ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING OVARIAN CANCER & RADIATION/CHEMOTHERAPHY BY GREG PAWELSKI
Neil Love, M.D. reports in a survey of breast cancer oncologists based in academic medical centers and community based, private practice oncologists. The
academic center-based oncologists do not derive personal profit from the
administration of infusion chemotherapy, the community-based oncologists do
derive personal profit from infusion chemotherapy, while deriving no profit from
prescribing oral-dosed chemotherapy.
The results of the survey show that for first line chemotherapy of metastatic
breast cancer, 84-88% of the academic center-based oncologists prescribed an
oral dose drug (capecitabine), while only 13% perscribed infusion drugs, and
none of them prescribed the expensive, highly remunerative drug docetaxel.
In contrast, among the community-based oncologists, only 18% prescribed the oral
dose drug (capecitabine), while 75% prescribed infusion drugs, and 29%
prescribed the expensive, highly remunerative drug docetaxel. The existence of
this profit motive in drug selection has been one of the major factors working
against the individualization of cancer chemotherapy based on testing the cancer
This is not to imply that the academic center-based oncologists are without
their fair share of collective guilt. They were misguided in not recognizing
that they were trying to mate notoriously heterogeneous diseases into
one-size-fits-all treatments. They devoted 100% of their clinical trials
resources into trying to identify the best treatment for the average patient, in
the face of evidence that this approach was non-productive. However, such
unsuccessful experiments will never be viewed as such by the thousands of people
whose careers are supported by these experiments.
Henderson, et al, entered 3,100 breast cancer patients in a prospective,
randomized study to compare cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin alone versus
cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin plus Taxol (in the adjuvant, pre-metastatic
setting). The results were microscopically positive, at best, and cannot begin
to justify the enormous financial and human resources expended (while making no
effort at all to test and improve methods to individualize treatment).
But these results changed the face of the adjuvant chemotherapy of breast
Cyclophosphamide+Doxorubicin+Taxol became standard of care. Taxol recently went
off patent. Now the thrust is to identify on-patent therapy which is
microscopically better in clinical trials of one-size-fits-all treatment.
Already, the community-based oncologists are migrating to
Cyclophosphamide+Doxorubicin+Docetaxel (expensive/remunerative) so what was the
purpose of doing that 3,100 patient prospective, randomized Henderson study?
Click Here for Patterns of Care
Peace and Blessings to you.
Greg receives email at: gdpawel"at"comcast.net">
To return to the main Greg Pawelski page click
Last Updated On: 02/08/2006
Back to Home Page