client handout for using chemo and radiation to treat VAS

evidence-based cancer treatment — the discipline that insists on proof that time-honored medical practices and procedures are actually effective.
No ancedotal stuff please.
Pet cancer treatment can cost ten thousand USA dollars. This forum is for people to tell us how they were able to obtain cancer treatment when they had no pet health insurance to cover the cost. Rabie Vaccine caused cancer often is paid for by the company that produced the vaccine even when not legally required to do so.

client handout for using chemo and radiation to treat VAS

Postby malernee » Sun Aug 01, 2004 10:17 am

When doctors say their treatments are of benefit medical fraud is difficult to prove. Science is what the public must use to determine the treatments that work from those treatments doctors only wished work. If your doctors are promoting chemo and radiation work for VAS they should be able to give you a peer reviewed randomized controlled trial showing the relative efficacy of the treatment they sell. If you get the study post it so we can peer review it if the peer review is not attached to the study. If they cannot give you such a study your doctors need to stop promoting unproven medical care fess up and tell you the treatments they want to sell is considered investigational medical care. I have not see a properly blinded study that has proven chemo or radiation will increase length of life or quality of life for treating sarcoma cancers. Other cancers yes but not sarcoma. If you find such a study in humans cats or dogs post it on this webpage along with any peer review.

see call for Randomized Controlled Trial posting for chemo and radiation for VAS treatment
http://evidencebasedvet.com/forum/viewt ... 14900597bb

As you can see in the webpage hyperlink Radiation has been shown to cause sarcoma.
Radiation has not been proven to cure sarcoma.
Those in authority will promote radiation for sarcoma in both in vet medicine and human medicine
Those who practice evidence based medicine if allowed by editors in authority will show you studies why radiation is still considered an investigational drug for treating sarcoma. I am sorry you must consider yet another drug for your cat that studies have shown causes sarcoma. Since most but not all so called experts in this field at the time I write this promote these treatments you will need to read the studies and get them peer reviewed yourself to make a decision about <animal> .
Adjuvant chemotherapy for soft tissue sarcoma has been the subject of many studies. Most studies have been nonrandomized and therefore by definition inconclusive. In addition, most of the 14 performed randomized studies have had small sample sizes. A meta-analysis on the data of these 14 studies suggested a possible survival improvement, albeit not significant. The outcome of the meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution in view of the fact that in 18% of patients, histology data were lacking; ineligibility rates in included studies were high; central pathology was not uniformly performed; and in 6% of patients, sarcomas other than soft tissue sarcomas were included. Because it is generally recommended that meta-analyses of small randomized trials are used only to generate hypotheses for more reliable randomized trials, it is argued and this doctor agrees that adjuvant chemotherapy in soft tissue sarcomas in the cat, dog or human should remain confined to the investigational setting.


references, new study post, peer-review
http://evidencebasedvet.com/forum/viewt ... 14900597bb
malernee
Site Admin
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 5:56 pm

Return to cancer treatment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron