Hi All,
I am sure that many of us have come across media articles that highlight the cancers that are difficult to diagnose ,difficult to treat and also have low survival rates.A former GP of mine was straight to the point and said that apart from an accident we will die of three possible groups of ailments-heart,cancers or dementias.My late partners neurologist said to me that dementia was a fatal condition and a horrible way to die and we have little idea still of the pathway to decline and eventual death as the patient is not able to relate effectively to medics their experience of mental and bodily decline etc.
Survival rates for cancers might be expressed as 1,5 or 10 year rates;the most common one is the 5 year survival rate and basically tells you what percentage of people live at least 5 years after diagnosis or when the cancer is found.Many tables showing rates will show all leukaemias grouped together so for CML we have to rely on specific and various studies of survivals. I remember when dx first of all in 2006 that I came across one study that for those being treated with Glivec (imatinib) the survival rate was a high as 90 to 95 %.Now with the introduction of other tkis, rates may well have improved I guess.Apparently the survival rates for CML depends on the phase of of the disease,other biologic characteristics of the CML and the response to treatment of the disease.
What prompted me to create or re- create this thread is an article that I read in a popular daily newspaper highlighting how hard it was to spot pancreatic cancer;the symptoms can mimic indigestion or IBS and show stomach pain or back pain.As it is an organ hidden behind the stomach it is hard to image and not easy to treat after diagnosis.If not treated in its early stages then the sarcoma spreads to other organs and overall the 5 year survival rate is as low as 7-8%.Cancer of the oesophogus is another low survival condition and one can list other low survival cancers of the brain,liver lung,stomach,bladder and ovaries.Despite being still big killers in terms of numbers ,survival rates for prostate and breast cancers are often in the range 70-80%. However these very much vary with stage of diagnosis and treatment and also can be slow growing say compared with say pancreatic disorders.
Of the leukaemias it would seem that CML is relatively easy to treat;my specialist said to me that AML is often extremely difficult to deal with for instance.So we are told that having CML allows us to expect a fairly normal life span but effecting a cure is still very difficult-whereas for some other early stage cancers a cure is still possible .For instance my early stage prostate cancer treated with iodine-125 less than two years ago according to my latest PSA scores is already on the way to a complete cure.
Does anyone else reflect on relative survival rates and how having CML is likely to involve lifelong treatment but is still probably at the top of the list of survival rates of cancers?
Regards
John