Our website uses cookies to improve your on-site experience. By using the website, cookies are being used as described in our Policy Document
Warning: To log in you will need to enable cookies and reload the page (Policy Document)
My ePortfolio Register   

Drop the C-word to reduce anxiety and overtreatment, say experts

"There is a growing body of evidence that describing a condition using more medicalised labels, including the use of the term 'cancer', can lead to an increased preference for more invasive treatments," says Professor Kirsten McCaffery of the University of Sydney who co-authored the BMJ analysis with colleagues from Bond University and the Mayo Clinic in the US.

"This supports calls to remove the cancer label, where it is appropriate."

"A prime example of this is low risk papillary thyroid cancer," says Brooke Nickel of the University of Sydney who led the analysis.

"Studies show that progression to clinical disease and tumour growth in patients with small papillary thyroid cancer who choose surgery are comparable to those who monitor their condition."

Similarly, in localised prostate cancer where active surveillance has been a recommended management option for many years, studies show that internationally most men still prefer radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

Active surveillance involves closely watching a patient's condition but avoiding treatment unless there are changes in test results that show the condition is getting worse.

"While active surveillance is increasingly being recognised as a safe management option for some patients with cancer, there is still a strong belief that aggressive treatments are always needed," says Professor McCaffery.

The authors say cancer types that could be considered for re-naming include intrathyroidal papillary thyroid cancer (<1cm in size), low and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), also often known as stage 0 breast cancer, and localised prostate cancer.

Moves to remove the cancer label aren't new, write the authors:

"An early example of this was when the World Health Organisation and International Society of Urological Pathologists removed the cancer label from bladder tumours. In 1998, they agreed that a condition known to rarely progress to invasive cancer should not be called 'cancer'".

In this change, 'papilloma and grade 1 carcinoma of the bladder' were reclassified as 'papillary urothelial neoplasia of low malignant potential'.

A similar change has been made in the labelling of cervical abnormalities detected during a Pap smear, which has supported more women to follow active surveillance in preference to invasive treatments.

"The evidence suggests to us that is time to stop telling people with a very low risk condition that they have 'cancer' if they are very unlikely to be harmed it," says Dr Ray Moynihan, a Senior Research Fellow at Bond University.

Source: The University of Sydney

0

Comments

Please click on the 'New Comment' link to the left to add a new comment, or alternatively click any 'Add Comment' link next to any existing post to respond. The views expressed here are not those of ecancer. For more information please view our Privacy Policy.



Founding partners

European Cancer Organisation European Institute of Oncology

Founding Charities

Foundazione Umberto Veronesi Fondazione IEO Swiss Bridge

Published by

ecancer Global Foundation