      |
CURE COMMUNITY
Perfume me
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | OCTOBER 28, 2011
After posting yesterday that I'm participating in the Komen for the Cure 5K this weekend, I had a few people ask me on Facebook and privately about the perfume (Promise Me) and its cause-related marketing campaigns. There are a lot of blogs, articles and opinions about Komen and its impact on breast cancer awareness, funding and research, and most recently its decision to market the perfume. I'm not going to rehash them, but if you'd like some interesting reads about the subject, I've included a few links below.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure statement on "Promise Me" perfume ingredients – Susan G. Komen for the Cure
Komen's pink ribbons raise green, and questions – USA Today
Welcome, Fans, to the Pinking of America – New York Times
Komen Has Crossed the Line – Lani Horn (breast cancer survivor who blogs as "Chemobabe")
Komen has done great things for breast cancer patients and survivors over the decades in working to eliminate the stigma of cancer, raise money for research and educational programs and increase awareness. (We included the Susan G. Komen for the Cure organization in our advocacy feature in Fall - Advocates Make Cancer Their Mission).
Personally, I think a breast cancer-branded perfume is misguided. I wouldn't buy a perfume for breast cancer, nor one for Alzheimer's disease, diabetes or Crohn's disease. Like many other cause-related marketing products, only a small part of the pie goes to the charity from the perfume's $60 price tag. However, the perfume's manufacturer has pledged at least $1 million to the charity.
So, what do you think? Would you buy Promise Me?
- Dating Teleconference Today
- Make a difference
- For the Cure to a broken heart
- An update on the Cancer Genome Atlas for breast cancer
- Video blog: Test could spare some DCIS patients from radiation
COMMENTS (1) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Drug approved to strengthen cancer patients' bones
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | SEPTEMBER 21, 2011
Late last week, on Sept. 16, the FDA approved denosumab to increase bone mass in patients receiving treatment for hormone-positive breast or prostate cancer who are at risk of bone fracture due to treatment.
Denosumab works by binding to RANKL, a protein involved in the formation, function and survival of osteoclasts, cells that break down bone tissue. In patients with hormone-positive cancers, treatments, such as aromatase inhibitors or androgen-deprivation therapy, can further weaken bones. The new approval of denosumab, under the brand name Prolia, is the first therapy to treat bone loss in patients with these types of cancers.
In mid-2010, Prolia received FDA approval to reduce the risk of fractures in women with osteoporosis. Xgeva, another form of denosumab, was approved in late 2010 to reduce fractures in certain advanced cancer patients with bone metastases.
The new indication was approved as Prolia because it is the same dosage used for women with osteoporosis - 60 mg subcutaneous injection that is give once every six months. Xgeva is given as a 120 mg injection every four weeks.
In the two trials reviewed by the FDA for this recent approval, Prolia increased bone mineral density when compared with placebo at one and two years follow-up. In prostate cancer patients, Prolia decreased new vertebral fractures at three years. Reported side effects included joint and back pain.
You can read about the approval and studies the FDA based its decision on here.
You can also view an animation of how certain cancer treatments affect bone tissue here.
RELATED POSTS- More trail mix
- When the cancer comes back
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Emerging treatment option for myeloma presented at hematology meeting
- The big news from the American Society of Hematology
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
FDA examining heart issues seen with Zofran
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | SEPTEMBER 15, 2011
The FDA announced today that it is looking into safety issues with Zofran (ondansetron), specifically that it may carry a risk of abnormal heart rhythms in certain patients. Zofran is a common anti-emetic that can prevent and reduce nausea and vomiting due to cancer therapy.
Patients taking Zofran are advised not to stop taking the drug, but if they have questions, talk to their doctor. If they have irregular heart beats or feel faint or dizzy while taking the drug, to seek help immediately.
The drug has been associated with a risk of developing prolongation of the QT interval of the electrocardiogram, which can lead to an abnormal and potentially fatal heart rhythm, including Torsade de Pointes.
Zofran's drug label already contains information about potential heart problems, but the FDA will be revising the label to include specific patients who are at risk and who should be monitored. Patients at risk include those with underlying heart conditions, those who are predisposed to low levels of potassium and magnesium in the blood and patients who are receiving other medications that may lead to QT prolongation.
The FDA is also requiring GlaxoSmithKline to conduct a study to determine the degree to which Zofran may cause these heart issues. The study should be completed by summer 2012.
Patients are encouraged to report side effects related to the use of Zofran to the FDA's MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program at fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm or call 800-332-1088.
RELATED POSTS- More trail mix
- When the cancer comes back
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Emerging treatment option for myeloma presented at hematology meeting
- The big news from the American Society of Hematology
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Andy Whitfield dies of non-Hodgkin lymphoma
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
Welsh actor Andy Whitfield, who played the title character in the Starz series "Spartacus: Blood and Sand," died of non-Hodgkin lymphoma Sunday, Sept. 11 at his home in Sydney, Australia. Whitfield was diagnosed in March 2010 through a routine checkup and immediately began treatment. Because it was diagnosed early, many, including his doctors, believed the disease would be easily treated. Unfortunately, he developed a recurrence in September 2010, and treatment wasn't able to knock out the cancer.
Chris Albrecht, president and chief executive of Starz, said in a statement: "The man who played a champion on-screen was also a champion in his own life." Mr. Whitfield faced cancer with "courage, strength and grace."
Rest in peace, Spartacus.
RELATED POSTS- For the Cure to a broken heart
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Drug approved specifically for treating myelofibrosis
- Erbitux Approved for Metastatic Head and Neck Cancers
- Perfume me
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Xalkori approved for non-small cell lung cancer
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | SEPTEMBER 1, 2011
Late Friday, Aug. 26, the FDA announced it had granted accelerated approval of crizotinib for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who test positive for a specific gene mutation.
Crizotinib, which was given the brand name Xalkori, has made news since results of a clinical study showed that it delayed tumor progression in patients with NSCLC who had a mutation in the ALK gene. The approval was based on two studies that showed a response rate (shrinkage or stabilization of the tumor) of 50 percent and 61 percent, respectively. Overall survival is still being evaluated, and a phase 3 trial is ongoing for Xalkori to receive full approval from the FDA.
The mutated ALK (anaplastic lymphoma kinase) gene was first identified in lymphoma in 2004, then in lung cancer in 2007. The mutation actually occurs when parts of chromosome 2 breaks off and reattaches at a different location on a chromosome - fusing the ALK gene to the EML4 gene. In 2009, a review in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology showed the mutation to be a cause of about 4 percent of NSCLC cases. In less than a decade, researchers have identified a mutation, developed a drug to target it, tested the drug and succeeded in getting it approved.
Although it only applies to a small population of lung cancers, the total number of patients who could benefit from Xalkori is estimated to be around 5,000 to 11,000 patients a year.
"It's a good day for lung cancer patients, especially those with an EML4-ALK (mutation)," said Paul Bunn, MD, professor of medicine and the James Dudley chair in cancer research at the University of Colorado in Denver at a press briefing held on Aug. 30, who predicted that the recent approval marks a paradigm shift in the care and management of patients with lung cancer.
Also approved is a companion diagnostic test called Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH Probe Kit that will identify patients who have the abnormal gene. While the mutation is more commonly seen in nonsmokers, there are no set clinical factors that identify patients who may have the mutation. "We feel that it is appropriate to test all lung cancer patients," Bunn said.
The test will also prevent patients who would not respond to Xalkori from taking a drug that would not be beneficial – saving them time to try other therapies. Xalkori is a pill taken twice a day. Based on the approval, Xalkori is taken by itself, but there are studies looking at its effectiveness when combined with other drugs, including Tarceva (erlotinib), another targeted agent used in lung cancer. Side effects of Xalkori taken alone include diarrhea, vomiting, edema, constipation and vision disorders. It has also been associated with life-threatening pneumonitis (1.6 percent).
The cost of Xalkori is estimated to be $9,600 a month, and the test will likely cost $1,500. Pfizer, the drug's maker, has launched First Resource, a program to help patients pay for the medication (877-744-5675; xalkori.com).
RELATED POSTS- More trail mix
- When the cancer comes back
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Emerging treatment option for myeloma presented at hematology meeting
- The big news from the American Society of Hematology
COMMENTS (2) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Cancer patients facing delays in receiving paclitaxel
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | AUGUST 9, 2011
The FDA released information today regarding manufacturing delays and an increase in demand for paclitaxel injection, a generic drug used for many different types of cancers. (You can read the full brief at FDA Drug Shortages.)
This marks only the latest cancer drug shortage. Problems with paclitaxel availability were first announced in May (more information can be found in Drug Shortages Leave Cancer Patients at Risk via Medpage Today).
The New York Times published an excellent opinion piece this past weekend by Ezekiel J. Emanuel (Shortchanging Cancer Patients) that explained how and why so many of these drug shortages are happening -- all of which are generic and inexpensive drugs.
We'll be reporting more on this topic in an upcoming CURE issue, so stay tuned. In the meantime, let us know if and how you've been affected by the recent drug shortages.
RELATED POSTS- More trail mix
- When the cancer comes back
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Emerging treatment option for myeloma presented at hematology meeting
- The big news from the American Society of Hematology
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
An Avastin reading list
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | JULY 5, 2011
The Avastin saga has so many angles and implications, it may be quite some time before we all know what to make of it. Here's a quick reading list to help you get up to speed, as well as viewpoints from various sources. Please feel free to add your own in the comments section.
1. Dr. Len, of the American Cancer Society, described the two-day hearings and their implications with "The FDA's Decision to Remove Approval for Avastin in Metastatic Breast Cancer is Caught Between Data and Emotion" and "FDA Advisors Vote Unanimously That Avastin Approval Should Be Withdrawn, And You Could Hear The Pain." You can also read over his live tweets at twitter.com/drlen.
2. "Do the FDA Avastin hearings mark the end of an era?" by CURE's own editor-in-chief and breast oncologist, Dr. Debu Tripathy. He writes: "The process of testing new cancer agents has forever changed because of this. It is now necessary to define predictive factors at the same time a drug is initially being developed. Not only is FDA approval in jeopardy, but drug companies can no longer afford the cost of huge trials to show a tiny difference in outcomes. The FDA hearings mark a milestone in this turn - the end the old era of cancer drug development."
3. "Memo to Avastin Protestors: The Agency You Want is in Baltimore, Not White Oak" - "Advocates urge FDA to maintain indication for Avastin in metastatic breast cancer. But their reason isn't really an FDA issue at all: they want to make sure use is still reimbursed. That decision goes to a different agency - CMS - no matter what FDA does next."
4. Column from Oncology Times "Avastin: What Went Wrong" - The column ends with a good summation: "We need to work through the tears and rise above them. And do better. We must do better."
5. Blogger who favors keeping approval of Avastin: KatherineMBC has been very vocal about the process, including her latest blog: "An open letter to Larry 'Let's Muzzle the Cancer Patients' Husten" at ihatebreastcancer.wordpress.com.
6. Blogger who favors withdrawal of Avastin: Katie at uneasypink.com blogged about the proceedings, ending with "The Vote." She writes: "...The follow-on studies failed to verify the clinical benefit and the risks are significant. Genentech plans to move forward with further studies. I applaud the FDA for sticking with the available science rather than being swayed by the sticky politics of this decision."
7. Postmarket Drug Safety Information for Patients and Providers from the FDA includes information about the proceedings from the agency, including: "The public hearing on the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research's December 2010 proposal to withdraw approval of the metastatic breast cancer indication for Avastin is now complete. The Center and Genentech are scheduled to provide additional written submissions by July 28, 2011, and the docket will remain open for public comment until that date."
8. The European Commission just approved Avastin for metastatic breast cancer using the same studies the FDA advisory committee pored over for the two days during the hearings. You can read the NPR piece here.
As you can see the story will be ongoing for quite a while. Stay tuned. (For backstory on the Avastin saga, read "Hurdles on the Faster Track.")
If you'd like to add to the reading list, please leave comments below.
RELATED POSTS- Dating Teleconference Today
- Make a difference
- For the Cure to a broken heart
- An update on the Cancer Genome Atlas for breast cancer
- Video blog: Test could spare some DCIS patients from radiation
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Avastin story in breast cancer not over yet
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | JULY 1, 2011
After two days of testimony, an FDA advisory panel has decided -- again -- that Avastin should no longer be approved to treat metastatic breast cancer.
The panel listened to patients who said the drug was extending their lives, doctors who said the same, experts from Genentech who went over the results of the studies once again. But the panel also listened to experts and patient advocates who said the risks of the drugs were too high, especially when follow-up studies show no survival advantage and a marginal delay in tumor progression.
Nearly a year ago, an advisory committee, comprised of many of the same experts who voted yesterday, recommended pulling Avastin's indication in breast cancer, saying follow-up studies did not confirm results showed in the original study that led to accelerated approval.
In December, the FDA agreed with that recommendation. However, at the appeal of the drug maker, Genentech, the FDA held a first-of-its-kind meeting to hear why the drug should still be used in metastatic breast cancer.
The issue is that the drug may help some women, some of whom attended and spoke at the FDA hearing, but there is no real evidence to show that it is truly Avastin that is prolonging their lives. There also doesn't appear to be any evidence that a particular subgroup does better on the drug. However, Genentech will continue testing it in breast cancer to look for a biomarker that may identify patients who would respond to the drug. But those study results won't be available for another few years, and the FDA panel was not too keen on extending the approval status until then.
"Clearly we should not be in this position so many years later after the first announcement that Avastin is effective in breast cancer. This has been going on for almost seven years; that's too long," says Len Lichtenfeld, MD, deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society. "What could we have done differently to avoid this situation?"
After talking with a few people (including Dr. Len and patient advocates), reading several news articles and patient blogs, and following two days of Twitter feeds and side conversations, here are some important things I felt should be mentioned:
• A final decision hasn't been made yet. Whether or not the FDA pulls Avastin's indication lies with FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. With a unanimous vote, though, it appears highly likely she will side with the advisory panel. The FDA will take public comments, as well as information from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and Genentech until July 28.
• Until a decision is made, Avastin is still approved for metastatic breast cancer. Insurance and Medicare should cover it, and likely will. The FDA decision, when it comes, does not affect CMS, Don McLeod, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), told Reuters on Thursday, "The drug will still be on the market, doctors will still be prescribing it, and we will continue to pay for it."
• If it is withdrawn, Avastin will likely still be available to breast cancer patients through off-label use, however, whether it will be covered under Medicare and insurance remains to be seen. Avastin costs about $88,000 per year. (Genentech has capped annual spending on the drug to $57,000 per year for patients with incomes below $100,000.)
• Another independent panel of experts from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network also agreed on the use of Avastin in metastatic breast cancer – but it was in support of using Avastin. This also creates a quagmire. As Dr. Len says, "How can one group of experts look at the evidence and say this is basically of no value to women with breast cancer, when a very qualified group of experts who treat women with breast cancer feel exactly the opposite. I don't think this is over." Insurance companies and Medicare also look to this group when deciding coverage.
• Avastin's use and indication for colon, lung, brain and pancreatic remain unchanged. The FDA's decision will have no impact for patients receiving Avastin for these types of cancers. As you can see the implications and angles to the saga are never-ending, and it won't be ending any time soon. Stay tuned.
For the backstory of the Avastin saga, read "Hurdles on the Faster Track."
RELATED POSTS- Dating Teleconference Today
- Make a difference
- For the Cure to a broken heart
- An update on the Cancer Genome Atlas for breast cancer
- Video blog: Test could spare some DCIS patients from radiation
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
What's it going to take to prevent cancer?
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | JUNE 21, 2011
Dr. Len's latest blog is a punch in the gut.
I love reading his American Cancer Society "Dr. Len's Cancer Blog" because he pulls no punches. He will call out the media for inaccurate reporting, candidly discuss the cost of cancer care and explain complicated topics with a conversational and patient tone you don't find with many physicians.
In "Cancer Facts and Figures 2011: Poverty is a Carcinogen. Does Anyone Care?" he discusses the newly released "Cancer Facts and Figures 2011" and the fact that "poverty remains one of the most potent carcinogens - rivaling tobacco and obesity - as we have ever seen."
Last Friday, CURE posted the news story, "Cancer death rates continue drop: study." But Dr. Len points out those who are poor and with limited education still have a much higher risk of cancer and cancer mortality. And it has little to do with race.
"...that increased risk is much less based on race as compared to education. Education trumps ethnicity," he writes.
Do you know what this means? It means we have the ability to prevent thousands of cancers every year. It's not all biological. It's something we can change.
He mentions from the report: "Among African Americans, eliminating socioeconomic disparities has the potential to avert twice as many deaths as eliminating racial disparities....Much of the disparity between African Americans and whites within the same level of education results from differences in risk factors and access to health care that cannot be captured in terms of educational attainment."
And it's not just education, but health insurance, access to good medical care and support. Dr. Len's post highlights these topics that we should be talking about in the public forum. It's definitely worth reading his entire post, which I encourage.
Dr. Len then touches on a pet peeve of mine. The fact that, as a society, we're more concerned with medical media hype. We're more worried about the avian flu than the real, deadly consequences of the seasonal flu. We become more concerned with cell phones causing cancer than lack of exercise. And the fact that we no longer microwave our meals in plastic containers, but we still overindulge in alcohol and processed meats.
He writes: We have been hearing for the past several weeks about the things that could cause cancer. We have been inundated with media reports telling us what is bad for us and perhaps not so good for us. We have started a national conversation about cell phones, airport scanners and now Styrofoam and formaldehyde.
But sitting right in front of our noses is the fact that if we did what we already know, at least 37% of cancer deaths in people between the ages of 27 and 64 could be avoided right now.
So who, my friends, is talking about that? Where is the national conversation about the fact that poverty is a carcinogen? Are you talking about it? Is the media talking about it? Are the politicians talking about it? Are your friends talking about it?
If the silence is deafening, then perhaps you have your answer.
We're listening. And we're talking about it. What are we going to do about it?
RELATED POSTS- For the Cure to a broken heart
- Two new drugs approved, one pulled from the pipeline
- Drug approved specifically for treating myelofibrosis
- Erbitux Approved for Metastatic Head and Neck Cancers
- Perfume me
COMMENTS (2) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
Laura Ziskin's legacy of Stand Up to Cancer lives on
BY ELIZABETH WHITTINGTON | JUNE 13, 2011
We received the news this morning that Laura Ziskin, a founder of Stand Up 2 Cancer, has passed away. She was diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer in 2004 and a recurrence in 2010 that had spread to her liver. After undergoing initial treatment for her first diagnosis, she said she wanted to give back by helping to fund cancer research that could reach the patient quickly--much more quickly than the current model.
The result: she became executive producer of a one-hour, live fundraising event called Stand Up To Cancer (SU2C), which aired on the three major networks simultaneously in fall 2008 and again in 2010. The donations went on to fund several "Dream Teams" of scientists looking at translational research deemed "high-risk/high-reward."
We wrote about Laura in last year's Summer issue in "Standing Up to Cancer."
When we spoke to her back in 2010, she was enrolled in a phase 1 study to treat her metastatic breast cancer. "I believe that I'll go along and that this will stop working, and then I'll have something else that will cure me," Ziskin had said.
A year later, I saw Laura at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research. AACR and Stand Up 2 Cancer had a joint event announcing the new round of research grants to young investigators. She and AACR CEO Margaret Foti were so excited during the panel discussion about the future of cancer research. Laura was filled with joy, and Margaret Foti was moved to tears when they discussed how much hope and excitement they had for these young researchers.
I truly feel that Laura believed that cancer research - and research into metastatic cancer - could have extended her life further, perhaps even cured her. It's sad we were unable to fulfill her prophecy, but because of her passion and service to others, she may ultimately help others.
I've included the news about her life and death below:
STAND UP TO CANCER CO-FOUNDER LAURA ZISKIN DIES AT AGE 61
Activist and Acclaimed Film Producer Championed Innovative, Groundbreaking Cancer Research
Acclaimed film producer and cancer activist Laura Ziskin died today at her home in Santa Monica at the age of 61. Ziskin, who lived with breast cancer for seven years, is survived by her husband, screenwriter Alvin Sargent, with whom she frequently collaborated; daughter, producer Julia Barry, and son-in-law, writer Eli Dansky.
The family requests that donations be made to Stand Up To Cancer: (via http://su2c.org or by mail: Attn: Stand Up To Cancer, c/o The Entertainment Industry Foundation, 1201 West 5th Street., T-700, Los Angeles, CA, 90017.)
Ziskin had a trail-blazing career as a producer and studio executive for 35 years. After her cancer diagnosis, Ziskin embraced an additional, unsought role as a cancer activist, joining with other women in the entertainment and media businesses (including Sherry Lansing, Katie Couric, Rusty Robertson, Sue Schwartz, Ellen Ziffren, Pam Williams, Noreen Fraser, and the Entertainment Industry Foundation's Lisa Paulsen and Kathleen Lobb) to co-found Stand Up To Cancer (SU2C). The group marshals the entertainment industry's resources to engage the public in supporting a new approach to cancer research geared toward getting new therapies to patients quickly.
Earlier this year, Ziskin was awarded The Producers Guild of America's Visionary Award for her work as a film producer and her humanitarian efforts in the fight against cancer. Speaking of herself and the other SU2C co-founders, Ziskin said, "We realized we had the potential to make cancer the first-tier issue it needs to be and to impact how cancer is treated by using our skills as producers and quite literally 'putting on a show.' Stand Up To Cancer is my most important production and I am so touched and proud that the PGA is honoring us for it."
In late 2007, ABC, CBS and NBC committed to donating an hour of time for the first-ever "roadblock" televised fundraising event to proactively combat a major public health threat. Ziskin was executive producer of the initial, historic Stand Up To Cancer telecast in September of 2008, as well as a follow-up one in September, 2010, that aired on those three broadcast networks, FOX, and 13 cable providers. The shows, which featured hundreds of film and TV stars, recording artists, news anchors and sports personalities, were seen in in 175 countries.
Donors of every type joined the movement, ranging from individuals all over the country to organizations like Major League Baseball, philanthropists such as Sidney Kimmel, corporations from an array of industries and foundations. Largely in connection with these two televised specials, $180 million has been pledged to support groundbreaking "translational" cancer research designed to move developments from the laboratory phase to new treatments that will benefit people battling cancer in record time. One of Stand Up To Cancer's key goals is to foster increased collaboration among cancer researchers at different institutions. Currently, 355 scientists from 55 institutions collaborate, interact and share information through SU2C.
"Laura was the heart and soul of Stand Up To Cancer," said SU2C co-founder Sherry Lansing. "She dreamed big, and attacked every challenge with creativity, passion, perseverance and intelligence." Added SU2C co-founder Katie Couric, "Laura was one of the most courageous people I've ever known. Her fearlessness in the face of this relentless killer inspires everyone on the SU2C team to redouble our efforts to make cancer history."
Nobel Laureate Phillip A. Sharp, Ph.D., Institute Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT, chairs the Stand Up To Cancer Scientific Advisory Committee, which makes the recommendations about which projects to fund. Dr. Sharp said, "Stand Up To Cancer's research is about bringing new therapies to the people who need them now. Laura was the 'impatient patient and friend', constantly hammering that message home to everyone on the science side of SU2C – from the Scientific Advisory Committee and the American Association for Cancer Research, to the Dream Team members and young Innovative Investigators. We take the mantra Laura and the other co-founders reiterate to us very seriously: that we collaborate in every way possible in order to accelerate the pace of research...That principle will forever guide our work."
Ziskin's Film Career A California native, Ziskin grew up in the San Fernando Valley. After graduating from the USC School of Cinema-Television in 1973, Ziskin began writing for game shows and then became the film producer/director Jon Peters' personal assistant. She quickly became a development executive, moving into feature films with Peters' production company, where she worked on the 1976 remake of A Star Is Born, starring Barbra Streisand. In 1978, she was the associate producer of The Eyes of Laura Mars.
In 1984, Ziskin partnered with Sally Field in Fogwood Films and produced Murphy's Romance, which yielded an Academy Award nomination for James Garner as Best Actor. Ziskin's passion for identifying new talent emerged early on. In 1987, she produced No Way Out, starring then newcomer Kevin Costner and Gene Hackman. In 1990, she was executive producer of Pretty Woman, starring Julia Roberts, which remains one of the highest-grossing films in Disney's history.
In 1991, Ziskin produced two films: the comedy hit What About Bob?, starring Bill Murray and Richard Dreyfuss, and the critically acclaimed The Doctor, starring William Hurt and Christine Lahti. In 1992, Ziskin produced Hero, directed by Stephen Frears and featuring Dustin Hoffman, Andy Garcia, and Geena Davis. In 1994, she produced Gus Van Sant's To Die For, starring Nicole Kidman. Ziskin also developed and served as executive producer of Columbia Pictures' As Good As It Gets, which garnered Academy Awards for stars Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt.
In 1994, Ziskin was named President of Fox 2000 Pictures, a newly formed feature film division of 20th Century Fox. Under her stewardship, Fox 2000 released such films as Fight Club, Courage Under Fire, Anna and the King, One Fine Day, Inventing the Abbotts, Volcano, Soul Food, Never Been Kissed, Anywhere But Here and The Thin Red Line, which garnered seven Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture. In 1996, Fox 2000 also pooled resources with Fox Searchlight to distribute Anthony Minghella's acclaimed The English Patient.
Ziskin turned to TV in 2001, executive producing the Norman Jewison-directed HBO Film Dinner With Friends, written by Donald Margulies from his Pulitzer Prize-winning play and starring Dennis Quaid, Andie MacDowell, Greg Kinnear and Toni Collette.
In March, 2002, Ziskin became the first woman to solo executive produce the Academy Awards. She held that position again for the 2007 broadcast, instituting the first-ever "Green" Oscars ceremony. The two shows garnered a total of 17 Emmy nominations.
The first of what will be four Spider-Man films for which Ziskin had a producing role hit theaters in 2002. Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 have grossed more than $1.5 billion, and Spider-Man 3 broke box office records worldwide to become the highest-grossing film in Sony's history. At the time of her death, Ziskin and her partner in Laura Ziskin Productions, Pamela Oas Williams, were at work on the fourth installment of the series.
In addition to her work with Stand Up To Cancer, Ziskin was actively involved in issues that concern the environment, health and families, having served on the board of Americans for a Safe Future, the National Council of Jewish Women and Education First.
RELATED POSTS- Dating Teleconference Today
- Make a difference
- For the Cure to a broken heart
- An update on the Cancer Genome Atlas for breast cancer
- Video blog: Test could spare some DCIS patients from radiation
COMMENTS (0) |
PRINT |
SUBSCRIBE
SEARCH BLOGS
BROWSE BY AUTHOR
BROWSE BY CATEGORY
AUTHOR BIOS
RECENT POSTS
MOST POPULAR
