I’d desire to share with you a recent bind on lung cancer treatment one that I found appauling and saddening. With other viable options of increasing quality of life and very often lifespan as well so many are turning to solely chemotherapy as a means of treating their cancer. And they are doing so for the most part without taking the time to educate themselves on the options available to them both for treatment and also support for their body during treatment. It is my belief and a fundamental part of what we’re trying to accomplish here at the FACR that knowledge is power and information is paramount. Before making any decisions on your cancer or the cancer of a loved one spend the measure researching online and talking to others who undergo had similar experiences or may have information they can overlap with you. act the time to alter informed choices. After all isn’t life worth it?
Here’s the article. If you would desire additional information on alternative or complementary approaches to cancer treatment and prevention please telecommunicate me with your questions and communicate information at.
A new study finds that survival for elderly patients with lung cancer has changed little despite large increases in healthcare expenditures for lung cancer treatment. The study by Harvard University. National Cancer initiate and National Bureau of Economic investigate researchers published in the December 1. 2007 issue of CANCER a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society finds that add up life-expectancy rose by less than one month between 1983 and 1997 while costs rose by over $20,000 per patient.
The U. S spends more than five billion dollars a year on detection determining the disease severity and treatment of lung cancer. This is a significant increase over the last few decades mirroring similar increases in general healthcare spending over the same period. The one-year survival rate for lung cancer has increased slightly from 37 percent in 1975-1979 to 42 percent in 2002 largely due to improvements in surgical techniques and combined therapies. However the five-year survival rate for all stages of lung cancer combined has remained relatively shelter and is currently only about 16 percent.
Dr. Rebecca Woodward and her colleagues linked and analyzed non-small cell lung cancer survival data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance. Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database and Medicare Parts A and B reimbursement data from the Continuous Medicare History consume File (CMHSF) database. Their objective was to examine changes in treatment costs and outcomes for localized regional and metastatic lung cancer from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s.
Cost-effectiveness as measured by the cost of an additional year of life gained was poor with a high average be of $403,142. While early re-create cancer treatment was more cost-effective by conventional standards than treatments for advanced disease the gains still were limited. When analyzed by disease severity the cost per additional year gained for local and regional disease was $143,614 and 145,861 respectively. For metastatic cancer the cost per additional year gained was $1,190,322.
Dr. Woodward and her co-authors conclude. “The additional money spent on lung cancer treatment in the mid-1990s compared to in the early 1980s did not prove in a favorable economic rate of return by conventional benchmarks.”
bind: “The Value of Medical Interventions for Lung Cancer in the Elderly: Results from SEER-CMHSF,” Rebecca M. Woodward. Martin L. cook. Susan T. Stewart. Kathleen A. Cronin. David M. Cutler. CANCER; Published Online: October 22. 2007 (DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23058); create air Date: December 1. 2007.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.facr.org/blog/?p=14
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
