tongue cancer

2»

Comments

  • swopoe
    swopoe Member Posts: 492
    #22
     My husband had tongue cancer

     My husband had tongue cancer and was told that the chemo made the rads more effective. His cancer also had not spread to the nodes. If it increased his chances of survival, he went for it. My husband is young, 40 when diagnosed, and we have 3 kids to think about. Honestly it didn’t matter who benefitted monetarily. It was my husband’s life that mattered. He is now 2 years cancer free and doing great.

  • Dean54
    Dean54 Member Posts: 160 Member
    #23
    They put me thru the chemo (3

    They put me thru the chemo (3 sessions) and didn't say it was only 3% more effective than radiation alone or I might have refused it myself. The radiation doctor highly recommened the cisplatin saying it would make the treatment way more effective so I believed him.

    Yes, they are in it for the money as I couldn't believe all the different people I had to see thru my journey with this cancer and some of it was totally unnecessary so it's definitely your call whether you go thru the chemo or not. If it's really only 3%, I wouldn't.

  • patricke
    patricke Member Posts: 570 Member
    #24

    Hi James,

    I didn't have chemo, because it was not part of my recommended treatment regimen.  My routine was slice, dice, and rad ho.  If I was in your shoes, and confident that the source(s) of information, regarding the benefit of chemo with radiation being 3%, is from reliable, unbiased, replicated, solid, evidence based scientific research studies (preferably multiple), I would pass.  

    Patrick 

  • CivilMatt
    CivilMatt Member Posts: 4,724 Member
    #25
    jameseroche said:

    Tongue cancer. Radiation therapy, vs. radiation Therapy and Che

    What do you folks think about doing JUST Radiation Therapy and NOT doing the Chemo-Therapy, Cysplatin and Radiation Therapy treatment for my tongue cancer.  Thge cancer is at the base of my tongue, and I was told stage 4 because of it's location, but there are NO palpable lymph nodes.  Any suggestions???  I work in the medical profession, and even though I am about to fight tongue cancer, I am not a believer of chemo-therapy.  I think the addition of chemo-therapy with radiation therapy only increases effectiveness by perhaps 3% in addition to the radiation therapy.  Is this chemo-therapy really worth 3% more favorable outlook? I think the two MAIN winners of chemo-therapy are:  1.  Big Pharmacology 2.  The physician ordering the chemo, who gets a monetary reward for doing so.  Your input is much appreciated.  Thank you.  It's my life, and I have to make this dissicion in 12 hours.  Thank you all.

    welcome

    jameseroche,

    Welcome to what is your life worth.  Is it the money they will make or the benefit you may receive from chemo.  Profit motive can be good for business.

    There are number of drugs included in the chemo group with some much less toxic to take.

    Some do go with rads only.  Remember, the rads do permanent damage too.

    Well, your 12 hours is almost up.  Good luck and knock the cancer right out of  them. (so to speak).

    Matt

  • JAL23
    JAL23 Member Posts: 88
    #26
    Where did this 3% number come

    Where did this 3% number come from? If it’s from the Internet, anyone can say anything about something. Its an oddly specific number, so I wonder if it came from a credible study or just someone spouting off a “feeling” about what chemo might or might not do. All I know is cisplatin is one of the oldest and most reliable (albeit toughest) chemo agents. We know quite a bit about how it works, what it does, and what it’s good for. While you wouldn’t treat H&N with cisplatin alone, I find it very hard to believe it‘s a 3% survivability.

    If that number did come from a reputable source, a statistically significant (p < .05) 3% increase in overall survivability IS A BIG DEAL. In my opinion, it’d be crazy to take anything like that off the table when you get one single chance to cure this wretched illness. Cisplatin sucks, side effects suck, but in my treatment I didn’t hesitate to add it to my arsenal.

    Regarding the cancer “money making machine” I find that perspective to be cynical at best. Do cancer oncologists, who are paid quite handsomely, really care about kickbacks from Merk etc.? Would a reputable onc really force chemo on someone if it didnt have an appropriate place in treatment? You might be able to find some outliers, but my experience at MSK has been far from it. Doctors agonizing over balancing under and over treating, being very careful and explaining very thoroughly why a certain chemo is being given. Lots of focus on reducing side effects of everything. Call that a money making machine if you want, but this cancer has curative intent in the treatment.

Discussion Boards