I’m neither disputing nor endorsing the stats here, but if oncologists start adopting a general view of “you’ve got advanced tumors so don’t even bother trying anything” then there will *never* be any progress against advanced tumors. Any sort of progress against any sort of cancers at any stage has been the result of trial and error. If you stop trying, well, then game over. Maybe that’s their goal, though.
“then there will *never* be any progress against advanced tumors.”
This needs to be explained to the patient that the treatment likely would be completely ineffective and they are being used to possibly help others with a future cure. A choice.
Chemotherapy is a living hell. I have to be attached to a machine that is pumping poison in my body for at least 12 days a month. I can’t go out in the sun without breaking out, it totally drains all my energy (takes all my willpower to accomplish anything), it attacks my skin in other ways even with precautions, and you can see the jaundice in my eyes.
Cancer is going to kill me and I am taking chemotherapy to prolong my life to be around grandkids (I get breaks from it). However, when it becomes ineffective, I am going to stop.
I agree with your points entirely. Also, these types of 'outcomes' statistical studies that use large database info (e.g. the Medicare database; combined registries) often do not tell the whole story. There is a ton of biological variability among people, and there may be subgroups of people who respond better than others. God forbid we let beancounters define the future of medicine.
Cancer has become a industry.
They will never cure it.