Who Was Ben Ivy?

Benjamin (Ben) Franklin Ivy III graduated with a Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering degree from Cornell University and received his MBA from the Stanford University Graduate School of Business. He was President of Ivy Financial Enterprises, Inc., a Registered Investment Advisory firm in Palo Alto, California. Ben was a Certified Financial Planner and a Registered Principal of Associated Securities Corp. who specialized in investment real estate. He was a pioneer in the concept of comprehensive financial and estate planning through a very successful series of lectures and workshops.

Ben possessed great intellect and had the ability to communicate his thoughts and ideas to his clients. He was listed annually in “Who’s Who in America” for over 20 years. In November of 2005, Ben lost his battle with brain cancer. He had survived only four months after diagnosis. Ben set a true example of living life to the fullest. He is missed and continues to set an example for those who were fortunate enough to have known him. The Ivy Foundation was created by Ben and his wife, Catherine, in order to support medical research.

Learn more about the Ben and Catherine Ivy Foundation here.

Advertisements

Learn About Brain Cancer

Brain Cancer

A disease of the brain in which cancer cells (malignant) arise in the brain tissue. Cancer cells grow to form a mass of cancer tissue (tumor) that interferes with brain functions such as muscle control, sensation, memory, and other normal body functions.

Brain Tumor

An abnormal growth of tissue in the brain.  Unlike other tumors, brain tumors spread by local extension and rarely metastasize (spread) outside the brain.

Clinical Trials

Research studies done to determine whether new drugs, treatments, or vaccines are safe and effective.  They are conducted in three phases:

  • Phase I
    In this phase, small groups of people are treated with a certain dose of a new agent that has been extensively studied in the laboratory. During the trial, the dose is increased group by group to find the highest dose that does not cause harmful side effects. Usually there is no control treatment for comparison. This process determines a safe, appropriate dose for use in Phase II.
  • Phase II
    This phase provides continued safety testing of a new agent, along with an evaluation of how well it works against a specific type of cancer. The new agent is given to groups of people and is usually compared with a standard treatment.
  • Phase III
    This phase answers research questions across the disease continuum and includes large numbers of participants so that the differences in effectiveness of the new agent can be evaluated. If the results of this phase merit further use of the new agent, the pharmaceutical company will usually submit a New Drug Application to the FDA.

Diagnostics

The determination of the nature of a disease or ailment.  A clinical diagnosis is based on the medical history and physical examination of the patient.

Glial Cells

Cells that provide structure to the central nervous system and insulate and protect neurons (cells that transmit electrical impulses that allow seeing/hearing/smelling/tasting).

Glioma

The term used to refer to the most prevalent primary brain tumors.  Gliomas arise from glial tissue, which supports and nourishes cells that send messages from the brain to other parts of the body.

Glioblastoma

Also known as glioblastoma multiforme, this is the most common and aggressive malignant primary brain tumor in humans, involving glial cells and accounting for 52 percent of all functional tissue brain tumor cases and 20 percent of all intracranial tumors.

GBM

GBM is an abbreviation for glioblastoma multiforme.

Translational Genomics

Innovative advances arising from the Human Genome Project, applying them to the development of diagnostics, prognostics and therapies for cancer, neurological disorders, diabetes and other complex diseases

Ivy Foundation Helps Transform Healthcare

Ivy Foundation Biomedical Innovation Fund Doubles Support for U.Va. Projects Benefiting Human Health

New commitments from the Ivy Foundation and the University of Virginia School of Medicine will double the annual Ivy Biomedical Innovation Fund’s research awards for U.Va. faculty, while advancing discoveries to better diagnose and treat disease.

The Ivy Foundation Biomedical Innovation fund supports projects that involve School of Medicine faculty members and other investigators from multiple departments, schools and specialties across the University.

Since the creation of the Ivy Biomedical Innovation Fund in 2008, the Ivy Foundation has awarded $860,000 to University research collaborations that have the potential to yield leading-edge diagnostics, technology and treatments for a wide range of human health problems.

Each year, the fund awards approximately $200,000, with individual awards averaging $50,000. Beginning in 2013, the Ivy Foundation will increase its annual contribution, which will be matched by the School of Medicine to provide awards totaling $500,000 annually.

“The scope of projects funded over the past five years has been impressive,” said Dr. Robert W. Battle, who chairs the Ivy Foundation and directs U.Va.’s Adult Congenital Heart Clinic. “This research will make a real and immediate difference for patients. It’s gratifying to see the work that has been accomplished through the Ivy Foundation’s support. I look forward to seeing the impact that these added resources will make possible.”

In 2012, a record number of U.Va. researchers and clinicians applied for funding, with 28 proposals coming from U.Va.’s College of Arts & Sciences, School of Engineering and Applied Science, School of Medicine, School of Nursingand Medical Center.

Read more here: http://bit.ly/1gQalnU

The Ben and Catherine Ivy Foundation Grants Nearly $1.2 Million for Mayo Clinic Brain Cancer Study

Mayo Clinic teams with Ivy Foundation to study brain tumor vaccines

The Ben & Catherine Ivy Foundation (Ivy Foundation) announced a gift of nearly $1.2 million to study brain tumor vaccines that combine a patient’s immune stimulators with tumor cultures from other patients.

The Ivy Foundation selected the study led by Allan B. Dietz, Ph.D., head of Mayo Clinic’s Human Cellular Therapy Laboratory, and Ian Parney, M.D. Ph.D., a neurosurgeon and immunobiologist, because of Dr. Dietz’s track record in brain cancer research, among other things.

“Mayo Clinic was selected as one of our brain cancer research partners because of the merit of the historical research done by Dr. Dietz and their ability to execute the project,” said Catherine Ivy, founder and president of the Ivy Foundation. “We believe this creative project will contribute important information to brain cancer research.”

The study will combine a patient’s optimized dendritic cells, known to be potent immune stimulators, with pooled and well-characterized cellular debris – known as lysates – from other patients’ brain tumor cultures to generate a tumor vaccine.

“We are combining this new approach with new methods for monitoring and tracking changes in the immune system,” said Dr. Dietz. “Together, we believe that this approach will allow us to identify and treat those patients most likely to benefit from this therapy.”
The Ivy Foundation has a research funding focus on glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most common and deadliest of malignant primary brain tumors in adults, and is the largest privately funded brain cancer research foundation in North America.

“We are extremely grateful for the Ivy Foundation’s support for our brain tumor vaccine clinical trial,” said Dr. Parney. “Their help has been crucial to bringing this promising new experimental treatment to patients diagnosed with glioblastoma. With their assistance, we hope to improve the outlook for patients with this highly aggressive brain cancer.”

http://www.ivyfoundation.org

Viv Raises Money for Brain Tumor Charity with a Cookbook

Brave mum Viv copes with battling a brain tumour by signing up celebrities and their recipes for her fundraising cook book

VIV MCBETH, of Prestwick was 32 when doctor’s discovered she had a brain tumour after she suffered blinding headaches which would wake her up during the night.

Viv McBeth is has raised £8000 for Brain Tumour UK from her cookbook, Viv's Kitchen.
Viv McBeth is has raised £8000 for Brain Tumour UK from her cookbook, Viv’s Kitchen.
WHEN Viv McBeth beat a deadly brain tumour, she wanted to help the doctors who saved her life.

So she signed up celebrities for a cookbook to raise cash for research into the condition through the charity Brain Tumour UK.

Lorraine Kelly, Miranda Hart and Matthew Wright are among those who supplied favourite dishes for the book, called Viv’s Kitchen, which so far has raised £8000.

Viv, now 40, found her world was turned upside down when she was diagnosed with an aggressive brain tumour, aged 32.

Scared she wouldn’t live to see her son Euan, then three, start school, she found comfort in her love of cooking.

Viv, a former financial adviser, now works full time for the Brain Tumour UK Charity.

She compiled the cookbook after meeting telly queen Lorraine at a charity awards ceremony and then wrote to a host of other household names asking for their help.

The mum-of-one, from ­Prestwick, Ayrshire, was delighted when Lorraine replied with a recipe for her mum Anne’s signature homemade chicken soup.

Contributions from comedian Miranda, TV presenter Matthew, former Scotland goalie Alan Rough and Rab C Nesbitt star Barbara Rafferty followed.

Viv is now hoping to attract more famous names for a second edition.

She said: “Home cooking was one of the things that kept me going when I was down. Making healthy meals made me feel good and I wanted to share my love of food with others.

“I couldn’t believe it when Lorraine Kelly sent me a recipe for her mum’s homemade chicken soup, so I decided to email more celebrities. Soon, Miranda Hart had sent me a recipe for a trifle and Matthew Wright another for a lovely chicken dish cooked with spinach.

“The teachers at my son’s school tell me how much they’ve enjoyed making the recipes.”

Viv first felt ill while making a banoffee pie in April 2005.

Days of blinding headaches followed and she and husband Paul, 44, began to worry when the pain became so bad she couldn’t sleep.

But they could never have prepared themselves for the devastating news that followed.

Viv said: “I thought I had a bug but I was waking Paul up at 3am asking him to massage my temples because the pain was so bad.

“Luckily, my GP took me ­seriously and they gave me a CT scan. Ten days later, I was told it was a cancerous brain tumour and I’d need ­radiotherapy.

“I was devastated – it was like being punched in the stomach. I was a young mum and I never thought anything like it would happen to me.

“I just felt so alone. I’d never heard of anyone who had brain cancer at 32 and I was terrified I would never see my son grow up.”

Viv had 33 sessions of ­radiotherapy and was given a life expectancy of five years.

But she has enjoyed good health since her treatment and has founded a support group for brain tumour sufferers in her area.

She added: “I wouldn’t say I’d had the all-clear but I’ve had good health for the last few years and feel blessed to have reached my 40th birthday.

“My tumour was only detected as it had a pocket of fluid around it that was causing the headaches.

“It could have been a different story and it’s because I’m one of the lucky ones I’ve done this.

“I had a good job but my illness made me rethink things and I realised spending time with my family was more important than going on two holidays a year.

“I had to stay positive for Euan but I was determined that cancer wouldn’t ruin my life.

“The cookbook was a lot of work but handing over a big cheque to Brain Tumour UK made it ­worthwhile.

“Research into brain tumours is underfunded, so it’s important to raise awareness of the ­condition. I hope people remember that every time they open the book.”

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/real-life/brave-mum-viv-copes-battling-2155728

A Scientific Breakthrough for Brain Tumors in Children

Stanford: Scientists Illuminate Brain Tumors in Mice

With the use of a “molecular flashlight” scientists hope to target tumors medulloblastomas in children one of the most devastating of the malignant childhood brain tumors.

Jennifer Cochran and Matthew Scott have created a bioengineered peptide that has been shown in mice to provide better imaging of a type of brain tumor known as medulloblastoma. Credit John Todd.
Jennifer Cochran and Matthew Scott have created a bioengineered peptide that has been shown in mice to provide better imaging of a type of brain tumor known as medulloblastoma. Credit John Todd.

In a breakthrough that could have wide-ranging applications in molecular medicine, Stanford University researchers have created a bioengineered peptide that enables imaging of medulloblastomas, among the most devastating of malignant childhood brain tumors, in lab mice.

The team used their invention as a “molecular flashlight” to distinguish tumors from surrounding healthy tissue. After injecting their bioengineered knottin into the bloodstreams of mice with medulloblastomas, the researchers found that the peptide stuck tightly to the tumors and could be detected using a high-sensitivity digital camera.

The findings are described in a study published online Aug. 12 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“Researchers have been interested in this class of peptides for some time,” said Jennifer Cochran, PhD, an associate professor of bioengineering and a senior author of the study. “They’re extremely stable. For example, you can boil some of these peptides or expose them to harsh chemicals, and they’ll remain intact.” That makes them potentially valuable in molecular medicine. Knottins could be used to deliver drugs to specific sites in the body or, as Cochran and her colleagues have demonstrated, as a means of illuminating tumors.
For treatment purposes, it’s critical to obtain accurate images of medulloblastomas. In conjunction with chemotherapy and radiation therapy, the tumors are often treated by surgical resection, and it can be difficult to remove them while leaving healthy tissue intact because their margins are often indistinct.

“With brain tumors, you really need to get the entire tumor and leave as much unaffected tissue as possible,” Cochran said. “These tumors can come back very aggressively if not completely removed, and their location makes cognitive impairment a possibility if healthy tissue is taken.”

The researchers’ molecular flashlight works by recognizing a biomarker on human tumors. The bioengineered knottin is conjugated to a near-infrared imaging dye. When injected into the bloodstreams of a strain of mice that develop tumors similar to human medullublastomas, the peptide attaches to the brain tumors’ integrin receptors — sticky molecules that aid in adhesion to other cells.

But while the knottins stuck like glue to tumors, they were rapidly expelled from healthy tissue. “So the mouse brain tumors are readily apparent,” Cochran said. “They differentiate beautifully from the surrounding brain tissue.”

The new peptide represents a major advance in tumor-imaging technology, said Melanie Hayden Gephart, MD, neurosurgery chief resident at the Stanford Brain Tumor Center and a lead author of the paper.

“The most common technique to identify brain tumors relies on preoperative, intravenous injection of a contrast agent, enabling most tumors to be visualized on a magnetic resonance imaging scan,” Gephart said. These MRI scans are used like in a computer program much like an intraoperative GPS system to locate and resect the tumors.

“But that has limitations,” she added. “When you’re using the contrast in an MRI scan to define the tumor margins, you’re basically working off a preoperative snapshot. The brain can sometimes shift during an operation, so there’s always the possibility you may not be as precise or accurate as you want to be. The great potential advantage of this new approach would be to illuminate the tumor in real time — you could see it directly under your microscope instead of relying on an image that was taken before surgery.”

Though the team’s research focused on medulloblastomas, Gephart said it’s likely the new knottins could prove useful in addressing other cancers.

“We know that integrins exist on many types of tumors,” she said. “The blood vessels that tumors develop to sustain themselves also contain integrins. So this has the potential for providing very detailed, real-time imaging for a wide variety of tumors.”

And imaging may not be the only application for the team’s engineered peptide.

“We’re very interested in related opportunities,” Cochran said. “We envision options we didn’t have before for getting molecules into the brain.” In other words, by substituting drugs for dye, the knottins might allow the delivery of therapeutic compounds directly to cranial tumors — something that has proved extremely difficult to date because of the blood/brain barrier, the mechanism that makes it difficult for pathogens, as well as medicines, to traverse from the bloodstream to the brain.

“We’re looking into it now,” Cochran said.

A little serendipity was involved in the peptide’s development, said Sarah Moore, a recently graduated bioengineering PhD student and another lead author of the study. Indeed, the propinquity of Cochran’s laboratory to co-author Matthew Scott’s lab at Stanford’s James H. Clark Center catalyzed the project. “Our labs are next to each other,” Moore said. “We had the peptide, and Matt had ideal models of pediatric brain tumors  —mice that develop tumors in a similar manner to human medulloblastomas. Our partnership grew out of that.”

Scott, PhD, professor of bioengineering and of developmental biology, credits the design of the Clark Center as a contributor to the project. The building is home to Stanford’s Bioengineering Department, a collaboration between the School of Engineering and the School of Medicine, and Stanford Bio-X, an initiative that encourages communication among researchers in diverse scientific disciplines.

“So in a very real sense, our project wasn’t an accident,” Scott said. “In fact, it’s exactly the kind of work the Clark Center was meant to foster. The lab spaces are wide and open, with very few walls and lots of glass. We have a restaurant that only has large tables — no tables for two, so people have to sit together. Everything is designed to increase the odds that people will meet and talk. It’s a form of social engineering that really works.”

Scott said he is gratified by the collaboration that led to the team’s breakthrough, and observed that the peptide has proved a direct boon to his own work. About 15 percent of Scott’s mice develop the tumors requisite for medulloblastoma research. The problem, he said, is that the cancers are cryptic in their early stages.

“By the time you know the mice have them, many of the things you want to study — the genesis and development of the tumors — are past,” Scott said. “We needed ways to detect these tumors early, and we needed methods for following the steps of tumor genesis.”

Ultimately, Scott concluded, the development of the new peptide can be attributed to Stanford’s long-established traditions of openness and relentless inquiry.

“You find not just a willingness, but an eagerness to exchange ideas and information here,” Scott said. “It transcends any competitive instinct, any impulse toward proprietary thinking. It is what makes Stanford — well, Stanford.”

The Stanford Center for Children’s Brain Tumors at Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital is supporting ongoing work by the group to translate the new technology into patient care. Additional funding came from the Wallace H. Coulter Foundation, the V Foundation for Cancer Research, the James S. McDonnell Foundation, the Stanford Cancer Institute, the National Science Foundation, a Stanford University graduate fellowship, a Siebel Scholars fellowship, a Gerald J. Lieberman fellowship, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine and the Stanford Child Health Research Institute.

Other Stanford co-authors were postdoctoral scholar Jamie Bergen, PhD; medical student Yourong Sophie Su; and life science research assistant Helen Rayburn.

Glen Martin is a freelance writer in Santa Rosa, Calif., for the School of Engineering’s communications office.

Courtesy of the Stanford News Service

For more information: http://paloalto.patch.com/groups/around-town/p/stanford-scientists-illuminate-brain-tumors-in-mice

See How Some People Are Honoring Zach’s Memory…

SprintingLife.com

Ryan Woods was diagnosed with Glioblastoma and told he had 1-4 months to live. He decided to let his story be heard. SoulPancake helped his voice be heard by the world. Share in his story… his love… and his inspiration. Take his story and allow it to inspire you to make a difference on this earth!

Ryan Woods passed away on Nov. 7, 2012. Our thoughts and prayers are with his wife and children. Thank you for sharing your story with us, Ryan. We will miss you.

More from SoulPancake:
Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/SoulPancake
Tweet us at: http://twitter.com/SoulPancake

GP

View original post

Ivy Foundation in Oncology Times

The Ben & Catherine Ivy Foundation has awarded the following individuals grants and funding for brain cancer research in 2012:

  • Greg D. Foltz, MD, Director of the Ben & Catherine Ivy Center for Advanced Brain Tumor Treatment at the Swedish Medical Center, $2.5 million over three years;
  • John Carpten, PhD, and David Craig, PhD, both of the Translational Genomics Research Institute for a collaborative effort with researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, UCLA, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and University of Utah, $5 million over five years; and
  • Brandy Wells, Manager of Science Education and Outreach at the Translational Genomics Research Institute, has received $45,000 annually for the Ivy Neurological Sciences Internship Program.

For more information: http://journals.lww.com/oncology-times/Fulltext/2013/06250/SHOP_TALK__Appointments,_Promotions,_Honors,.18.aspx

A Promising New Cancer Drug

Promising New Cancer Drugs Empower the Body’s Own Defense System

“If you look five years out, most of this meeting will be about immunotherapy,” said Dr. Mario Sznol.
SCOTT MORGAN / ASCO
By ANDREW POLLACK
June 3, 2013

CHICAGO — The early success of a new class of cancer drugs, revealed in test results released here over the last several days, has raised hope among the world’s top cancer specialists that they may be on the verge of an important milestone in the fight against the disease.

The excitement has spread to Wall Street. Shares of Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb, which are developing such drugs, rose more than 3 percent on Monday after data from their studies was presented over the weekend at the meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The drugs, still generally in early testing, work in an entirely new way, by unleashing the immune system to attack cancer cells much as it attacks bacteria. That could be an alternative to often-debilitating chemotherapy.

Finding ways to use the body’s own defenses has been a goal since the late 1800s, when a New York surgeon named William B. Coley noticed that cancer disappeared in a patient who had a severe bacterial infection.

He then began injecting bacteria into cancer patients to rev up their immune systems. His claims of success were disputed and most attempts since then to harness the immune system have not worked.

The new drugs work by disabling a brake on the immune system called the programmed death 1 receptor, or PD-1. And although the data presented at the meeting was from the earliest stage of testing only, the drugs were the center of attention here, with some doctors predicting that cancer treatment was about to shift.

“If you look five years out, most of this meeting will be about immunotherapy,” said Dr. Mario Sznol, a professor of medical oncology at Yale.

Analysts, who predict billions of dollars in sales, are trying to determine which of the three front-runners — Merck, Bristol-Myers and Roche — have the best drug and how soon the drugs could reach the market. Some think it could be as early as a year and a half from now.

“I think all of you recognize this is a very special moment in oncology,” Dr. Roger M. Perlmutter, head of research and development at Merck, told analysts Sunday at a standing-room-only meeting.

Harnessing the immune system is appealing for several reasons. It might be applicable to many different types of cancer. It might produce longer lasting remissions than can be achieved by chemotherapy or the newer targeted drugs. And it seems somehow more natural and holistic.

“It seems the right thing to do to stimulate our body’s defense rather than take some kind of poison,” said Therese Bocklage, a cancer patient and pathologist from Albuquerque.

Dr. Bocklage thought she had bruised her leg moving a Christmas tree in late 2011. It turned out to be the return of the melanoma she thought had been successfully eradicated by surgery 20 years earlier.

She has been taking Merck’s experimental PD-1 inhibitor, lambrolizumab, as part of a clinical trial since January 2012, and her tumors have disappeared. “If I had had this turn up not last year but six years ago, most likely I’d be dead,” she said.

But there are reasons to be cautious. This is cancer, after all. Many other hoped-for miracles have failed to materialize. This is a conference that has hailed drugs that extend lives by only a few weeks as breakthroughs.

“We’re so used to failure, we get excited very easily,” said Dr. Kim Margolin, an expert on melanoma and immune therapies at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance.

Most of what is known about the PD-1 drugs is that they shrink tumors significantly in 15 to 50 percent of patients. It is still not clearly established, though there are some hints, that the drugs will let people live longer.

And results seen in trials, under idealized conditions, do not translate perfectly to the real world. One poster presented here looked at use in Britain of Yervoy, a melanoma drug approved in 2011 that disables a different immune system brake. Median survival has been only about half of what was seen in clinical trials.

Moreover, just because the immune system is involved does not make something safe. Ask anyone with lupus, multiple sclerosis or other diseases caused by an aberrant immune system.

Yervoy, made by Bristol-Myers, has some serious side effects caused by overstimulation of the immune system. The newer PD-1 drugs seem remarkably well tolerated so far, though lung inflammation is seen in some patients.

For the last decade or so, the emphasis in oncology has been so-called targeted therapy, in which drugs counteract particular genetic mutations that drive tumor growth. These were supposed to displace conventional chemotherapy, which tends to poison fast-growing cells, both cancerous and healthy ones, causing serious side effects.

Targeted therapy has had some great successes, particularly the leukemia drug Gleevec. But cancer cells, which tend to mutate rapidly, can develop resistance to the targeted therapies. And it is becoming more difficult to develop drugs for each narrow population of patients with a particular tumor mutation.

The PD-1 drugs are in a sense a return to a one-size-fits-all approach. And it might be harder for the tumor to become resistant to the immune system, which can adapt, than to a single drug.

In fact, what most excited researchers here this weekend was “the tail.” When researchers plot on a graph how many patients remain alive over time, the curves tend to drop to near zero for metastatic cancer. A successful drug slows the rate of decline, but eventually almost all patients die from the cancer.

But with Yervoy and, experts hope, with the PD-1 drugs, there appears to be fraction of patients who do not die of the disease, at least for a long time. The curve levels out in a plateau.

Dr. Sznol said that of five patients treated at Yale with the Bristol-Myers PD-1 blocker, nivolumab, two had no evidence of recurrence even two years after stopping the drug.

Over all, 133 melanoma patients at various clinics took nivolumab in the Phase 1 trial. Median survival was 16.8 months, with 62 percent of patients alive at one year and 43 percent alive after two years. There was no comparison group in the study, but with the existing melanoma drugs, about 24 to 33 percent of patients are alive after two years, Dr. Sznol said.

So if the immune system is so effective, why doesn’t it cure cancer on its own? One reason is that cancerous cells are the body’s own cells, though mutated, and might not be recognized by the immune system as foreign. Another is that the tumors act to suppress the immune system.

Much of the previous attempts at cancer immunotherapy have focused on the first problem — trying to train the immune system to recognize the tumor and attack it.

The PD-1 drugs tackle the second problem of immune system suppression. How many cancers this will work for is still unclear. Much of the early work has been in melanoma, which is known to be more susceptible than many other tumors to immune system attack. There are cases, though rare, in which the immune system vanquishes melanoma on its own.

What is encouraging doctors is that the drugs can shrink some lung cancer tumors, which have not been considered particularly susceptible to immune attack. There are sporadic reports of cases with other cancers as well, like colorectal cancer.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/health/promising-new-cancer-drugs-empower-the-bodys-own-defense-system.html