a lot of time talking about the most common forms of Neuroendocrine Tumours (NETs), but what about the less well-known types?  As part of my commitment to all types of NETs, I’d like to shine a light on two less common tumour types known as Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas – incidence rate approximately 8 per million per year. They are normally grouped together and the definitions below will confirm why.  If you think it’s difficult to diagnose a mainstream NET, this particular sub-type is a real challenge.

So, let’s get definitions out of the way:

Pheochromocytomas (Pheo for short)

Pheochromocytomas are tumours of the adrenal gland that produce excess adrenaline. They arise from the central portion of the adrenal gland, which is called the adrenal medulla (the remainder of the gland is known as the cortex which performs a different role and can be associated with a different tumour type). The adrenal medulla is responsible for the normal production of adrenaline, which our body requires to help maintain blood pressure and to help cope with stressful situations.  The adrenal glands are situated on top of the kidneys (i.e. there are two). Adrenaline is also called ‘epinephrine’ which is curiously one of the 5 E’s of Carcinoid Syndrome.

Paragangliomas (Para for short)

Paragangliomas are tumours that grow in cells of the ‘peripheral’ nervous system (i.e. the nerves outside the brain and spinal cord). Like Pheochromocytomas, they can release excess adrenaline.  There can be confusion between the two types of tumour as Paragangliomas are often described as extra-adrenal Pheochromocytomas (i.e. a Pheo external to the adrenal gland).

Going forward, I’m going to talk about both using the single term of ‘Pheochromocytoma’ in the context of an adrenaline secreting tumour but may refer to Paraganglioma where there might be a difference other than anatomical location.

Pheochromocytomas are often referred to as the “ten percent tumour” because as a rule of thumb they do many things about ten percent of the time. However, these figures are slowly changing, so this label is gradually becoming less apparent. The following is a fairly exhaustive list of these characteristics:

A few facts about Pheochromocytomas

  • As much as 1 in 3 are Malignant but most have undetermined biologic potential.  A recent document issued by the World Health Organisation (WHO) stated that “Paragangliomas should not be termed benign”.
  • Around 10% of Pheochromocytomas are Bilateral (i.e. found in both adrenal glands: 90% arise in just one of the two adrenal glands)
  • Around 10% are Extra-Adrenal (found within nervous tissue outside of the adrenal glands … i.e. 10% are Paragangliomas)
  • Around 10% are found in Children (i.e. 90% in adults)
  • Up to 30% are Familial potentially rising to 50% for metastatic cases and Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia (MEN) involvement.
  • The recurrence rate is around 16%, i.e. about 1 in 6 patients have a tumor that comes back after surgery.  Tumors that come back also have the potential to be malignant. If you have pheo or para and have surgery to remove it, be sure to continue to check in with your doctor to monitor for any returning tumors.
  • Present with a stroke (10% of these tumours are found after the patient has a stroke)

Symptoms

The classic symptoms of Pheochromocytomas are those attributable to excess adrenaline production. Often these patients will have recurring episodes of sweating, headache, and a feeling of high anxiety.

  • Headaches (severe)(one of the classic triad, see below)
  • Excess sweating (generalized)(one of the classic triad, see below)
  • Racing heart (tachycardia and palpitations)(one of the classic triad, see below)
  • Anxiety and nervousness
  • Hypertension
  • Nervous shaking (tremors)
  • Pain in the lower chest or upper abdomen
  • Nausea (with or without vomiting)
  • Weight loss
  • Heat intolerance

Diagnosing Pheochromocytomas

According to the ISI Book on NETs (Woltering, Vinik, O’Dorisio, et al), Pheochromocytomas present with a classic triad of symptoms and signs:  headache, palpitations and sweating.  This symptom complex has a high specificity and sensitivity (>90%) for the diagnosis of Pheochromocytomas.  The figure is much lower in individual symptom presentations (palpitations 50%, sweating 30%, headaches 20%). In addition to correctly diagnosing from these symptoms, Pheochromocytomas may also be found incidentally during a surgical procedure even after a diagnosis of an ‘adrenal incidentaloma’

Markers.  Like serotonin secreting tumours, adrenal secreting tumours convert the offending hormone into something which comes out in urine. In fact, this is measured by 24 hour urine test very similar to 5HIAA (with its own diet and drug restrictions).  It’s known as 24-hour urinary catacholamines and metanephrines. This test is designed to measure production of the different types of adrenaline compounds that the adrenal glands make. Since the body gets rid of these hormones in the urine, we simply collect a patient’s urine for 24 hours to determine if they are over-produced.  Like 5HIAA, there is also a plasma (blood draw) version of the test.  According to the ISI Book on NETs, there is also an additional test called ‘Vanillylmandelic Acid (VMA).  This reference also indicates the most sensitive test is plasma free total metanephrines. Also read more here.

Genetics.  The familial connection with Pheo/Para is complex. Up to 13 genes have been identified including NF1, RET, VHL, SDHA, SDHB, SDHC, SDHD, SDHAF2(SDH5), TMEM127, MAXm EPAS1, FH, MDH2.  Read more here ( recent update)The NIH also have a useful section –click here.

Scans.  Other than the usual range of scanners, ultrasound, CT/MRI, all of which may be used to find evidence of something, the other scan of note is called MIBG.  This is a nuclear scan similar in concept to the Octreotide Scan given to many NET patients (in fact some Pheo patients my get an Octreotide scan if they have somatostatin receptors).  The key differences with MIBG is the liquid radioactive material mix which is called iodine-123-meta-iodobenzylguanidine or 131-meta-iodobenzylguanidine  (this is where the acronym MIBG originates).  Together with the markers above, the results will drive treatment.  Depending on availability, the latest PET scans may also be available potentially offering greater detail and accuracy i.e. 18F-FDOPA, 18F-FDG and Ga68.  Read more on scans here.

This statement and diagram was provided by Dr Mark Lewis who is an Oncologist and MEN patient.  “The algorithm for working up a hyperadrenergic state is attached (and was developed by Dr. Young at Mayo Clinic). It outlines the most reliable testing for a pheo or Paraganglioma”

work-up-for-diagnosing-pheo

Additional Factors and Considerations

  1. This is an awareness post so I’m not covering treatment options in any detail except to say that surgery if often used to remove as much tumour as possible.   Somatostatin Analogues may also be used in certain scenarios in addition to other hormone suppression or symptom controlling drugs. That said, Pheo/Para patients may be interested in a PRRT trial exclusively for Pheo/Para – read more here (see section entitled – “What about Pheo/Para”)
  2. The adrenal cortex mentioned above is actually the site for Adrenocortical Carcinoma (ACC) – this is a totally different cancer.
  3. Pheochromocytomas are probably difficult to diagnose (you only have to look at the symptoms to see that).  The differential diagnoses (i.e. potential misdiagnoses) are: hyperthyroidism, hypoglycaemia, mastocytosis, carcinoid syndrome, menopause, heart failure, arrhythmias, migraine, epilepsy, porphyria lead poisoning, panic attacks and fictitious disorders such as the use of cocaine and benzedrine.
  4. Many Pheochromocytoma patients will also be affected by Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia (MEN), in particular MEN2 (there are some wide-ranging percentage figures online for this aspect).  There can also be an association with Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) syndrome and less commonly with Neurofibromatosis type 1.
  5. Given the nature of the hormones involved with Pheochromocytomas, there is a risk of intraoperative hypertensive crises. This is similar in some ways to Carcinoid Crisis but needs careful consideration by those involved in any invasive procedure.

Newly Approved Drug – AZEDRA

On 30th July 2018, Progenics Pharmaceuticals Announces FDA Approval for AZEDRA® (iobenguane I 131) to Treat Unresectable, Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pheochromocytoma or Paraganglioma – read more by clicking here.

Summary

Pheochromocytomas are very complex involving many of the challenges found in the more abundant and common types of NETs.  To underscore this statement, please see this case study where one patient was misdiagnosed with psychiatric problems for 13 years before being correctly diagnosed with a metastatic Pheochromocytoma.

Also  ….. take a look at this awareness video produced by the Pheo Para Alliance. I voted this as the best piece of NET awareness in 2017. click here to watch

This is an extremely basic overview offered as an awareness message about the lesser known types of NETs.  I refer you to my disclaimer.  If you wish to learn more about Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas, check out the links below.

Research References used in this post:

Know Pheo/Para from Progenics Pharma

ISI – Neuroendocrine Tumors 2016

http://pheopara.org/ (in August 2017, the Pheo Para Troopers and the Pheo Para Project Merged)

http://www.pheosupportfoundation.org/

http://www.pheochromocytoma.org/

http://endocrinediseases.org/

https://www.endocrineweb.com/

Various authoritative Neuroendocrine and Endocrine Sites.

Also ……why not take a look at these Pheo boggers:

  1. Kirsty Dalglishhttps://kirstywestwood.wordpress.com/
  2. to follow

 

 

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.  I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

I’m only as good as my last scan

scancake
Scanning – a piece of cake!

“I’m only as good as my last scan”. I received this comment last week in response to one of my posts and I thought it was a very pragmatic thing for someone to say.

A NET patient under surveillance has regular tests at determined intervals but the one that is most likely to spot disease progression, stability or regression is a scan. Markers such as (say) Chromogranin A (CgA) or 5HIAA are clearly useful but in an ongoing surveillance scenario, they alone would not be used as a firm declaration of progression, stability or regression. Every picture tells a story and a scan is normally the confirmation required whether it’s a CT, MRI or PET (etc).

IF YOU CAN SEE IT YOU CAN DETECT IT! (click here for a post about scans)

octreo-vs-g68
Octreoscan vs Ga68 PET

Scans are also important at the diagnostic phase and I’m sure like myself, many people had their first ever scan at this point.  You can have many checks, investigations and tests but for most, the scan is normally the main test that is going to confirm the presence of tumours.  This then leads to further checks to confirm the staging and grading (i.e. a biopsy) and then hopefully, a proper diagnosis.

I don’t mind scans, they are probably the test that is going to alert my team to anything odd going on.  Thus why I don’t mind doing them – in fact, they are a piece of cake!

Thanks for listening

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news. Please also support my other site – click here and ‘Like’

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Check out my Podcast (click and press play)

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

patients included

WEGO Awards

 

 

Scanxiety – I just don’t get it!


The results will be what the results will be 11 July 2018

OPINION

The internet is full of blogs and articles about a subject which is described as ‘scanxiety‘ – the joining of the words ‘scan’ and ‘anxiety’. I also noted some authors using the words ‘scanxiety’ and ‘anxiety’ interchangeably which in my opinion is clearly wrong as by definition it is only an anxiety about scans and I guess incorporates the results of scans.  Not that we need separate names – at the end of the day, it’s just anxiety regardless of whether it is waiting on the results of a biopsy, blood test, urine test, or anything else related to an illness.  No-one goes around saying ‘blood-testxiety’ or ‘biopsyxiety’. Why scans?

‘Scanxiety’  – I just don’t get it  ……or more accurately I just don’t get overly anxious about having a scan or getting the results of a scan. Why? Because testing (scans in particular) is the one thing that’s going to keep me alive for as long as possible.  I was diagnosed 8 years ago thanks to the trigger of precautionary tests including a scan. I now live with the knowledge (and I accept this fact) that there are still bits of cancer inside me.  If I am not regularly tested, there is a chance I will eventually succumb to a serious or irreversible problem which should have been spotted earlier. Even in the event of ‘not so good news’ following a routine surveillance scan, I still see that as a positive because it means the surveillance regime has worked and an investigation can be commenced to more accurately localise and treat the problem. Even if you are in the diagnostic phase and a scan is ordered, you need to get right inside that machine and get it over and done with.  It just might save your life.

The test results will be what the test results will be and personally I try to save any worry until I know if I have anything to worry about.

Many cancer patients are under surveillance for a long time and are tested regularly. As an incurable cancer patient myself, I sometimes feel like I’m in a perpetual state of testing. I suspect if I was to let anxiety get the better of me, that would simply lead to other complications I just don’t need.  I’m not that insensitive to forget that some people do probably get anxious about actually climbing into a scanner, particularly if they are claustrophobic but that is already a recognised anxiety issue rather than so-called scanxiety.  I also suspect people will be anxious about their relatives having scans, particularly the first diagnostic one, worse when young ones are involved and I totally get that. Anxiety (as opposed to so called scanxiety) is a pretty natural reaction.  However, to control your fears, you need to face them and then try not to let your anxiety filter down to others.  I think people naturally and automatically try to do that without thinking.

‘Scanxiety’ – I just don’t get it.  As for the 51,600 search results on the internet, I just don’t get that either!

You may find my 7 tips for conquering fear useful – read here.

Thanks for reading

You may also enjoy my article “10 Questions to ask your Doctor” – click here.

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.  I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

Please Share this post

 

Chasing normality

Chasing NormalityCancer isn’t always a one-time event. It can be a chronic (ongoing) illness, much like diabetes or heart disease. Cancer can be closely watched and treated, but sometimes it never completely goes away. The cancer may be ‘controlled‘ with treatment, meaning it might seem to go away or stay the same, and it doesn’t grow or spread as long as you are getting appropriate treatment. Sometimes the treatment shrinks the cancer, but the cancer is still there – it doesn’t go away and stay away – it’s not cured.  More people are living with cancer than ever before and the ratio is on the increase thanks to better treatments.

For the first 18 months following my diagnosis, I underwent a significant number of treatments and tests.  As I continue living with my cancer, that tempo doesn’t seem to have gone away.  Every 6 months (and sometimes in between too) I undergo a plethora of tests and appointments.  Some tests are annual.  I feel I’m stuck in this perpetual surveillance world – sometimes I’m not sure what to expect or what’s going to happen next!  I suspect this is the case for many Neuroendocrine Cancer patients.

I saw a post on one of the forums last week – the question was “what does stable actually mean”. The answer may seem obvious but one reputable website defines it as follows “A doctor may use the term controlled if tests or scans show that the cancer is not changing over time. Another way of defining control would be calling the disease stable“.  Worth noting that “not changing” can also mean ‘not decreasing’.

It’s 2 months until my next Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) and if I was a betting man, I would guess they will say “stable” having confirmed no remnant tumour growth and my blood and urine tests will be “unremarkable” (don’t you just love those medical terms!).

So is this normal?  I guess it could be for me but I like to tie quality of life into my ‘normal’ definition.  I also think that living with an incurable cancer is not so much about “getting back to normal” but rather what’s normal for me now (i.e. I can’t put back bits of my small intestine back in!).  As I’m tying this into quality of life which is something I’m constantly trying to improve, I must therefore be constantly trying to improve my ‘normal’. I guess for me, normal isn’t really a static thing.

Being stable and finding a new normal doesn’t mean you don’t need support.  The surveillance scans and tests are a given but the support isn’t always there in the quantity and quality you might like.  I may be stable but I still need support and often this can only be acquired by being a proactive patient.  I have a number of ongoing issue which might present bumps on the road ahead (at least the ones I can see) and these present a challenge to my normality.

  1. Thyroid lesion (ongoing).  Although it has not grown since discovered. Watch and wait.  Check out my Thyroid blog for the full story.
  2. I’m on long-term blood thinners (Clexane) due to the discovery of blood clots in one of my lungs following major surgery in 2010.  To keep an eye on the risk of developing osteoporosis arising from long-term use of this drug, I have an annual DEXA scan which measures bone density. My last scan indicated a slight reduction (nothing drastic).  I’m not getting any younger, so my bones are starting to ‘moan’ a little.
  3. I’m not syndromic but I do have some post surgical side effects.  Anyone who’s had classic NET gastrointestinal or pancreatic surgery will know the issues. It’s a constant battle but I’ve made some improvements by understanding why these side effects occur and taking action to reduce their impact.  For example, since my ‘turning point’ in 2014, I’ve managed to reduce bathroom visits by 300%, so things are pretty normal frequency wise.  I continue to work on this.  Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth  (SIBO) is something I’d like to explore with my MDT, particularly as a big increase in my probiotics dose made a difference. Check out my Nutrition series of blogs.
  4. My fatigue levels are vastly improved since my 2014 turnaround and I put this down to my turnaround changes in the last two years including keeping active and reducing stress levels.  I continue to work on this too.

A new normal can be found.  They can be improved.  However, they need to be guarded by being proactive and positive.   And …. it’s not the same for everyone.

Thanks for listening.

Ronny

Are you following my Facebook page?  If not, you’ll be missing out on selected news and short blogs – Click here and ‘Like’ the page

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts