As regular readers of this blog will be aware, The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink is often unhappy about the “over-hyping” of certain types of scientific and medical information related to prostate cancer in the media.
Apparently, however, we aren’t the only ones to have this perception.
According to an article by Fishman et al. in an upcoming issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine, the majority of articles dealing with cancer in magazines and newspapers tend to be overly optimistic, focusing on things like survival and aggressive forms of therapy while paying a great deal less attention to such issues as cancer-specific deaths, treatment failures, adverse events, and end-of-life palliative or hospice care. This comes as no great surprise to The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink.
The authors carried out a detailed analysis of the content of all reports and stories related to cancer in eight newspapers and five national magazines using trained content coders to monitor the percentages of each article for its discussion of cancer survival, cancer death and dying, aggressive cancer treatment, cancer treatment failure, adverse events of cancer treatment, and end-of-life palliative or hospice care.
Based on the analysis of a total of 436 articles, they showed that:
- 140/436 articles (32.1 percent) focused on survival
- Only 33/436 articles (7.6 percent) focused on death and dying.
- Only 57/436 articles (13.1 percent) reported that aggressive cancer treatments can fail.
- 131/436 articles (30.0 percent) reported that aggressive treatments can result in adverse events.
- 249/436 articles (57.1 percent) were exclusively focused on aggressive treatment options.
- Only 2/436 articles (0.5 percent) discussed end-of-life palliative or hospice care exclusively.
- Only 11/436 articles (2.5 percent) discussed aggressive treatment and end-of-life care.
The authors concluded that “portrayals of cancer care in the news media may give patients an inappropriately optimistic view of cancer treatment, outcomes, and prognosis.”
The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink thinks that a positive attitude to any form of treatment for any cancer is wise. However, that positivity needs to be tempered by realism. Quite apart from the fact that there are plenty of people who will happily relieve patients and their family members of large amounts of money in return for forms of therapy of dubious value, there is also the whole issue of when “enough is enough.”
On the latter topic, we would advise any family member of a patient with very late stage cancer to read the personal and empathetic article by Jane Brody on the death of her much loved husband, Richard, that appeared recently on the Well blog in the New York Times.
Luckily, by comparison with many other forms of cancer, most men diagnosed with prostate cancer are never at any great risk of death from this disorder. However, for those with aggressive, metastatic, hormone-refractory disease, we still have no treatments that offer the opportunity for truly extended survival. Planning carefully to avoid the severe and painful problems associated with very late stage prostate cancer is still a wise course when this prospect becomes a real probability.
Filed under: Living with Prostate Cancer, Management Tagged: | cancer, death, dying, meadia, planning
Search for new and
ongoing trials on the
CTAG PCa web site
Yes, the “D-word” is still taboo. Death is UNAMERICAN.
.
I believe that men are driven into early treatment by statements like the one that features in so much material, so many press releases, so many posts on the Internet: “Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men.”
So of course they imagine the worst when they hear the word cancer applied to themselves. But that statement is not only misleading, it is plain wrong, because it simply does not apply to all men — it is only true for men over the age of 80.
But despite this death-fearing prime mover in the decision-making process, it is almost impossible to discuss the subject on the Internet. In the early days of my diagnosis I was anxious to find some data about the probabilities of death as a “young” man with a GS 7 diagnosis. Very difficult to find as a newbie and appeals for help fell on deaf ears.
Discussions would rage on about the relative value or threat of flax seed oil, which like the discussions of theologians about the number of angels who could dance on the head of a pin, might be of some technical interest but wasn’t much help to the likes of me. But no one would respond to any questions about mortality rates and risks.
As I learned more about researching subjects I satisfied myself of my own relative risk (confirming my decision for me) and ultimately wrote a piece about this dread subject for the Yananow web site. I called it “The Elephant in the Room.”
When I wrote this, I invited comment and discussion, but, apart from a couple of e-mails from people who said they found it useful, there was no reaction — positive or negative.
Given the amount of research in the media about what attracts audiences, it seems, from these personal experiences of mine, that articles about death will not be attractive to readers or viewers and that is never acceptable to the media.
Just my two cents worth from Down Under.