In an earlier posting, I gave a pop quiz on the results of the PACE study, an effort to determine how people feel about cancer and cancer treatment in Germany, Italy, France, the UK, Japan, and the US. You can find the information on the study here:
The PACE Cancer Perception Study
Having given you a chance to see for yourself whether or not you have a true understanding of public perception about cancer, let's consider the implications for cancer families.
What's the most interesting thing about the findings? The majority of people surveyed for the study believe it takes too long for new cancer medicines to reach patients and they think more money should be spent on cancer research and cancer treatment. That speaks to the frustrations of many who feel that promise of improvement is so close, putting those cancer treatments in the hands of those who most need them can make a difference. If we weren't seeing real results hovering over the horizon, would we be so hopeful? Twenty years ago, so many people perished because the treatments for cancer were far less successful and sometimes the treatment was even harsher on the body and spirit than the disease itself. Now we can feel it coming, that next great discovery, and we want to be a part of it. We want to catch that wave and ride it all the way to a cure.
Which country had the most people with an optimistic view of cancer management? The United States. Sixty-five percent of those asked said they didn't view cancer as always having a fatal outcome. Why is that? Is it the fact that we have some amazing cancer centers that are constantly updating their cancer programs, keeping current with the latest developments? Is it that this particular group of Americans had more experience and knowledge of cancer survival? Hard to say. Maybe Americans are just normally more optimistic than people in other countries. That's a question that might be answered by a follow-up study.
What is cancer? It's not one disease, but rather a series of more than 200 diseases, which can have their origins in biologic, genetic, or environmental causes. Why is it important to know that? Not all cancers are the same. They won't respond to the same treatments the same way. They won't respond to the same medicines. Every time a patient is diagnosed with cancer, it's imperative that the type of cancer and as much information on viable options is determined by the medical team. With so many different kinds of cancer, there's no way cancer treatment is "one size fits all".
At the moment, a mere 5% of cancer patients are enrolled in clinical trials. And yet, 70% of the PACE study respondents were interested in those trials. Why? Clinical trials offer that extra chance of survival. If there's a new medicine that offers a better survival rate, wouldn't any sane human being want to try it? What's stopping them? The survey only dealt with the perceptions about cancer, so we still don't know. Is it lack of opportunity? Are cancer centers reluctant to abandon drugs with known results, even if the results are less than satisfactory, in place of experimental treatments? I don't have the answer to that.
Six out of ten people asked reported their belief that pharmaceutical companies are focused on treating cancer, rather than curing it. Why does the public believe that pharmaceutical companies are less interested in putting investment dollars into a cure? Part of that is that perception of how cancer treatment is handled. It's a communications issue, a failure to explain how things happen in research. But don't forget that with more than 200 different diseases that are lumped together as cancer, it's easy to lose sight of the progress. For every step forward, it can feel like it's taking too long to catch up. If cancer were a single disease, we would probably be far more confident in the efforts to battle it, because we'd be better able to assess the progress. But with so many different types of cancer, those little baby steps don't seem to add up as quickly.
As for satisfaction in the war on cancer, six out of ten people expressed their approval on efforts to fight the disease. Is that just because six out of ten are normally optimistic people, or do they have a reason to hope? Do they know something the rest of the population doesn't? In the survey, a group of cancer patients and cancer caregivers were interviewed, along with a larger group from the general population. The cancer patients and cancer caregivers made up a little more than one quarter of the whole group, and yet six out of ten people reported approval. Did the remainder of the people who answered positively have more experience with cancer than those who did not? Again, it's a question for another study.
Why were Japanese participants in the survey less worried about the impact of the economic factors on the treatment of cancer? Was it because their economy hasn't required cutbacks in spending for cancer treatment? Are the other five countries struggling more to fund health programs? Is cancer treatment in Japan well-funded? Are there lower cancer rates for the Japanese? Again, more questions that will have to be answered in a future study.
The French participants in the PACE survey reported the most satisfaction with the amount of money spent on cancer research in their country. Is that because of the actual amount of money put towards research, or is it the perception that the country is moving forward with the research? Is it the result of good public relations or good research? Yet another question that needs further study.
Is it surprising that nine people out of ten would be willing to share their medical records in order to help researchers and oncologists? That speaks to the heart of the perceptions of cancer patients, their families, and the general population. We understand that the more information our researchers and doctors have, the better the chances to survive the disease. We're willing to cooperate to make that happen. Some people expressed concern that the data might be misused. That's understandable, given the current climate of data collection. There are marketers and other entities that misuse the information for their own gain. Would it be misused by cancer researchers and doctors? Hard to say, but it speaks to the public's need for strict guidelines to protect privacy.
PACE stand for Patient Access to Cancer care Excellence, and the PACE network is made up of a vast group of professionals involved in all aspects of cancer research, treatment and policy. The goal is to improve how we fight cancer globally. Will it work? Only time will tell. The more success we see in cancer treatment, the more our confidence will grow. And some of that confidence will come from the public outreach that makes us all aware of new medicines and treatments. The more we know, the more proactive we will be in fighting cancer. We will take advantage of the opportunities afforded us. That's really the best chance to survive the disease, and surviving it brings each of us that much closer to a cure.
No comments:
Post a Comment