|
Where is everyone from the "follow-up" thread?
Hi all,
This is most interesting. I hope that it proves to be true. It goes against the follow-up guidelines, as we've heatedly discussed previously. But it backs up Brenda's thinking and adds weight to her eloquent arguments. (I'd already begun to see your side of it, Brenda, before this study - I wish that I'd found you at SABCS but time went by so quickly and my poor little brain was so full).
The trouble that I see with this is the logistics and the COST! It usually annoys me to see analysis of cost effectiveness r/t cancer treatment - we are people not beans for the bean counter, fcol. But the implications of this information, indicating that in some instances, oligomets can be cured or better-treated, could start an avalanche of ultra vigilance using scans and other extremely expensive modalities on so many, to benefit so few. I hope to see work on finding simpler ways to screen for oligomets, like reliable tumor markers, so that this vigilance is not only improving lives but being fiscally sustainable.
Debbie Laxague
|