IP CHEMO: Maybe not such a step forward, after all

Linda and Ella

At the time of Linda’s ovarian cancer diagnosis there was excitement about a new method of administering chemotherapy.  Up to that time the stuff had been applied intravenously (IV), involving a needle or a port and trusting to blood circulation to deliver it to the tumor.  The new wrinkle was called Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy, and it was widely deemed to be superior to IV treatment. IP worked by drilling a hole in the woman’s abdomen and injecting the poison directly into the target area.  Linda didn’t get IP chemo – and I have always wondered why.  See this commentary:

https://ljb-quiltcutie.blogspot.com/2015/08/intraperitoneal-chemotherapy.html

Now, however, it turns out that IP not only is no more effective than IV, but has more unpleasant side effects:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/hematologyoncology/ovariancancer/79415

So I guess I should be happy that Linda didn’t get IP treatment, but I’m not, really.  I have long chuckled at the frequency with which “health experts” change their minds.  About all they seem to regard as immutable advice is not to smoke and not to get fat!  However, I do not chuckle at suggestions that there are “fads” in cancer therapy.  Find it out and test it, guys, then put it to use.  Replace it if something better comes along, but never find yourselves in a position where you have to say “Woops”!