Alternative cancer treatments
Alternative cancer treatments describes
alternative and complementary treatments for cancer that have not been approved
by the government agencies responsible for the regulation of therapeutic goods.
They include diet and exercise, chemicals, herbs, devices, and manual
procedures. The treatments may be untested or unsupported by evidence, either
because no proper testing has been conducted, or because testing did not demonstrate
statistically significant efficacy. Concerns have been raised about the safety
of some of them.
Alternative cancer treatments are typically
contrasted with experimental cancer treatments, which are treatments for which
experimental testing is currently underway. All currently approved
chemotherapeutic cancer treatments were considered experimental cancer
treatments before their safety and efficacy testing was completed.
Such therapies can be categorized broadly
into three groups: alternative treatments offered as a substitute to standard
medical treatment; alternative treatments as an addition to standard treatment;
and treatments proposed in the past that have been found in clinical trials to
be useless and/or unsafe. Some of these obsolete or disproven treatments
continue to be promoted, sold, and used.
Since the 1940s, medical science has
developed chemotherapy, radiation therapy, adjuvant therapy and the newer
targeted therapies, as well as refining surgical techniques for removing
cancer. Before the development of these modern, evidence-based treatments, 90%
of cancer patients died with five years. With modern mainstream treatments,
only 34% of cancer patients die within five years. However, while generally
prolonging life or permanently curing cancer, most effective, mainstream forms
of cancer treatment have side effect ranging from unpleasant to fatal, and permanent
cures are not guaranteed. These side effects and the uncertainty of success
create appeal for alternative treatments for cancer, which purport to cause
fewer side effects or to increase survival rates.
Alternative cancer treatments have
typically not undergone properly conducted, well-designed clinical trials, or
the results have not been published due to publication bias (a refusal to publish
results showing a treatment does not work).
Among those that have been published, the methodology is often poor. A
2006 systematic review of 214 articles covering 198 clinical trials of
alternative cancer treatments concluded that almost none conducted dose-ranging
studies, which are necessary to ensure that the patients are being given a
useful amount of the treatment. These kinds of treatments appear and vanish
frequently, and have throughout history.
No comments:
Post a Comment