Facebook Live – Ask the Stem Cell Team about Patient Advocacy

How often do you get to ask an expert a question about something that matters deeply to you and get an answer right away? Not very often I’m guessing. That’s why CIRM’s Facebook Live “Ask the Stem Cell Team About Patient Advocacy” gives you a chance to do just that this Thursday, March 14th from noon till 1pm PST.

We have three amazing individuals who will share their experiences, their expertise and advice as Patient Advocates, and answer your questions about how to be an effective advocate for your cause.

The three are:

Gigi McMillan became a Patient Advocate when her 5-year-old son was diagnosed with a brain tumor. That led her to helping develop support systems for families going through the same ordeal, to help researchers develop appropriate consent processes and to campaign for the rights of children and their families in research.

Adrienne Shapiro comes from a family with a long history of Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) and has fought to help people with SCD have access to compassionate care. She is the co-founder of Axis Advocacy, an organization dedicated to raising awareness about SCD and support for those with it. In addition she is now on the FDA’s Patient Engagement Collaborative, a new group helping the FDA ensure the voice of the patient is heard at the highest levels.

David Higgins is a CIRM Board member and a Patient Advocate for Parkinson’s Disease. David has a family history of the disease and in 2011 was diagnosed with Parkinson’s. As a scientist and advocate he has championed research into the disease and worked to raise greater awareness about the needs of people with Parkinson’s.

Also, make sure to “like” our FaceBook page before the event to receive a notification when we’ve gone live for this and future events. If you miss the broadcast, not to worry. We’ll be posting it on our Facebook video page, our website, and YouTube channel shortly afterwards.

We want to answer your most pressing questions, so please email them directly to us beforehand at info@cirm.ca.gov.

And, of course, feel free to share this information with anyone you think might be interested.

Rare Disease Day – fighting for awareness and hope

It’s hard thinking of something as rare when one in 20 people are at risk of experiencing it in their lifetime. But that’s the situation with rare diseases. There are more than 7,000 of them and each affects under 200,000 people. In some cases they may only affect a few hundred people. But for each person that disease, though rare, poses a real threat. And that’s why Rare Disease Day was created.

Rare Disease Day is held on the last day of February each year.  The goal is to raise awareness among the general public about the huge impact these diseases have on people’s lives. That impact is not just on the person with the disease but on the whole family who are often struggling just to get a diagnosis.

Every year groups around the world, from patients and patient advocacy organizations to researchers and policymakers, stage events to mark the day. This year there are more than 460 events being held in 96 countries, everywhere from Albania and Andora to Tunisia and Uruguay.

Here in the US many groups organize events at State Capitols to educate elected officials and policy makers about the particular needs of these communities and the promise that scientific research holds to combat these conditions. Others have auctions to raise funds for research or public debates to raise awareness.

Each event is unique in its own way because each represents many different diseases, many different needs, and many different stories. The goal of these events is to put a human face on each condition, to give it visibility, so that it is no longer something most people have never heard of, instead it becomes something that affects someone you may know or who reminds you of someone you know.

Here’s a video from Spain that does just that.

You can find a complete list of events being held around the world to mark Rare Disease Day.

At CIRM we feel a special link to this day. That’s because many of the diseases we fund research into are rare diseases such as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), and ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease, and Sickle Cell Disease.

Evie Vaccaro, cured of SCID

These diseases affect relatively small numbers of patients so they often struggle to get funding for research. Because we do not have to worry about making a profit on any therapy we help develop we can focus our efforts on supporting those with unmet medical needs. And it’s paying off. Our support has already helped develop a therapy for SCID that has cured 40 children. We have two clinical trials underway for ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease. We also have two clinical trials for Sickle Cell Disease and have reached a milestone agreement with the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) on a partnership to help develop a cure for this crippling and life-threatening disorder.

The hope is that events like Rare Disease Day let people know that even though they have a condition that affects very few, that they are not alone, but that they are part of a wider, global community, a community committed to working to find treatments and cures for all of them.

Tips on how to be a great Patient Advocate from three of the best Advocates around

No one sets out to be a Patient Advocate. It’s something that you become because of something that happens to you. Usually it’s because you, or  a loved one or a friend, becomes ill and you want to help find a treatment. Whatever the reason, it is the start of a journey that often throws you into a world that you know nothing about: a world of research studies and scientific terminology, of talking to and trying to understand medical professionals, and of watching someone you love struggle.

It’s a tough, demanding, sometimes heart-breaking role. But it’s also one of the most important roles you can ever take on. Patient Advocates not only care for people afflicted with a particular disease or disorder, they help them navigate a new and scary world, they help raise money for research, and push researchers to work harder to find new treatments, maybe even cures. And they remind all of us that in the midst of pain and suffering the human touch, a simple kindness is the most important gift of all.

But what makes a great Patient Advocate, what skills do you need and how can you get them? At CIRM we are blessed to have some of the most amazing Patient Advocates you will ever meet. So we asked three of them to join us for a special Facebook Live “Ask the Stem Cell Team” event to share their knowledge, experience and expertise with you.

The Facebook Live “Ask the Stem Cell Team About Patient Advocacy” event will be on Thursday, March 14th from noon till 1pm PST.

The three experts are:

Gigi McMillan

Gigi McMillan became a Patient Advocate when her 5-year-old son was diagnosed with a brain tumor. That has led her to helping develop support systems for families going through the same ordeal, to help researchers develop appropriate consent processes and to campaign for the rights of children and their families in research.

Adrienne Shapiro

Adrienne Shapiro comes from a family with a long history of Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) and has fought to help people with SCD have access to compassionate care. She is the co-founder of Axis Advocacy, an organization dedicated to raising awareness about SCD and support for those with it. In addition she is now on the FDA’s Patient Engagement Collaborative, a new group helping the FDA ensure the voice of the patient is heard at the highest levels.

David Higgins

David Higgins is a CIRM Board member and a Patient Advocate for Parkinson’s Disease. David has a family history of the disease and in 2011 was diagnosed with Parkinson’s. As a scientist and advocate he has championed research into the disease and strived to raise greater awareness about the needs of people with Parkinson’s.

Please join us for our Facebook Live event on Patient Advocates on Thursday, March 14 from noon till 1pm and feel free to share information about the event with anyone you think would be interested.

Also, make sure to “like” our FaceBook page before the event to receive a notification when we’ve gone live for this and future events. If you miss the broadcast, not to worry. We’ll be posting it on our Facebook video page, our website, and YouTube channel shortly afterwards.

We want to answer your most pressing questions, so please email them directly to us beforehand at info@cirm.ca.gov.

The power of one voice: David Higgins’ role in advancing stem cell research

CIRM-2018_28-

David Higgins: Photo courtesy Nancy Ramos @ Silver Eye Photography

As we start a new year, we are fine tuning our soon-to-be-published 2018 Annual Report, summarizing our work over the past 12 months. The report is far more than just a collection of statistics about how many clinical trials we are funding (50 – not too shabby eh!) or that our support has generated an additional $3.2 billion in leveraged funding. It’s also a look at the people who have made this year so memorable – from patients and researchers to patient advocates. We start with our Board member David Higgins, Ph.D.  David is the patient advocate on our Board for Parkinson’s disease. He has a family history of Parkinson’s and has also been diagnosed with the disease himself.

How he sees his role

As a patient advocate my role is not to support any Parkinson’s program that comes in the door and get it funded. We have to judge the science at the same level for every disease and if you bring me a good Parkinson’s project, I will fight tooth and nail to support it. But if you bring me a bad one, I will not support it. I see my role as more of a consultant for the staff and Board, to help advise but not to impose my views on them.

I think what CIRM has done is to create a new way of funding the best science in the world. The involvement of the community in making these decisions is critical in making sure there is an abundance of oversight, that there is not a political decision made about funding. It’s all about the science. This is the most science-based organization that you could imagine.

The Board plays a big role in all this. We don’t do research or come up with the ideas, but we nurture the research and support the scientists, giving them the elements they need to succeed.

And, of course the taxpayers play a huge role in this, creating us in the first place and approving all the money to help support and even drive this research. Because of that we should be as conservative as possible in using this money. Being trustees of this funding is a privilege and we have to be mindful of how to best use it.

On the science

I love, love, love having access to the latest, most interesting, cutting edge research in the world, talking to scientists about what they are doing, how we can support them and help them to do it better, how it will change the world. You don’t have access to anything else like this anywhere else.

It’s like ice cream, you just enjoy every morsel of it and there’s no way you can find that level of satisfaction anywhere else. I really feel, as do other Board members, that we are helping people, that we are changing people’s lives.

I also love the learning curve. The amount I have learned about the field that I didn’t know before is amazing. Every meeting is a chance to learn something new and meeting the scientists who have spent years working on a project is so fascinating and rewarding.

 Unexpected pleasure

The other joy, and I hadn’t anticipated this, is the personal interaction I have with other Board members and staff members. They have become friends, people I really like and admire because of what they do and how committed they are.

When I talk about CIRM I tell people if you live in California you should be proud of how your money is being spent and how it’s making a difference in people’s lives. When I give a talk or presentation, I always end with a slide of the California flag and tell people you should be proud to be here.

 

 

Stories that caught our eye: Is a Texas law opening up access to stem cell treatments working? Another CIRM-funded company gets good news from the FDA.

TexasCapitol_shutterstock_494317324

Texas Capitol. (Shutterstock)

In 2017 Texas passed a sweeping new law, HB 810, which allowed medical clinics to provide “investigational stem cell treatments to patients with certain severe chronic diseases or terminal illnesses.” Those in favor of the law argued that patients battling life-threatening or life-changing diseases should have the right to try stem cell therapies that were involved in a clinical trial.

Now a new study, published in the journal Stem Cells and Development, looks at the impact of the law. The report says that despite some recent amendments t there are still some concerns about the law including:

  • It allows treatment only if the patient has a “severe, chronic” illness but doesn’t define what that means
  • It doesn’t have clearly defined procedures on tracking and reporting procedures so it’s hard to know how many patients might be treated and what the outcomes are
  • There is no Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight of the patients being treated
  • Because the treatments are unproven there are fears this will “open up the state to unsavory and predatory practices by individuals preying on vulnerable patients”

The researchers conclude:

“While HB 810 opens up access to patients, it also increases significant risks for their safety and financial cost for something that might have no positive impact on their disease. Truly understanding the impact of stem cell based interventions (SCBI) requires scientific rigor, and accurate outcome data reporting must be pursued to ensure the safety and efficacy behind such procedures. This information must be readily available so that patients can make informed decisions before electing to pursue such treatments. The creation of the SCBI registry could allow for some level of scientific rigor, provide a centralized data source, and offer the potential for better informed patient choices, and might be the best option for the state to help protect patients.”

Another CIRM-funded company gets RMAT designation

Poseida

When Congress approved the 21st Century Cures Act a few years ago one of the new programs it created was the Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) designation. This was given to therapies that are designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition, where early clinical stage trials show the approach is safe and appears to be effective.

Getting an RMAT designation is a big deal. It means the company or researchers are able to apply for an expedited review by the FDA and could get approval for wider use.

This week Poseida Therapeutics was granted RMAT designation by the Food and drug Administration (FDA) for P-BCMA-101, its CAR-T therapy for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. This is currently in a Phase 1 clinical trial that CIRM is funding

In this trial Poseida’s technology takes an immunotherapy approach that uses the patient’s own engineered immune system T cells to seek and destroy cancerous myeloma cells.

In a news release Eric Ostertag, Poseida’s CEO, welcomed the news:

“Initial Phase 1 data presented at the CAR-TCR Summit earlier this year included encouraging response rates and safety data, including meaningful responses in a heavily pretreated population. We expect to have an additional data update by the end of the year and look forward to working closely with the FDA to expedite development of P-BCMA-101.”

This means that five CIRM-funded companies have now been granted RMAT designations:

TELL ME WHAT I NEED TO KNOW: A Patient Advocate’s guide to being a Patient Advocate

A few weeks ago I was at the CIRM Alpha Stem Cell Clinic Network Symposium at UCLA and was fortunate enough to hear Gianna McMillan speak about patient advocacy. It was a powerful, moving, funny, and truly engaging talk. I quickly realized I wanted to blog about her talk and so for the first few minutes I was busy taking notes as fast as I could.  And then I realized that a simple blog could never do justice to what Gianna was saying, that what we needed was to run the whole presentation. So here it is.

Gianna McMillan

Gianna McMillan at the CIRM Alpha Stem Cell Clinic Symposium: Photo courtesy UCLA

TELL ME WHAT I NEED TO KNOW

Gianna McMillan, MA – Patient/Subject Advocate, Bioethics Institute at Loyola Marymount University

Stem cell research and regenerative medicine are appealing topics because patients, families and society are weary of inelegant medical interventions that inflict, in some cases, as much harm as benefit. We are tired of putting poison in our loved ones to kill their cancer or feeling helpless as other diseases attack our own bodily functions. California, full of dreamers and go-getters, has enthusiastically embraced this new technology—but it is important to remember that all biomedical research— even in a new field as exciting and inspiring as stem cell therapeutics – must adhere to basic premises. It must be valid science and it must be based on an ethical partnership with patients and research subjects.

In the world of research ethics, I wear a lot of hats. I have been a subject, a care-giver, an Institutional Review Board (IRB) member (someone who actually reviews and approves research studies before they are allowed to proceed), and I have worked with the government on regulatory committees. These days I am finishing my doctoral studies in Bioethics, and while I love the interplay of philosophy and ethical principles, I most truly identify as an in-the-trenches Patient/Subject Advocate. I am compelled to champion patients who struggle with new and devastating diagnoses, hoping desperately for a cure, and who might be faced with decisions about participating in research for their own benefit and for the greater good of science.

In the old days, doctors made decisions on behalf of their patients— who, meekly grateful for the guidance, did whatever they were told. It is a little different now. Patients are better informed, often do their own homework, and demand to be an integral part of their treatment plan. The world of research has undergone similar changes. Instead of investigators “doing things to research subjects”, best practices involve patients in the design of clinical trials. Patients and experienced subjects help decide what specific questions should be the focus of the research; they identify endpoints in the research that are meaningful to the patient population being studied; and they assist in devising tools for patient-reported outcomes and delivery of study results.

The investigator and the research subject have come to be seen as partners.

While the evolution of this important relationship is healthy and wonderful, it should not be assumed that this is an equal partnership. Why? Because subjects are always at a disadvantage.  I realize that this might be an uncomfortable concept. Physician-investigators in charge of the study might want to qualify this statement it by insisting “but we do our best to accommodate their needs”. Subjects would also rather not admit this—because it is hard to make a decision with confidence while simultaneously acknowledging, “I am really at a disadvantage here.”

However, I have learned the hard way that an honest partnership requires addressing some uncomfortable realities.

A short personal story illustrates what I am talking about. When my oldest son was five years old, he was diagnosed with malignant brain cancer. Before meeting with our son’s treatment team for the first time, my husband and I decided that my husband, articulate and concise, would take the lead. He had a legal pad, with a list of questions… each question and answer would take us down the page until, at last, we would use all the information to make a decision—a life or death decision – on behalf of our young child.

In the meeting, the neurosurgeon pointed at brain scans and explained a few things. And then radiologist drew pictures of machines and treatment angles. The oncologist described risks and benefits and side effects. Then we all looked expectantly at my husband—because it was his turn. This lovely man opened his mouth. And closed his mouth. And then burst into tears, holding that legal pad over his chest like a shield. He could not speak. After a few seconds of horrified silence, I stammered out what few questions I could remember. The doctors answered, of course. Their mouths moved, and I leaned in and nodded while making eye contact – but I have no idea what they said.  All I heard was a loud white noise that filled my skull and my husband’s raspy breathing, and my own voice crying out in my head – “Oh my God! My child! My child!”

The point of this story is to illustrate that good people, educated and prepared, ready to bring their best selves to make the most important decision they would ever make, one that would affect the life of a beloved child— these people could not function. Despite this, in just a few days’ time, we were introduced to a research study, one that might cure our child while limiting the damage to his growing brain.  No matter how well-intentioned the research team was—no matter how desirous they were of a “partnership” with us, we were at such a distinct disadvantage, that the relationship we had with these investigators could not be categorized as one “among equals”.

Even now, more than twenty years later, it is painful for me to reflect on this. But I have learned, working with hundreds of families whose children went into clinical trials, that if we can be honest about the dysfunctional nature of this situation, we might take some action to improve it. Let me be specific about the ways research subjects are at a disadvantage.

  1. They often don’t speak the language of the disease.
  2. They are unfamiliar with the process of research.
  3. They are wrestling with emotions: despair, denial, anger and hope.
  4. Their life has been disrupted – and there are consequences.

Compare this with the research team, who knows the lingo, designed the research plan, is not personally affected by the scenario and well, this is business as usual: enroll a subject, let’s get going! How is the notion of “partnership” affected by such unequal circumstances?

Is a meaningful “partnership” even possible?

I say, yes! And this notion of “partnership” is especially important as new technologies come to invade intimate qualities of “self” and the building blocks of what makes each of us human. However, we need to be realistic about what this partnership looks like. It is not equal.  I am going to take a stand here and say that the partner who has the advantage (in this case, the researcher/scientist) is morally obligated to meaningfully address the disadvantage of the other party. This bears repeating. The partner who has the advantage is morally obligated to meaningfully address the disadvantage of the other party.

Over the years, families and subjects have told me what they want and need from the doctors and researchers they work with. They say:

  1. Tell me what I need to know.
  2. Tell me in a way I can hear it.
  3. Tell me again and again.

Let me expand on these a bit. First, if I am a patient new to a diagnosis, a treatment or research—I probably do not know what I do not know. Help me learn vocabulary, procedures, and systems. Tell me about the elements of informed consent so that I recognize them when I see them in the documents you want me to sign. Explain the difference between “standard of care” and “experimental treatment”. Help me understand the research question in the context of the disease (in general) and my own ailment (in particular). Give me the words to ask the questions that I should be asking.

Secondly, there are many different ways of sharing this information: print, video, websites, peer mentors, nurse-educators, and research team members. Hit the topic from all sides and in multiple formats. Thirdly, please realize that there is a learning curve for me— and it is closely tied to my emotional journey with my predicament. I may not be able to absorb certain facts at the very beginning, but a few weeks later I might be mentally and cognitively in a different place. And obviously, I might be an inexperienced research subject when I sign the consent form— but a few months later I will be vastly more sophisticated and at that time, I need the opportunity to ask my more considered and context-savvy questions.

I want to point out that researchers have access to a deep well of wisdom – a resource that can advise and support ethical actions that will help their disadvantaged partners: researchers can ask their experienced subjects for advice.

Remember those hundreds of families I worked with, whose children ultimately enrolled in clinical trials? These experienced parents say:

  • Let me tell you what I needed to know.
  • Let me tell you how I needed to hear it.

Getting input from these experienced subjects and caregivers does two things.

First, the research team is leveraging the investment they have already made in the participants of their studies; and secondly — very importantly — they are empowering the previously disadvantaged partner. Experienced subjects can to share what they have learned or give suggestions to the research team. Physicians and researchers might even build a stable of peer mentors who might be willing to help newbies learn about the process.

Everything I have said applies to all avenues of clinical research, but these are especially important considerations in the face of new and exciting science. It took a long time for more traditional research practices to evolve into an investigator/subject partnership model. Stem cell research and regenerative medicine has the opportunity to do this from the very start—and benefit from previous lessons learned.

When I was preparing my remarks for today, someone casually mentioned that I might talk about the “importance of balancing truth-telling in the informed consent process with respect for the hope of the family.” I would like to unequivocally state that the very nature of an “informed consent process” requires 100% truth, as does respect for the family—and that this does not undermine our capacity for hope. We place our hope in this exciting new science and the doctors and researchers who are pioneers. We understand that there are many unknowns in this new field. Please be honest with us so that we might sort out our thoughts and our hopes for ourselves, in our own contexts.

What message would I wish the scientists here, today, to take away with them?      Well, I am putting on my Patient/Subject Advocate hat, and in my Patient/Subject Advocate voice, I am saying: “Tell me what I need to know!”

 

 

Stem Cell Agency Heads to Inland Empire for Free Patient Advocate Event

UCRiversidePatientAdvocateMtg_EventBrite copy

I am embarrassed to admit that I have never been to the Inland Empire in California, the area that extends from San Bernardino to Riverside counties.  That’s about to change. On Monday, April 16th CIRM is taking a road trip to UC Riverside, and we’re inviting you to join us.

We are holding a special, free, public event at UC Riverside to talk about the work that CIRM does and to highlight the progress being made in stem cell research. We have funded 45 clinical trials in a wide range of conditions from stroke and cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, vision loss, diabetes and sickle cell disease to name just a few. And will talk about how we plan on funding many more clinical trials in the years to come.

We’ll be joined by colleagues from both UC Riverside, and City of Hope, talking about the research they are doing from developing new imaging techniques to see what is happening inside the brain with diseases like Alzheimer’s, to using a patient’s own cells and immune system to attack deadly brain cancers.

It promises to be a fascinating event and of course we want to hear from you, our supporters, friends and patient advocates. We are leaving plenty of time for questions, so we can hear what’s on your mind.

So, join us at UC Riverside on Monday, April 16th from 12.30pm to 2pm. The doors open at 11am so you can enjoy a poster session (highlighting some of the research at UCR) and a light lunch before the event. Parking will be available on site.

Visit the Eventbrite page we have created for all the information you’ll need about the event, including a chance to RSVP and book your place.

The event is free so feel free to share this with anyone and everyone you think might be interested in joining us.

 

 

Just a Mom: The Journey of a Sickle Cell Disease Patient Advocate [video]

Adrienne Shapiro will tell you that she’s just a mom.

And it’s true. She is just a mom. Just a mom who is the fourth generation of mothers in her family to have children born with sickle cell disease. Just a mom who was an early advocate of innovative stem cell and gene therapy research by UCLA scientist Dr. Don Kohn which has led to an on-going, CIRM-funded clinical trial for sickle cell disease. Just a mom who is the patient advocate representative on a Clinical Advisory Panel (CAP) that CIRM is creating to help guide this clinical trial.

She’s just a mom who has become a vocal stem cell activist, speaking to various groups about the importance of CIRM’s investments in both early stage research and clinical trials. She’s just a mom who was awarded a Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Action Award at last month’s World Stem Cell Summit. She’s just a mom who, in her own words, “sees a new world not just for her children but for so many other children”, through the promise of stem cell therapies.

Yep, she’s just a mom. And it’s the tireless advocacy of moms like Adrienne that will play a critical role in accelerating stem cell therapies to patients with unmet medical needs. We can use all the moms we can get.

Adrienne Shapiro speaks to the CIRM governing Board about her journey as a patient advocate

Engaging the patient to create a culture of health citizenship

P4C

Health Citizenship panel discussion at Partnering for Cures: L to R: Lucia Savage, Roni Zeiger,  Claudia Williams, Jennifer Mills, Kathy Hudson, Beth Meagher

One of the buzz phrases in healthcare today is “patient engagement”. It seems that you can’t go to a medical or scientific conference without coming across a panel discussion on the topic. A recent Partnering For Cures* event in San Francisco was no exception. But here the conversation took on a very different tone, one that challenged what the term meant and then said that if we are really serious about engaging patients, then doctors and drug companies need to change the way they think and operate.

That tone was set from the start of the discussion when moderator Claudia Williams said even the term “patient engagement” suggests that it is something “being imposed, or at least allowed, from the outside; by experts and doctors and those in charge.”

Williams quoted Erin Moore, the mother of a young boy with cystic fibrosis saying “No one is more engaged than the patient. I want the experts, the doctors, the pharmaceutical companies to be engaged.”

Need to train doctors

Dr. Roni Zeiger, the former Chief Health Strategist at Google, said doctors aren’t trained to truly listen to and engage with patients, and that has to change:

“I sometimes think of myself as a recovering paternal physician. When I listen to and learn from patients and families I am surprised, every time, at the breadth and depth of the conversations. All of the things that we, in the medical field, do from designing a waiting room to designing a clinical trial to deciding when and how to have a conversation, we bring a tremendous amount of assumptions to those. And those assumptions are often wrong. I think that on a daily basis we should be looking at the key work we do and ask are there assumptions here I should throw away and talk to those I serve and get their help in redesigning things in a way that makes more sense.”

Jennifer Mills, the Director of Patient Engagement (that phrase again) at biotech giant Genentech, said those mistakes are made by everyone in the field:

“The biggest assumption for me is thinking about patients with a capital P, as a homogeneous group, instead of realizing they are also individuals. We need to address them as a group and as individuals depending on the circumstances.”

Caregivers count too

For example as people get older and rely on a partner or spouse to take care of them it may be important to not just engage with the patient but also with the caregiver. And the needs for each of them may not be the same.

At that point the conversation turned to the use of data. Lucia Savage, the Chief Privacy and Regulatory Officer at Omada Health, said it is going to be increasingly important to give people control over their own medical data, and sometimes the medical data of others.

“Caregivers need access to healthcare records. For example, I can check my mom’s labs. If I message her doctors they can share that information with me. It’s great because it helps us help her lead an independent life as an 80 year old.”

Savage also pointed out that we need to be careful how we interpret data. She said she could go shopping and buy three extra-large bags of potato chips. On the face of it that doesn’t look good. But did she buy those chips for herself or her daughter’s soccer team. The data is the same. The implications are very different.

Partnership not patronizing

The discussion ended with an attempt to outline what being a good health citizen means. Just as citizenship involves both rights and responsibilities on the part of the individual and society, health citizenship too involves rights and responsibilities on the part of the individual and the biomedical research and health care world. Patients deserve to be treated as individuals who have a vested interest in their own health. They don’t need “experts” to talk down or patronize them or assume they know best.

Mills says she is seeing progress in this area:

“Companies are moving from assuming what patients need to asking what they need. We once assumed that if we were in the therapeutic area long enough we didn’t need to ask what patients need. I’m seeing that change.”

Deloitte Consulting’s Beth Meagher said we need to look beyond technology and focus on the people:

“Humility is going to be the killer app. The true innovators are really being humble and realizing that to have the kind of impact they are looking for, there is a need to work in a way they haven’t before. “

*Partnering for Cures is a project of Michael Milken’s FasterCures, whose goal is to save lives by speeding up and improving the medical research system.

 

A Patient Advocate’s Personal Manifesto

Janni and Obama

President Obama and Janni Lehrer-Stein

Janni Lehrer-Stein was just 26 when she was diagnosed with a degenerative eye disease and told she was going to be blind within six months. The doctor who gave her the news told her “But don’t worry, people like you are usually hit and killed by a bus long before they go completely blind.”

At the time she was recently married, had just graduated law school and landed her dream job with the government in Washington DC, litigating workplace discrimination. The news about her eyesight stopped her in her tracks.

But not for long. If you ever met Janni you would know that nothing stops her for long.

I was fortunate enough to hear Janni talk at a Foundation Fighting Blindness event in the San Francisco Bay Area last weekend. I was part of a panel discussion on new approaches to treating vision loss, including the research that CIRM is funding.

Janni didn’t talk about stem cells, instead she focused on the importance of the patient advocate voice, community, and their determination. She said one of the most important things anyone battling a life-threatening or life-changing disease or disorder needs to remember is that it’s not about disability, it’s about capability. It’s about what you can do rather than what you cannot.

Janni laid out her “manifesto” for things she says will help you keep that thought uppermost in your mind.

1) Show up. It’s that simple and that important. You have to show up. You have to get educated, you have to learn all you can about your condition so you know what you can do and what you can’t do. You have to share that information with others. You have to be there for others. Don’t just show up for yourself. Show up for others who can’t be there.

2) Share this information. Janni talked about a website called My Retina Tracker which is helping drive research into the causes of retinal diseases like retinitis pigmentosa and macular degeneration, and hopefully will lead to treatments and even cures. She says the more people work together, the more we combine our resources, the more effective we can be.

3) Support the researchers. Janni says while raising awareness is important, raising money is just as important. Without money there can be no research, and without research no treatments or cures. Janni says it doesn’t matter how you do it – a charity walk, a Go Fund me campaign, petitioning your state or federal elected representatives to urge them to fund research – everything counts, every dollar helps.

4) Remember you are part of a wider community. Janni says no one ever won a battle on their own; it takes a lot of people to fight and win the right to be treated equally. And it takes a lot of effort to stop those rights from being rolled back.

Janni hasn’t let losing her sight hold her back. In 2011, she was appointed by President Obama, and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, to the National Council on Disability where she served two terms advising the President and Congress on national disability policy.

Now she has returned home to the San Francisco Bay Area, but she is no less determined to make a difference and no less determined to fight for the rights of patients and patient advocates.

In an article on Medium she shares her feelings about being a patient advocate:

“The America that I so deeply respect is one that embraces, values and respects the contributions of us all. My America includes every one of us, regardless of our gender, race, age or disability. Our America is a place where, regardless of whether we are sighted or blind, we have the same opportunities, for which we are equally considered. Our America includes every one of us who wishes to make the world a more peaceful, responsible, and inclusive environment that is tolerant of all differences and abilities, physical or otherwise. To me, those differences make our lives richer, give our contributions more meaning, and lead to a brighter future for the next generation.”