Letters to the editor

E-mail this article Print this article

'The Hutch'

Series overlooks The Hutch's many successes

Editor, The Times:

I am disappointed with the articles about the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center ("Uninformed consent," Times series, March 11-15). They fail to mention the thousands of people who are alive today thanks to The Hutch.

A cancer diagnosis is a burden in so many ways. Hope for a cure is a driving factor as a person suffers the difficulties of this deadly disease. It would be wonderful if everyone survived the disease, but they don't.

Yet, more survive today than they did years ago. This increase in survival is a result of the dedicated researchers at The Hutch.

I am one of the world's longest survivors of acute myelogenous leukemia. In 1972, at the age of 16, I was given three weeks to live. I refused to give up. Thanks to The Hutch and access to research-based treatment, I am alive today.

In May of 1996, I was diagnosed with Stage 4 breast cancer. Some of the same researchers who rescued me from leukemia have also been involved in my treatment for breast cancer. I am alive thanks to their willingness to try new treatments at my insistence. I am very informed and made a positive choice to not give up.

I am thankful to the doctors and nurses who took such good care of me. They were, and are, kind, caring and, always, informative.

Your article is shameful. Why would you choose to denigrate a Seattle treasure? We should all be proud to have The Hutch in our backyard.
- Tamara Stevens, Bellevue

Set up patients' rights review board made up of survivors, loved ones

I believe the three doctors at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center who had a financial incentive in that deadly Protocol 126 deserve to be sanctioned from practice. In my opinion, they are not trustworthy. My father died of brain cancer in 1983 after an experimental chemotherapy treatment. Suddenly, I wonder if unethical financial interests, versus ethical clinical concerns, motivated his treatment.

I am sure anyone who has lost a loved one to cancer while undergoing an experimental treatment will now have to wonder, "Did my doctor have my best interest at heart?" These men have breached the Hippocratic oath in a way that will forever make me suspect of a doctor's motivation.

A solution would be to have cancer survivors or their family members serve on review boards, so someone can speak for the rights of vulnerable patients without having to fear for their careers. You don't need to be an oncologist to understand the federal guidelines protecting patients' rights, but you may need tremendous courage to enforce them.

It seems like The Hutch owes the deceased patients and their families at least that much.
- Peter Loft, Seattle

Inherent ethical conflict

Just how, pray tell, can there be an ethical dilemma with drugs, money and medicine when there are no ethics connected with any of the three? To allow doctors and hospitals to have a financial interest in drugs being tested is an open invitation to disaster.
- Desmond Call, Edmonds

Harm done

It was with great disappointment and dismay that we followed the "investigative" series on the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center these past few days. We've never seen such one-sided, malicious, misleading drivel in our lives. We fail to understand the purpose or intent of your paper in writing and printing such an attack on the finest research institution in this nation.

The harm you've done to cancer research will probably never clearly be measured. We expect more from our daily paper and cannot support such unprofessional attacks or misguided reporting of the news.

Please cancel our subscription immediately and refund whatever balance remains on our account. We will gladly donate this refund to The Hutch with the hopes they can undo some of the harm your article has done.
- Richard and Sue Pouley, Mukilteo

Center of denial

I believe even Fred Hutchinson and his brother would even be proud of The Times and ashamed of both the behavior of the staff and the leadership of the cancer center. But even more so they would be ashamed of the lack of integrity shown by the center's response to the exposure of this behavior.

When you are caught with your hands in the cookie jar, it is best that you say "Oops, Mom, I'm sorry and I won't do it again." To add loud denials only compounds the behavior and leads to a further lack of confidence in the leadership and staff of the center.

It simply shows that the problem of lack of integrity still exists at the center. And this is a loss not only for the center but for all who might be helped by a center that regained its integrity. It sounds like the center is listening only to its lawyers and not to its conscience.
- Bert Metzger, Seattle

Trying to save lives

I was shocked to read your articles about Fred Hutch. I was waiting to read the other side of the story. I missed it. What is the motive of one-sided journalism? Who do you think you are fooling? Who is really the victim? I don't have cancer, but I pray every day for those who do. I pray for the day that Fred Hutch can come closer to a cure.

We as citizens need to realize that being a pioneer and stepping out to try to find a cure is risky. Not everyone will live. Not everyone will die. My impression of Fred Hutch is that they are very reputable, and they are trying to save lives in the long term.

Your articles didn't change my idea of Fred Hutch. It changed my idea of The Seattle Times. I waited all week for an apology from The Seattle Times on the attack you gave Fred Hutch. I didn't see it.
- Pam Smith, Woodinville

Colleagues assist

A large part of the development of the Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation program at City of Hope, as well as progress that we have been able to make in the treatment of patients with these diseases, is derived from work performed by our colleagues at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and, in particular, under the careful and thoughtful leadership of Drs. E. Donnall Thomas and Frederick Appelbaum.

It is very clear that there are literally thousands upon thousands of patients worldwide who owe their lives to the pioneering work developed in Seattle, which has continued over a 30-year period, leading to cures in adults and children of diseases that would have robbed them of their lives and their dignity at too early a time in their lives.

Over the past 15 years, my colleagues and I have collaborated with scientists and clinicians at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center to develop therapeutic studies.The most gratifying result of these collaborations has been the development of new approaches that have brought hope to more patients with these often-incurable diseases. All who work in this field understand the challenges of the task of bringing lifesaving therapies to difficult and highly resistant diseases. Thus the approach has been to always attempt to offer hope to a patient with the use of novel approaches.

It is my impression from observing the conduct of these studies in the care of patients at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center that my colleagues there are engaged in a noble effort to save lives and increase knowledge so that others may live.
- Stephen Forman, M.D., director, division of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, Calif.

Why Fred Hutch?

As others have commented, you have been a bit harsh with Fred Hutch regarding the medical research they have been involved with. There are many other facilities or medical research coordinating companies that could have been exposed. Why Fred Hutch? Why not expose all research facilities and physicians who are involved in research?

All research done is based on dollars. Take a look at the pharmaceutical companies - they are behind a lot of the research that is being done. They paid out large dollars to entice physicians to be involved in research. Some physicians do research to help advance medical technology, others do it for the dollars. Is it not amazing that medical treatment, which includes medications, are costing "the little guys" big dollars?

So be fair, expose all who do medical research, and not just a few.
- Laila Niemela, Bothell

'We will never know'

Doctors at The Hutch gave my mother, Kathy Hamilton, a lethal dose of chemotherapy. She was told she would receive PTX - either orally or, if necessary, intravenously - which, they hoped, would protect her from the toxic effects of the drugs. The Hutch acknowledged in its press conference March 15 that she had been misled, and that intravenous PTX should have been available to her. But, they argue, it really didn't make a difference because we now know that PTX doesn't work. She would have died anyway.

The Hutch seems to be missing the most important lesson of these disturbing stories. The point is not whether, in hindsight, my mother would have lived or died if she had received PTX. The point is that she didn't receive the critical information she needed to decide whether to participate in the experiment in the first place.

What would she have done if she had known that she would not get PTX because it wasn't available intravenously? If she had known about the research at the time showing PTX didn't work? If she had known about the financial ties between The Hutch, Cell Therapeutics, her doctors and PTX?

We will never know the answers to those questions. We will never know what her informed decision would have been because she never had a chance to make it.

I know that there are many good people at The Hutch who realize that grave mistakes were made, and who want to see changes occur. The Hutch is engaged in high-risk experiments that have the potential to save many lives, but that also involve life-and-death decisions on the part of the patients. I hope that everyone at The Hutch - and at other research institutions throughout the country - will renew their commitment to ensuring their patients are fully informed of all the risks. Our basic human dignity demands no less.
- Chris Addicott, Seattle

Yes they do experiments

I received a bone marrow transplant in 1987 at the Hutchinson Center and my care there was exceptional. I can assure you that informed consent is an individualized process in which medical professionals convey highly technical scientific information to a patient during a critical turning point in his life. It is not a piece of paper with words printed on it in ink. Rather it is a process - a week, a month or even four years or more in the making. It is really more of an art than a science.

My doctors at The Hutch, as well as nurses, social workers, a pastor and others all took the time necessary to give me the information I needed to make my decision whether or not to enter into a risky experimental treatment.

Their motive was to find a better way to treat my disease. I went to the Hutchinson Research Center, not to a conventional hospital. Yes, they do experiments on people there - careful, methodical and humane experiments that benefit humanity. That's how advancements are made and my hope is that you who are unfortunate enough to face cancer in the future may benefit from The Hutch's research thanks, in part, to us who came before you.
- Michael Rubin, Vashon

Commerce's role

At the current levels of government funding for academic centers, it is impossible for new therapeutic entities to be tested and brought to market without the support and financial capital provided by the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries.

Academic centers have neither the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to bring a promising drug candidate through clinical development nor the staff to attend to the myriad and growing number of quality assurance, quality control and regulatory filings necessary to support clinical development programs.

The lives of hundreds of thousands of patients have been saved, extended or improved by drugs that were conceived in academic laboratories and brought to market by commercial entities

Moreover, the licensing fees received by academic centers such as The Hutch help to support additional promising research programs that may not receive sufficient support from federal grant agencies. Within these programs may lay the seeds of new therapies for cancer, Alzheimer's disease, cardiovascular disorders, diabetes or other diseases likely to touch all of our lives in some way.

(The series) left the impression that the only way to ensure patient safety is to disconnect the academic and corporate worlds. I believe that would be bad for everybody's health.
- H. Stewart Parker, president and CEO, Targeted Genetics Corporation, Seattle

Informed society

I am very disappointed with the weak defense of "diligent in managing potential conflicts" and "currently meet all federal standards and guidelines" as a response to financial gain by both the doctors involved and The Hutch ("Research center responds to Times stories," Times, March 12).

To point out that Genetic Systems does not own the patent shows blatant disregard for an informed society. Profit from patents is minimal in comparison. The licensing rights and exclusive commercial use of drugs, in various protocols, across company and research lines, provides significant profit opportunity in many formats.

It was not denied that both the doctors and The Hutch significantly profited from this relationship. That this relationship existed in Protocol 126 and people may have died due to the continuing of the trial is appalling to say the least.

After checking The Hutch's Web site, their Q&A on technology transfer was informative, yet stopped short of the critical question: Which companies and doctors have financial relationships with The Hutch and within which clinical trials? Where is this information available? Is it included on the informed consent?

I want to thank The Times for pursuing this story. This sincerely proves the value of our newspaper and its writers.
- Linda Wharton, Bothell

Sad revocation

Some background as to my personal involvement in this issue: (1) My brother has leukemia. (2) Because of my brother's leukemia, I contacted Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Foundation in December 2000 and asked for information about charitable contributions. (3) Because of my brother's leukemia and guidance from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Foundation, I donated money to Puget Sound Blood Center, underwent testing for bone-marrow transplant compatibility, and am now on the national bone-marrow transplant registry.

With that background, I was overwhelmed with several emotions as I read your articles. First, I realized instantly that if someone in my family had been victimized as you have described, your article would, literally and truly, be about dead people, talking about the perpetrators.

Second, I realized that the actions taken by The Seattle Times are heroic. Regardless of what condemnations The Seattle Times receives/suffers (and I am sure it will be bountiful), it is irrefutably clear to me that the study and subsequent publication of these facts is important. It is a source of hope for the future for me to see that The Seattle Times had the courage to publish these facts.

Sadly, I will be taking the charitable contribution package sent to me by the associate director of Annual Giving, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and returning it to her with a letter indicating that under extant circumstances I will not further consider donating even the smallest of amounts.
- F. Lee Hinebaugh, Seattle

The 'best of the best'

Let's keep things in perspective. The Hutch is a worldwide Mecca for some of the most brilliant scientists. They are the "best of the best" in their fields of specialty and it would not benefit society to put the brakes on commercial development of their ideas. The combination of ingenious and creative science, capital backing and a local biotech culture here in Seattle has spawned medical breakthroughs with the potential to benefit many people in the future.

I do not believe for one minute these doctors are prioritizing their own financial gain over the well being of their patients. But I do believe this kind of partnership between patient care and biotech development needs to continue in order to bring forth the most innovative medical treatments. Let's not scorn it because some of the scientists behind the ideas are benefiting financially.
- Debi Kirkpatrick, Shoreline

Another name for it

The Seattle Times reports that the U.S. health-care bill has risen to a record $1.2 trillion and is likely to more than double in nine more years! ("Doctor bill for nation is soaring," March 12.)

What are we buying? Not health. In 1997, we spent 42 percent of the world's health-care budget for a population comprising 4.6 percent of the world. The proportion is even more askew today. Yet, we stand about 25th in what I call the Health Olympics, the ranking of countries by life expectancy. We are behind almost all other rich countries and quite a few poor ones as well.

This suggests the appellation for our non-system of health care could be damaged care or profit care, as exposed by the excellent front-page reporting on conflict of interest at The Hutch.
- Stephen Bezruchka M.D., School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle