Posted on 05/18/2024 5:40:45 PM PDT by george76
Cutting-edge cancer treatments are essentially useless for patients barely clinging to life, a new study shows.
Chemotherapies, immunotherapies, targeted therapies and hormone therapies do not improve survival rates in patients with very advanced tumors near the end of life, according to findings published Thursday in the journal JAMA Oncology.
"Since we don't see an improved survival benefit, oncologists should revisit their goals of care conversations with patients, and this information in the study should be explained to patients," said lead researcher Maureen Canavan, an associate research scientist with Yale Cancer Center.
For the study, researchers analyzed records on more than 78,000 adult cancer patients treated at 280 U.S. cancer clinics between 2015 and 2019.
The team specifically looked at patients in the final stages of six common cancers -- breast, colon, lung, pancreas, kidney and bladder.
"We wanted to find out if oncologic treatment of very advanced tumors is associated with improved survival or if there are times when it's futile to continue care and instead oncologists should shift focus to palliative and supportive care," Canavan said in a Yale news release.
The results showed no statistically significant survival benefit for patients treated with systemic therapies, compared to those who didn't receive such treatments, researchers said.
Further, this was found across all the cancer types studied.
This information builds on a 2022 study, also published in the journal JAMA Oncology, which found there has been a gradual decline in chemotherapy use at the end of a patient's life.
But at the same time, there's been a corresponding uptick in the use of newer immunotherapy treatments, that earlier study reported.
That means that the use of systemic therapies overall has held steady, with about 17% of near-death patients receiving what now appears to be useless treatment, researchers said.
Doctors could best help patients by better judging when additional therapy will be futile and communicate that through a discussion of goals of care near the end of life, researchers concluded.
"We hope this information can help inform oncologists when they are deciding whether or not to continue treatment or transition patients who have metastatic disease to supportive care," Canavan said.
Ministers and provincial leaders frequently come to the US for treatments they can’t get in Canada.
I wonder if the Quebec Provence is different. More well-funded perhaps. Timely effective care doesn’t seem to be an issue there.
I’m 12 years out. When I saw my oncologist last to have my port removed, about 6 years ago at the insistance of my primary, he was surprised I was alive. Sometimes treatment works!
All my best to you in your fight. I hope you have rewards that the grands can bring.
“Sometimes treatment works!”
Absolutely, good to hear! And we are staying positive. We are just tired of being the ones who have to stay on top of them to treat in a timely manner as it should be. They keep rescheduling treatments and such pushing it out and delaying treatments. These delays are self defeating and not helping one bit. It is like they are purposely dragging it out so that it doesn’t actually work.
I am now convinced the standard of operation is to create future repeat business of one sort or another for the industry as a whole. They send each other business using poor decisions and delays. And the incompetence is off the charts, we have caught them five or six times now to prevent serious mistakes. Thankfully our kids are in the medical industry and are on top of it. Did you know Medical error is the third leading cause of death?
https://www.propublica.org/article/study-urges-cdc-to-revise-count-of-deaths-from-medical-error
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225187/
There was a woman sent from Calgary (which boasts one of Canada’s premier medical centers) to lil’ podunk Great Falls, Montana, to give birth to quadruplets. It seems one of Canada’s top medical facilities couldn’t handle the anticipated complications.
Probably still free though
It might not have cost Karen Jepp anything but it certainly wasn’t “free.” Socialist countries with “single-payer” systems tend to have colossal tax rates.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-woman-delivers-identical-quadruplets-in-u-s-1.639588
Yes i remember that.
But as I say cancer care in Quebec is second to none.
New brunswick was functioning with one psychiatrist in the entire province.
Perhaps Quebec gets more than their fair share?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.