Early Stage IV colon cancer...

John23

HeartofSoul said:

thank you members for posting on this topic.
Thank you Jams67 and others for your feedback.

On the comment by John23, "as far as statistics I make no friends here saying this, but the statistics have not changed in over 40 years"), well your statement is not accurate.

There is a significant difference in survival rates since 1970 for many reasons, such treatment options, new advancements in chemo and rad and surgey, surveillence, education, awareness and a far greater understanding of cancer.

See
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21686287/Cancer-Facts-and-Figures-Report-2009

What Percentage of People Survive Cancer?
The 5-year relative survival rate for all cancers diagnosed between 1996-2004 is 66%, up from 50% in 1975-1977. The improvement in survival reflects prog- ress in diagnosing certain cancers at an earlier stage and improvements in treatment

The criteria used is:
Age-adjusted Cancer Death Rates, Males, US, 1930-2005
Per 100,000, age adjusted to the 2000 US standard population

For Colon cancer since 1985, the death rate has gone down from 35 to 20 for men per 100,000 and for woman its gone down from 25 to 15 per 100,000.

People suffering from some of the most common forms of cancer are twice as likely to survive for at least 10 years, compared with patients diagnosed in the early 1970s, research shows.

Breast, bowel and prostate cancer survival rates have shot up, as have those for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and leukaemia. The study compared data on 10-year survival rates of patients diagnosed with cancer in 1971-72 with the expected survival rates of those diagnosed in 2007. On average it found that 45.2% of cancer patients are now expected to survive at least 10 years, compared with 23.7% in the 1970s.

One of the most notable improvements was recorded for prostate cancer patients – nearly 70% of whom are now expected to survive for at least 10 years, compared with 20% in 1971-72.

The survival rate for those with leukaemia is still relatively low, with 33.2% of patients likely to live for at least 10 years in 2007. But this still represents a fourfold improvement since the early 1970s, when only 8.1% of patients were expected to survive more than 10 years.

The percentage of women likely to survive breast cancer for at least 10 years has jumped from less than 40% to 77%, while the figure for both sexes for bowel cancer has risen from 23% to 50%.

Twice as many women with ovarian cancer now survive (18% to 35%) while for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, survival has leapt from 22% to 51%.

While 10-year survival is still low for oesophageal cancer and myeloma (both below 20%), it is thought to have trebled over the same period.

Professor Michel Coleman, which calculated the figures, said: "These big increases in long-term survival since the 1970s reflect real progress in cancer diagnosis and treatment, and they confirm the immense value of having a National Cancer Registry that holds simple information about all cancer patients diagnosed during the last 30 to 40 years."

Professor Peter Johnson, put the improvement down to "faster diagnosis, better surgery, more effective radiotherapy and many new drugs".

Accoding to the American Cancer Society, Trends in 5-year Relative Survival Rates* (%) by all Races and Year of Diagnosis, US, 1975-2004 shows a comparison using 1975-1977 era to the 1996 to 2005 era. For almost every type of cancer listed, the 5 yr survival rates have gone up between 3% and 30% percentage points.

The rates for the following cancer have been rising:
liver

The rates have been on flat slope for pancreas, ovary, leukimia. For women, the rates for lung cancer has leveled off after rising since 1970

HOS, et al -



Re:
"..................... but the statistics have not changed in over 40 years.
About 26% of us will survive colorectal cancer, give or take a few
percentage points. The amount of time varies from diagnosis to death,
and living 15 or more years is possible, but the "bottom line" is that the
statistical records show that people that get colorectal cancer rarely
fare well."

That, is reality. Being diagnosed earlier doesn't mean that the overall
life-span is improved, it is only the span between diagnosis and death,
that's changed (There was a Norweigian study not too long ago, proving
just that).

Is that dismal? No, I don't think so. "Feeling good" by burrowing
one's head away from the reality doesn't help change the industry.
There's too much complacency regarding chemotherapy drugs and
treatments. The industry actually have some individuals believing that
drugs like Xeloda is a new invention. Capecitabine (Xeloda) has been
around long before it's patent date in 1998. What's "new" about that?

If there were more cancer victims screaming about the lack of
new drugs that use different concepts for killing cancer cells, perhaps
we would see some change. But continual support for old chemicals
isn't going to cause the industry to produce otherwise. Xeloda's
patent runs out in 2011; would you like to wager what will happen
to it? How about a "new name" and some reformulation of the
original recipe? The industry makes a big profit re-using old
formulas, and the public supports it by being blind to reality.

A 26% survival rate does not mean you will die of your cancer
tomorrow, or next week, year, or even in twenty years. It is the
statistical probability that the cancer will -eventually- get to 74%
of those that have it.

Hearing about those that are still here after 7,8, or more years after
diagnosis means little, regarding the statistics. My mother lived for
another 17 years after a dx of lung cancer and a prognosis of two
years, maximum. The cancer finally got her anyway, 17 yrs later.

She was another statistic. Her longevity did not change that statistic.

The propaganda that people are now living more than five years
after diagnosis, where in the past they didn't... is just a contortion
of facts. They have been diagnosed earlier; the cancer identified earlier,
and consequently have gone longer from dx to end.

If you want change, face the facts and demand change. Accepting
the industry's propaganda is wasting precious time.

Better health to all!

John

PhillieG

Hi Sally
I was DX with stage IV colon cancer well over 6 1/2 years ago. I had more than a few spots on my liver so I had to have more than half removed. It was done at the time of my initial surgery. Currently I have to deal with a few small spots in my lungs and that is being done using RFA (radio frequency ablations) which is a procedure where they insert a needle into the tumor and heat it up and it dissolves the tumor. It's relatively new for lung tumors but it's more common for treating with liver tumors. After reading your post I don't see why a RFA could not be done for the liver since it seems like it's not widespread.

People have been diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer and have turned out OK. Don't believe all of the statistics you may read. Every case is different. Also, the statistics are based on so many factors that they really (in my opinion) be taken with a grain of salt. They are generalizations based on many people with different backgrounds and circumstances so do not take them as facts.