| Author |
Message |
|
Peter Uniqu
#1 / 12
|
 Last thoughts pre-chemo (Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for a reason which should become clear.) I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of the
cancer and the surgery was successful. The pathology results showed that the
cancer is stage 3 (Duke C) with 4 out of 32 lymph nodes affected. The tumour
was adjacent to an occluded vein which had recanalized, and this is being
taken as evidence of possible vascular invasion. I'm due to start chemo
(5FU) tomorrow morning, as an "insurance policy" to try and reduce the
chances of any further cancer. Since the surgery I have put back on quite a
lot of weight, which seems to be a good sign.
In view of all the controversy that rages about chemo, I've been searching
the internet (www and newsgroups) to try to research the opinions for and
against, and sure enough, it's a minefield. There are a lot of people
prepared to warn me against any particular cancer treatment, conventional or
alternative.
I've seen claims that chemo is just a big lie - an "industry" which only
exists because of the financial interest of those who perpetuate it. So, are
the scientifically-reported benefits (10% mortality benefit for 5FU in stage
3 colon cancer) a lie too? Surely not.
I've seen dire warnings about the bad effects of chemotherapy (causes
immune system damage, leukemia, heart problems, bone problems, mucositis;
shrinks tumours short-term but makes them more aggressive long-term). It
seems some people believe no cancer patients should ever take chemo.
I've seen e{*filter*}ment about alternative and complementary treatments such as
oxygen therapy, but then I've seen warnings about some of these too (doesn't
work; causes heart problems; shrinks tumours short-term but makes
them more aggressive long-term...).
In principle I'm very open-minded about complementary and alternative
medicine - some of today's "cranky" ideas (including some of those flatly
deprecated by some of the scientific community) will become tomorrow's
scientifically-accepted facts. But certainly not all of them! And how do you
tell which? Personal experimentation, I suppose, in areas where the risk is
acceptable. I don't feel I can experiment with life and death.
If I delay the chemo while trying something else, I increase the risk
that the cancer will spread to my liver and then we will be talking about
palliative care instead of hoping to cure the cancer.
I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
|
| Fri, 07 May 2004 06:26:58 GMT |
|
 |
|
Dr Cha
#2 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo Quote:
> (Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for a > reason which should become clear.) > I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
> rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of the
> cancer and the surgery was successful. The pathology results showed that the
> cancer is stage 3 (Duke C) with 4 out of 32 lymph nodes affected. The tumour
> was adjacent to an occluded vein which had recanalized, and this is being
> taken as evidence of possible vascular invasion. I'm due to start chemo
> (5FU) tomorrow morning, as an "insurance policy" to try and reduce the
> chances of any further cancer. Since the surgery I have put back on quite a
> lot of weight, which seems to be a good sign.
> In view of all the controversy that rages about chemo, I've been searching
> the internet (www and newsgroups) to try to research the opinions for and
> against, and sure enough, it's a minefield. There are a lot of people
> prepared to warn me against any particular cancer treatment, conventional or
> alternative.
> I've seen claims that chemo is just a big lie - an "industry" which only
> exists because of the financial interest of those who perpetuate it. So, are
> the scientifically-reported benefits (10% mortality benefit for 5FU in stage
> 3 colon cancer) a lie too? Surely not.
> I've seen dire warnings about the bad effects of chemotherapy (causes
> immune system damage, leukemia, heart problems, bone problems, mucositis;
> shrinks tumours short-term but makes them more aggressive long-term). It
> seems some people believe no cancer patients should ever take chemo.
> I've seen e{*filter*}ment about alternative and complementary treatments such as
> oxygen therapy, but then I've seen warnings about some of these too (doesn't
> work; causes heart problems; shrinks tumours short-term but makes
> them more aggressive long-term...).
> In principle I'm very open-minded about complementary and alternative
> medicine - some of today's "cranky" ideas (including some of those flatly
> deprecated by some of the scientific community) will become tomorrow's
> scientifically-accepted facts. But certainly not all of them! And how do you
> tell which? Personal experimentation, I suppose, in areas where the risk is
> acceptable. I don't feel I can experiment with life and death.
> If I delay the chemo while trying something else, I increase the risk
> that the cancer will spread to my liver and then we will be talking about
> palliative care instead of hoping to cure the cancer.
> I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
> opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
I think I agree. I am not an M.D. but if I were in your position I would try those
'alternatives' that at least have some decent scientific rationale, if
not yet present enough proof to be standard of care.
For long-term use you may want to ask people about anti-inflammatories
and anti-angiogenics like Celebrex. Thalidomide too but that has some
side effects---though it apparently significantly reduces the side
effects of irinotecan (another chemo drug for colon cancer) when taken
in combination.
Those would be in addition to standard treatments.
|
| Fri, 07 May 2004 06:43:40 GMT |
|
|
|
Step
#3 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo
Quote: > (Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for a > reason which should become clear.) > I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
> rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of
the
> cancer and the surgery was successful. The pathology results showed that
the
> cancer is stage 3 (Duke C) with 4 out of 32 lymph nodes affected. The
tumour
> was adjacent to an occluded vein which had recanalized, and this is being
> taken as evidence of possible vascular invasion. I'm due to start chemo
> (5FU) tomorrow morning, as an "insurance policy" to try and reduce the
> chances of any further cancer. Since the surgery I have put back on quite
a
> lot of weight, which seems to be a good sign.
> In view of all the controversy that rages about chemo, I've been searching
> the internet (www and newsgroups) to try to research the opinions for and
> against, and sure enough, it's a minefield. There are a lot of people
> prepared to warn me against any particular cancer treatment, conventional
or
> alternative.
> I've seen claims that chemo is just a big lie - an "industry" which only
> exists because of the financial interest of those who perpetuate it. So,
are
> the scientifically-reported benefits (10% mortality benefit for 5FU in
stage
> 3 colon cancer) a lie too? Surely not.
It's not a big lie. Adjuvant treatment for someone with your stage of disease improves 5 year survival by about a quarter to a third. Without adjuvant therapy, , 5 year survival would be 40-50%, with adjuvant treatment it's about 55-65%. Don't forget that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer is not just chemotherapy though - most patients who recur, do so locally in the pelvis, and the treatment which has the biggest effect on this likelihood isn't chemo, but radiotherapy. Quote: > I've seen dire warnings about the bad effects of chemotherapy (causes
> immune system damage, leukemia, heart problems, bone problems, mucositis;
> shrinks tumours short-term but makes them more aggressive long-term). It
> seems some people believe no cancer patients should ever take chemo.
All treatments have side-effects and dangers, but are only worth using if the potental benefits outweigh the risks. Those who say that no cancer patient should take chemo are just stupid. Ask the many people with germ cell tumours or lymphomas who have been cured by chemo. Quote: > I've seen e{*filter*}ment about alternative and complementary treatments such
as
> oxygen therapy, but then I've seen warnings about some of these too
(doesn't
> work; causes heart problems; shrinks tumours short-term but makes
> them more aggressive long-term...).
Oxygen therapy is a) ineffective b) based on a very childish view of physiology and pathology. Quote: > In principle I'm very open-minded about complementary and alternative
> medicine - some of today's "cranky" ideas (including some of those flatly
> deprecated by some of the scientific community) will become tomorrow's
> scientifically-accepted facts. But certainly not all of them! And how do
you
> tell which? Personal experimentation, I suppose, in areas where the risk
is
> acceptable. I don't feel I can experiment with life and death.
You need to apply the same criteria to "alternatives" as you do to "conventional". There are only 3 reasons to consider any treatment: 1) Can it cure me? 2) If not, can it increase my survival time? 3) If not, can it improve my quality of life. To decide thes, you have to know if there is any data. The peddler of laetrile may claim he can cure you, but is there any objective evidence of that? The radiation oncologist may claim he can cure you, and if he does, you can be sure there IS objective evidence of that, and he can show it to you. And finally, apply your common sense. If it sounds too good to be true, it is. Quote: > If I delay the chemo while trying something else, I increase the risk
> that the cancer will spread to my liver and then we will be talking about
> palliative care instead of hoping to cure the cancer.
Adjuvant therap certainly has a "window of opportunity". We generally like to get adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy started within 4- weeks. If you leave it much later than that, whatever benefits theremay be will decay. Quote: > I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
> opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
And radiotherapy, I hope.
|
| Fri, 07 May 2004 07:26:06 GMT |
|
|
|
Miche
#4 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo On Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:26:58 -0000, "Peter Unique" Quote:
>(Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for a >reason which should become clear.) >I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
>rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of the
>cancer and the surgery was successful. The pathology results showed that the
>cancer is stage 3 (Duke C) with 4 out of 32 lymph nodes affected. The tumour
>was adjacent to an occluded vein which had recanalized, and this is being
>taken as evidence of possible vascular invasion. I'm due to start chemo
>(5FU) tomorrow morning, as an "insurance policy" to try and reduce the
>chances of any further cancer. Since the surgery I have put back on quite a
>lot of weight, which seems to be a good sign.
<snip> Hi, Peter. I finished treatment for stage three rectal cancer at the
end of June. Though not all people respond to chemo and radiation the
same way, I can tell you that my experiences were very positive.
Chemo: lost some hair, and the rest of it got kind of fried and dried
out looking. Had small problems with nausea and diarrhea, but they
were generally well controlled by meds. Fatigue was the biggest
problem.
Radiation: some gut problems towards the end of the five week regimen:
a spastic {*filter*}sphincter was about the worst of it. That and a
bleeding, sore {*filter*}, but you won't have to deal with that <g>.
Throughout my treatment I continued to work, alternating between full
time, half and three quarter time. 5FU and leucovorin are generally
well tolerated.
My onc. didn't make any unrealistic promises regarding treatment
following surgery; she said that there was a a 50% likelihood of the
cancer recurring without the chemo/radiation, and a 35% chance of the
cancer coming back if I had further treatment.
Outside of treatment, there were some things I felt that I could do to
make myself feel healthier (not cured of the cancer, but feeling
stronger and better): eating well, going for walks, meditating,
writing.
Good luck to you :-)
Michele
|
| Fri, 07 May 2004 07:56:09 GMT |
|
|
|
Peter Uniqu
#5 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo
Quote: > Don't forget that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer is
> not just chemotherapy though - most patients who recur, do so locally in
the
> pelvis, and the treatment which has the biggest effect on this likelihood
> isn't chemo, but radiotherapy.
I did previously ask my oncologist about radiotherapy but she advised that that was more appropriate where there is a known tumour (i.e. somewhere to direct the radiotherapy). Hence she has not proposed any radiotherapy. Perhaps I should ask her about it again. If there is no known tumour remaining after the surgery, where would you suggest directing the radiotherapy? The general area of the pelvis, I suppose? Day 1 of chemo over with no noticeable side-effects yet. They gave me some
anti-sickness tablets but I haven't needed to take any. Enjoyed a nice meal
with my wife this evening - home-made curry and rice, with white wine to
drink. Back for chemo session 2 in the morning.
|
| Sat, 08 May 2004 06:01:47 GMT |
|
|
|
The Cat in the Ha
#6 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo
Quote: > I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
> opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
I feel you are definitely thinking clearly! My honey started Xeloda ({*filter*}5FU) Saturday. It is a real quality of life improvement, if you ever need that option. Take care, and let us know how you do! Robert
|
| Sat, 08 May 2004 06:59:07 GMT |
|
|
|
Step
#7 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo
Quote:
> > Don't forget that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer is
> > not just chemotherapy though - most patients who recur, do so locally in
> the
> > pelvis, and the treatment which has the biggest effect on this
likelihood
> > isn't chemo, but radiotherapy.
> I did previously ask my oncologist about radiotherapy but she advised that
> that was more appropriate where there is a known tumour (i.e. somewhere to
> direct the radiotherapy). Hence she has not proposed any radiotherapy.
> Perhaps I should ask her about it again. If there is no known tumour
> remaining after the surgery, where would you suggest directing the
> radiotherapy? The general area of the pelvis, I suppose?
> Day 1 of chemo over with no noticeable side-effects yet. They gave me some
> anti-sickness tablets but I haven't needed to take any. Enjoyed a nice
meal
> with my wife this evening - home-made curry and rice, with white wine to
> drink. Back for chemo session 2 in the morning.
"Standard" post op adjuvant treatment of stage B2 or C rectal cancer (rectal, not colon) certainly does include radiotherapy. In fact radiotherapy is probably the most important part of the treatment.
|
| Sat, 08 May 2004 09:55:19 GMT |
|
|
|
Mike Radcliff
#8 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo Peter, It's great that you have had no immediate side effects from the chemo, many people seem to sale through some chemo regimens with little effort, however I would tend to avoid spicy foods. Eating curries etc. is a bit like tempting the devil. Good luck MIKE
Quote:
> > > Don't forget that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer is
> > > not just chemotherapy though - most patients who recur, do so locally
in
> > the
> > > pelvis, and the treatment which has the biggest effect on this
> likelihood
> > > isn't chemo, but radiotherapy.
> > I did previously ask my oncologist about radiotherapy but she advised
that
> > that was more appropriate where there is a known tumour (i.e. somewhere
to
> > direct the radiotherapy). Hence she has not proposed any radiotherapy.
> > Perhaps I should ask her about it again. If there is no known tumour
> > remaining after the surgery, where would you suggest directing the
> > radiotherapy? The general area of the pelvis, I suppose?
> > Day 1 of chemo over with no noticeable side-effects yet. They gave me
some
> > anti-sickness tablets but I haven't needed to take any. Enjoyed a nice
> meal
> > with my wife this evening - home-made curry and rice, with white wine to
> > drink. Back for chemo session 2 in the morning.
> "Standard" post op adjuvant treatment of stage B2 or C rectal cancer
> (rectal, not colon) certainly does include radiotherapy. In fact
> radiotherapy is probably the most important part of the treatment.
|
| Sun, 09 May 2004 07:11:46 GMT |
|
|
|
Clifford Thom
#9 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo Oops Omit the www. to the first site It should be
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/suthercon
Cliff
|
| Sun, 09 May 2004 08:00:03 GMT |
|
|
|
Clifford Thom
#10 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo Hi Peter You may want to check out this site
http://www.ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/suthercon or
http://www.supportpath.com go to letter C and click on colon cancer
scroll down for information re: Stage 3 I wish you success with any
decision you make. Take care and God bless. Cliff Stage IV and
going on 17 months without any treatment and doing great ... Thank you
God !!! Given a year to live in 1999. Take care and God bless. Cliff
" All things are possible. Pass it on. "
|
| Sun, 09 May 2004 08:58:30 GMT |
|
|
|
geralv
#11 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo Quote:
> (Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for a > reason which should become clear.) > I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
> rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of the
> I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
> opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
In your place I would take the 5FU if that is what your doctor advises. Here's some hope for the not-too-distant future: http://www.msnbc.com/news/658150.asp?0si=-#BODY
|
| Mon, 10 May 2004 23:16:10 GMT |
|
|
|
Howi
#12 / 12
|
Last thoughts pre-chemo I think your analysis makes sense. Chemo has been successful albeit with some side effects. However, the side effects medically are generally not as bad as set forth in your post. Loss of hair which frequently accompanies chemo is disturbing but not medically significant. With any treatments, the evaluations is straightforward. Look for background on published tests involved the drug or treatment on cell lines and animals. Then see if there are published studies showing positive results on humans, and try to assess the consistency of those results (beneficial results from chemo have shown many times). Be careful of the {*filter*} theorists, ie.,
A combination of bubble gum, yesterday's newspaper, and peanut butter can
eliminate almost all tumors. In a Mexican clinic, 80% of those patients for
whom therapy was previously unsuccessful had their tumors eliminated. However,
because this effective therapy poses a direct threat to the financial interests
of large pharmaceutical companies and hospitals, who have a vested interest in
the status quo these results have been suppressed and the founders of this
miracle drug attacked.
Quote: >Subject: Re: Last thoughts pre-chemo
>Date: 11/18/2001 5:43 PM Eastern Standard Time
>> (Apologies for cross-posting, but I believe it's appropriate this time for
>a
>> reason which should become clear.)
>> I am 43 years old and recently had surgery to remove a tumour from my
>> rectum. The "surgeon's-eye view" was that there was no obvious spread of
>the
>> cancer and the surgery was successful. The pathology results showed that
>the
>> cancer is stage 3 (Duke C) with 4 out of 32 lymph nodes affected. The
>tumour
>> was adjacent to an occluded vein which had recanalized, and this is being
>> taken as evidence of possible vascular invasion. I'm due to start chemo
>> (5FU) tomorrow morning, as an "insurance policy" to try and reduce the
>> chances of any further cancer. Since the surgery I have put back on quite a
>> lot of weight, which seems to be a good sign.
>> In view of all the controversy that rages about chemo, I've been searching
>> the internet (www and newsgroups) to try to research the opinions for and
>> against, and sure enough, it's a minefield. There are a lot of people
>> prepared to warn me against any particular cancer treatment, conventional
>or
>> alternative.
>> I've seen claims that chemo is just a big lie - an "industry" which only
>> exists because of the financial interest of those who perpetuate it. So,
>are
>> the scientifically-reported benefits (10% mortality benefit for 5FU in
>stage
>> 3 colon cancer) a lie too? Surely not.
>> I've seen dire warnings about the bad effects of chemotherapy (causes
>> immune system damage, leukemia, heart problems, bone problems, mucositis;
>> shrinks tumours short-term but makes them more aggressive long-term). It
>> seems some people believe no cancer patients should ever take chemo.
>> I've seen e{*filter*}ment about alternative and complementary treatments such as
>> oxygen therapy, but then I've seen warnings about some of these too
>(doesn't
>> work; causes heart problems; shrinks tumours short-term but makes
>> them more aggressive long-term...).
>> In principle I'm very open-minded about complementary and alternative
>> medicine - some of today's "cranky" ideas (including some of those flatly
>> deprecated by some of the scientific community) will become tomorrow's
>> scientifically-accepted facts. But certainly not all of them! And how do
>you
>> tell which? Personal experimentation, I suppose, in areas where the risk is
>> acceptable. I don't feel I can experiment with life and death.
>> If I delay the chemo while trying something else, I increase the risk
>> that the cancer will spread to my liver and then we will be talking about
>> palliative care instead of hoping to cure the cancer.
>> I feel I have no sensible option but to go along with scientific medical
>> opinion - currently that means proceeding with the chemo.
>I think I agree.
>I am not an M.D. but if I were in your position I would try those
>'alternatives' that at least have some decent scientific rationale, if
>not yet present enough proof to be standard of care.
>For long-term use you may want to ask people about anti-inflammatories
>and anti-angiogenics like Celebrex. Thalidomide too but that has some
>side effects---though it apparently significantly reduces the side
>effects of irinotecan (another chemo drug for colon cancer) when taken
>in combination.
>Those would be in addition to standard treatments.
|
| Thu, 20 May 2004 12:30:42 GMT |
|
| |
|
