Bone Cancer Statistics

Question: What are my chances of getting Cancer? I am a 13 year old boy, who is 6 foot tall, and goes on his computer a lot. In my Health class they said that the chances of getting Bone Cancer are more common in boys that are taller then average because more growth cells are being used, so theres more possibility for mutation. They also said radiation has something to do with it, so now I'm pretty concerned. No one in my family has ever had Bone cancer and many of my family members are very tall but still, in terms of statistics, what are my chances of getting Bone Cancer?

Answer: Your chances are slim as there are 650-700 cases diagnosed each year in people under 20 years old, about 8.7 in 1 million. As many kids that seem to be concerned about cancer I would hope a teacher would include information about how often it occurs.

Question: What is the outlook like for some one with Secondary Cancer caught at the early stages? My mother was diagnosed with Breast Cancer 4 years ago, at the time recieved RadioTherapy. She is now currently on Hormonal Treatment for this also. However, recently she was diagnosed with Secondary Bone Cancer. We were told that her Breast Cancer was caught early so this news has come as a huge shock. My questions are ; 1) What is the outlook like for this, how long on average can someone live with this, are there any statistics? 2) Is it possible under the right treatments that she can get back to normal for the forseeable future? 3) How is this secondary cancer growing if she currently on hormonal treatment ? 4) Can a secondary cancer spread or is it only the primary cancer that spreads ? Please help and information / experiences with this would be greatly valued !

Answer: Cara I am sorry to tell you that there is no such thing as catching a secondary cancer in the early stages. The fact that it is a secondary cancer makes it an end stage, or stage 4 cancer. Most patients with a stage 4 breast cancer survive 2-4 years. Short of a miracle she will not get back to normal. The best that can be done at this point is to try and manage her disease. You do not say what stage her cancer was when diagnosed 4 years ago or what her hormone receptors were, but if she had lymph node involvement that is the likely cause for her recurrence now. It is only the primary cancer that spreads. If a biopsy were taken of her bone lesion it would have breast cancer cells. I know my answer is not what you want to hear, but I believe you asked the question because you want to know the truth and maybe it may help you in some way. I urge you to speak to your mother’s oncologist and/or radiation oncologist. They are a wealth of information and know your mother’s disease best. God bless.

Question: MY FREIND OF 17 HAS CANCER!!!? i just recently found out that my best friend since middle school is diagnosed with bone cancer. He told me he first found out when a small lump appeared on the upper part of his upper arm about 3 month ago. It didn't hurt at first, but gradually became very painful. He got it checked out and its cancer. He is a boy and is 17. Docotor says its localized and should respond well to chemo. DO you think he will be ok? cuz he is going through treatment right now. What is the statistics on people like him surviving? will he be able to live normally?

Answer: I think if its localized he will respond to chemo very well. But no two patients are exactly alike, and bone cancer treatment and responses to treatment vary greatly. # The size, the location, and the type of bone cancer # The bone cancer stage (how far the cancer has spread) # How long the patient has had symptoms # How much of the cancer is taken out by surgery and/or killed by chemotherapy # The patient's age, blood, and other test results # The patient's general health. survival rate for 1995-2001 was 69.4 percent. * 67.5 percent for Caucasian men * 72.1 percent for Caucasian women * 70.0 percent for African-American men * 68.4 percent for African-American women. 84.5 percent for localized i really hope this helps you and i hope your friend lives through it without much more pain. Best wishes, Molly

Question: wondering why any doctor would subject anyone to chemo? Chemotherapy Quotes "Two to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy….The bottom line is for a few kinds of cancer chemo is a life extending procedure---Hodgkin's disease, Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL), Testicular cancer, and Choriocarcinoma."---Ralph Moss, Ph.D. 1995 Author of Questioning Chemotherapy. "NCI now actually anticipates further increases, and not decreases, in cancer mortality rates, from 171/100,000 in 1984 to 175/100,000 by the year 2000!"--Samuel Epstein. "A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy (NCI Journal 87:10)."—John Diamond Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin's disease are 18 times more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35 per cent chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40---which is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng J Med, March 21, 1996) "Success of most chemotherapy is appalling…There is no scientific evidence for its ability to extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancer…chemotherapy for malignancies too advanced for surgery which accounts for 80% of all cancers is a scientific wasteland."---Dr Ulrich Abel. 1990 The New England Journal of Medicine Reports— War on Cancer Is a Failure: Despite $30 billion spent on research and treatments since 1970, cancer remains "undefeated," with a death rate not lower but 6% higher in 1997 than 1970, stated John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., and Heather L. Gornik, M.H.S., both of the Department of Health Studies at the University of Chicago in Illinois. "The war against cancer is far from over," stated Dr. Bailar. "The effect of new treatments for cancer on mortality has been largely disappointing." "My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery, other than when used in immediate life-threatening situations."---Prof Jones. (1956 Transactions of the N.Y. Academy of Medical Sciences, vol 6. There is a fifty page article by Hardin Jones of National Cancer Institute of Bethesda, Maryland. He surveyed global cancer of all types and compared the untreated and the treated, to conclude that the untreated outlives the treated, both in terms of quality and in terms of quantity. Secondly he said, "Cancer does not cure". Third he said "There is a physiological mechanism which finishes off an individual".) "With some cancers, notably liver, lung, pancreas, bone and advanced breast, our 5 year survival from traditional therapy alone is virtually the same as it was 30 years ago."---P Quillin, Ph.D. "1.7% increase in terms of success rate a year, its nothing. By the time we get to the 24 century we might have effective treatments, Star Trek will be long gone by that time." Ralph Moss. "….chemotherapy’s success record is dismal. It can achieve remissions in about 7% of all human cancers; for an additional 15% of cases, survival can be "prolonged" beyond the point at which death would be expected without treatment. This type of survival is not the same as a cure or even restored quality of life."—John Diamond, M.D. "Keep in mind that the 5 year mark is still used as the official guideline for "cure" by mainstream oncologists. Statistically, the 5 year cure makes chemotherapy look good for certain kinds of cancer, but when you follow cancer patients beyond 5 years, the reality often shifts in a dramatic way."—Diamond. Studies show that women taking tamoxifen after surviving breast cancer then have a high propensity to develop endometrial cancer. The NCI and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, which makes the drug, aggressively lobbied State of California regulators to keep them from adding tamoxifen to their list of carcinogens. Zeneca is one of the sponsors of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. "Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy…Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumours…Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it."—Alan Levin, M.D. According to the Cancer Statistics for 1995, published by the ACS in their small journal (2), the 5-year survival rate has improved from 50%-56% for whites and 39%-40% for bl Gary, did you bother to read? if I'm not mistaken the NEJ of medicine was quoted as well as several md's which if I'm not mistaken stands for medical doctors, also some with PHD's. what more do you need?I don't recall mentioning anything about alt med. I watched my mother, my aunt, her husband , a friend die from this treatment, and now my cousin is dying from this junk science, don't even bother to defend it. it's monstrous, but you are welcome to believe it if you want, I don't and I'll take my chances, as you'll take your's. good luck

Answer: "Quotes" ? Yep, quote mining is a poor and frequently invalid form of taking a quote out of context and pretending it is a fact on its own. Don't forget: Increases in cancer are due to people living longer so they are more likely to die of cancer (we all have to die of something!). Dying at 85 from cancer, rather than at 35 from scurvy is known as "medical progress".

Question: math question on 2 sample test? [25.] (3 marks) Multiplemyeloma, or blood plasma cancer, is characterized by increased blood vessel formulation (angiogenesis) in the bone marrow that is a prognostic fac- tor in survival. One treatment approach used for multiple myeloma is stem cell transplantation with the patient’s own stem cells. The following data represent the bone marrow micro-vessel density for patients who had a complete response to the stem cell transplant, as measured by blood and urine tests. The measurements were taken immediately prior to the stem cell transplant and at the time of the complete response: Patient Before After 1 158 203 2 189 206 3 202 220 4 353 320 5 416 340 At the 0.05 level of significance, we would like to test whether the mean bone marrow micro-vessel densities before the stem cell transplant and after the stem cell transplant are different. Find the test statistic for this test. (A) |t| = 0.1859 (B) |t| = 0.2278 (C) |t| = 0.2685 (D) |t| = 0.3087 (E) |t| = 0.3414

Answer: Hypothesis: That there is no real difference between the readings of the patients Before and After the treatment, i.e. mean change = 0. Test statistic for a t-test: |t| = [ (estimate) - ( Hypothesized mean) ] / std.deviation In this case: |t| = [ (Mean difference) - (0 ) ] / (std. deviation / Sq rt (N) ) The difference for each patient would be equal to: Before - After Patient 1) 158 - 203 = d1 Patient 2) 189 - 206 = d2 etc... The 'mean difference' = ( SUM of the differences for each patient ) / Number of patients = ( d1 + d2....+d5) / 5 Let the mean difference be 'm' Let the Standard deviation be 's' s = [SUM OF ( di - m)^2 ] (1/(N-1)) i: 1, 2, 3, 4 ,5. In this case since there are only 5 patients, i can only go up to 5. eg. i = 1 then..( di - m)^2 becomes ( d1 - m)^2 where..d1 = (158 - 203) i = 2 then...( di - m)^2 becomes ( d2 - m)^2 where d2 = ( 189 - 206) and so on... m: The mean difference calculated just before. N: Number of patients. ( Above.. "N-1" -> 4 -> so (1/(N-1)) now equals (1/4) ) Now that we've obtained the Estimate, which is 'm' the mean difference, and Standard deviation... The hypothesized mean will be equal to '0' because as mentioned before we assume that there will be no change after the treatment and hence the mean change we'd expect to be nothing! i.e. Zero. Therefore: |t| = [ (Mean difference) - (0) ] / (std. deviation / Sq rt (N) ) We divide the standard deviation by SQ RT (N) because this is a random sample taken from the population, (std.deviation / sq rt(N)) is known as the 'standard error' of the sample. In conclusion |t| = [ (m) - (0) ] / (s / Sq rt (5) ) and Voila, you should hopefully have your t-statistic!