May 14, 2015
Dealing with a diagnosis of cancer remains a very scary, emotionally charged experience. That experience is not helped by the addition of conflicting advice, especially advice based on opinion and not evidence. And once in a while, that's what happens when a celebrity is the source of the information, as has now occurred with Sandra Lee. But this time reporters are stepping up to address the issue on the record.
Many of you are familiar with the now widely available interview Ms. Lee gave with ABC's Good Morning America anchor Robin Roberts, herself a cancer survivor who has openly shared her journey with the public. Ms. Lee told the nation that she has breast cancer, that a lumpectomy had positive margins, and that her doctors recommended a double mastectomy since she was a "ticking time bomb" in her words.
What the nation also knows is that Ms. Lee at the age of 48 was critical of guidelines that-in her words-tell women to wait until they are 50 to get a screening mammogram. She also recommended that women of all ages, even in their 20s and 30s, call their health professional now and get a mammogram. In short, all women "need to know" whether or not they have breast cancer.
A diagnosis of breast cancer is traumatic. A positive mammogram that turns out not to be cancer--what doctors call a "false positive"--is also traumatic, especially if a women has to endure the uncertainty of follow-up tests including additional x-rays and biopsies, which are certainly uncomfortable at the least and disfiguring at the worst. Younger women have a greater number of false positive mammograms, in part because their breast tissue is more dense making the reading of a mammogram more difficult.
People are entitled to their opinions. But when personal thoughts turn into public pronouncements it can create a sense of fear and a sense of panic that may not be warranted. Often, listening to what the science tells us can help us confront some of that fear. In this case what the science tells us is that screening women in their 20s and 30s who are at average risk of breast cancer would cause a great deal of harm and not much benefit. More...
April 21, 2015
Years ago when I first started this blog I wrote about the democratization of information, and how people would come to an era where they had ready access to information yet reserved the right to determine whether that information was valid or not.
Fast forward to today, and a company called Color Genomics announced a new genomic based profile to measure breast cancer risk. They are clearly headed into the democratization of health care, since they are pricing the test at $249 and have tried to reduce the barriers for women and men to get the test.
Inevitably, this announcement is going to fan the flames of how far we should be going to allow people to get whatever laboratory tests they would like, whenever they want them. Although a health professional must order the test, in reality doctors will be available to meet your need if you decide to bypass your personal physician. And although most professional organizations active in this field recommend genetic counseling from a qualified professional be done before such tests are done, the company says they will provide such counseling-after the test results are known. More...
January 30, 2015
This blog was originally published on the Medpage Today website on January 22, 2015. It is reposted here with permission.
Are we prepared for the genomics revolution?
The President's proposed Precision Medicine Initiative as mentioned in his recent State of the Union address suggests it's probably time to get ready for some changes in our daily routines as health professionals.
I'm not talking about the incredible information that has already been produced by researchers examining the human genome. Nor am I referring to the work that is going on in major cancer centers and elsewhere exploring how to better match patients with genomic analyses of their cancers, for example.
And I am not talking about the advances in targeted therapies associated with diagnostic tests that can help guide the treatment of patients with a variety of cancers including but not limited to lung and breast cancers as examples.
No, I am asking whether we are prepared to usher in the new era of medical practice where genomic analyses in one form or another will be a part of our everyday medical practice. It's not just about cancer, my friends. It will be coming to a primary care practice near you probably sooner than you realize -- but it is coming. More...
November 13, 2014
The numbers about skin cancer incidence and costs in the United States are worse than anyone expected.
That's the message that comes from a report published recently in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine on research from the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Cancer Institute.
The researchers took a look at the number of skin cancers--both melanoma and non-melanoma--that were diagnosed in the United States for two different periods of time, from 2002-2006 and 2007-2011. They also examined the total cost of care for the treatment of those patients.
The staggering reality is that the average number of skin cancers diagnosed in this country in people 18 and older went from 3.4 million per year during the first time frame to 4.9 million in the second period. That means through 2011 that close to 5,000,000 (yes, 5 million) adults have a skin cancer diagnosed every year-and today that number may even be higher. More...
November 12, 2014
(This blog was originally posted on Medpage Today and is reprinted here with permission)
A simple word with lots of meanings, all of which depend on the context of the moment. Value in healthcare -- especially in cancer care -- is certainly no exception. What is undeniable is that we are seeing an increasing clamor about value in cancer treatment. And one person's value is clearly another person's concern.
At the crux of the debate is the question of whether we will continue to see improvements in cancer care that are meaningful, and whether we will be able to support the very innovation that, in no small part, holds such great promise for the future of making cancer a chronic disease for many and even finding a cure for some.
A recent Washington conference sponsored by the Turning The Tide Against Cancercoalition is an excellent case in point.
Conference organizers brought together experts from around the country who are vitally concerned about the progress we are making, and must continue to make, in elevating personalized (or precision) medicine as a key part of advancing cancer research and cancer care. The agenda included a number of presentations about not only how to make personalized medicine more relevant to all of us, but also how to address the question of "value." More...
November 06, 2014
What if you were sitting in the room with some of the best financial and scientific minds in the country and someone asked how many of you would be willing to contribute a modest sum of money to create a company with the potential of speeding up the evaluation of drugs that could revolutionize cancer treatment?
That was the opening question of a fascinating meeting I attended recently at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, one where I didn't want to leave my seat for a moment for fear I would miss another thought-provoking comment or idea.
The meeting was called CanceRX 2014, and for two solid days about 300 participants listened, debated, and engaged in discussion on how to make that scenario happen. No small task, to be certain. But in this era of ever increasing research discoveries of new treatment targets, it is clear that we need some innovative thinking to take what we learn in the laboratory to the bedsides of the patients we care for. And to make that happen we need as much "out of the box" thinking as we can muster. More...
October 02, 2014
It's October and that means we are about to see a lot of pink for the next 31 days. And virtually all of the work comes down to one simple -some might say overly simple-message: get a mammogram.
But as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM), begins, I find myself one again asking some difficult questions: Are we really looking at the right side of the equation? Is it all about mammograms? Is there more to the story? The answer is absolutely unequivocal and without a moments hesitation: YES! More...
September 30, 2014
I had an interesting day this past week. Sadly, it left me wondering why the same "hope and hype" directed at cancer patients and their families decades ago when I started my oncology career was still alive and well today. But then, maybe I am the naïve one to think that anything should have really changed.
In the morning I found out that a story I had been interviewed for a story which appeared on the Kaiser Health News website. A discussion about proton beam therapy for cancer (PBT), it basically pointed out that insurers aren't necessarily paying for the treatment and that the information supporting its use is not as definitive as some would hope or claim.
Not long after, I was informed of an online discussion on Twitter (called a "tweet chat" at #protonbeam) being hosted by a major medical institution and a well-known weekly newsmagazine on the very topic of proton beam therapy, or PBT. What I watched unfold over the hour-long discussion was what I call a "scrum" of doctors and public relations people promoting proton beam therapy as the answer to many cancer treatment dilemmas with nary a word about the limitations of our knowledge or potential problems with the treatment. It was all about "we can do it, call us and we will tell you how good we are, and insurers won't pay us." Simply stated, the "conversation" seemed to be glancing by some of the inconvenient facts surrounding what has become another poster story for how we develop and promote new treatments in medicine, let alone cancer care. More...
August 07, 2014
We have lost a hero. A true hero. Not one whose name would be on the tip of everyone's tongue or whose passing would be on nationwide news, but a hero nonetheless. We have lost a man who possibly had more influence on the lives of cancer patients and advances in cancer than most of us will ever realize.
Gordon (Gordy) Klatt, MD died this week. A colorectal surgeon who lived in Tacoma, Washington, Dr. Klatt died from the very disease which he did so much to eradicate. And even while ill, he contributed time and effort tirelessly to the American Cancer Society and the very volunteers-like himself-who do so much to reduce the burden and suffering from cancer for so many.
Dr. Klatt is a hero because almost 30 years ago he had an idea and he acted on it. He decided to walk around a track for 24 hours to raise money for cancer care and cancer research. He was the founder and inspiration of the American Cancer Society's signature "Relay For Life," which has spread not only throughout the United States but now is found throughout the world.
If you ever wake up one day and say, "I have an idea," then become discouraged as you try to enable your dream, please don't ever forget Dr. Klatt. He had an idea, and his idea enabled the Society to raise the funds needed to meet cancer head on through research, education, advocacy, and service. That money has done more to support cancer patients and their families, advance cancer research and treatment, and improve the quality of life of cancer patients than you can ever imagine. More...
July 31, 2014
(Note: This blog was originally published on another American Cancer Society website on July 29 because of technical problems on this site. Those have now been resolved and it is now reposted here. We appreciate your understanding.)
That was the core message that came out of the introduction Tuesday morning of the Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent Skin Cancer at a meeting held at the National Press Club in Washington DC.
There were some other messages that now raise skin cancer awareness and prevention high on the public health awareness list, such as the fact that over 5 million people every year have a diagnosis of skin cancer (and many have more than one skin cancer), and that we are spending over $8 billion dollars treating the disease. But most important is the fact that this is one of the most preventable cancers, and if current trends are any indication we are not getting the job done when it comes to decreasing the number of skin cancers and saving lives. More...