Cleansing ceremony before mountain adventure
As I prepared to construct this blog a powerful lot of
extremely colorful language trickled through my head. I managed to suppress most of it, but a bit
may seep out from time to time. Forgive
me.
Jesus H. Christ!
The news today is that the FDA has joined our old friend the USPSTF in
recommending that CA125 should not be used to screen for ovarian cancer. Not even in its ROCA form. Not even for post-menopausal women. Not even if you toss in a family history of
ovarian or breast cancer. Not even if
you are positive for BRCA mutations. Not
for nothing, apparently.
And the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund agrees,
apparently.
Add to that the fact that many (most?) doctors either don’t
know the OVCA Symptom Index, or don’t think it works (see recent blog about
Gilda Radner) and you arrive at the current situation: most OVCA sufferers are
diagnosed in Stage IIIc or IV, and have at best a 45% chance of living five
more years!
And why not use ROCA or some similar technique? Cost!
False positives! Hain’t passed
the crucial tests with a high-enough margin of error! (I just choked back a particularly harsh
epithet.)
I appreciate the efforts of our medical experts to protect
us from harm. But can’t we put more of
all that brain power and money to work doing something positive? We could save a lot of lives if we could
detect early stage ovarian cancer. If we
had a Cancer Czar, as I have suggested, he or she might be persuaded to make
this a priority. But with the present Moonshot
structure – not a chance.
By the way, this being Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, I
will send you a classy teal pin, free of charge, if you promise to (1) wear it,
and (2) email me your address.
Hi Uncle Myrl, interesting & I'll have to read your previous Radner post now
ReplyDeleteMore on ROCA and similar tests. Implies that the “don’t use” recommendation applies only to women with no danger factors – like BRCA mutations or family history. If that is so, I retract my condemnation (above).
ReplyDeleteBy the way, this article furnishes an interesting chart showing OVCA mortality by state. Best was North Dakota, with 4 deaths per 100,000 women (in 2012); worst was Wyoming, with 12.7 per 100,000. Probably meaningless, caused by small data sets. Among states with robust data sets: California, 7.2; Texas, 6.8; New York, 7.6.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ritarubin/2016/09/11/how-can-a-company-market-an-ovarian-cancer-screening-test-if-the-fda-says-women-shouldnt-use-it/2/#e97236b6c35e