Bibliotherapy! Sometimes reading can cause more problems than it solves. Statistics like this demonstrate the poor outcomes that have been seen in the past, but does not tell you how you will do today with the treatment you receive. Wise doctors select treatment likely to be beneficial for you, rather than focusing on the negative. Advanced cancer has poor outlook for most, but some profit from treatment.
That would be low. Vanderbilt has a 35% 2 year survival for unresectable lung cancers, and survivals for adenoca and small cell are improving with new drugs and regimens. But survivals depend on both stage and defined survival period, 1 min survivals are almost 100% and hundred year survivals are 0%.
Depends on stage. Survival for lung cancer is stage specific. Early stage has better survivalmthen late stage. However if you are being treated for lung cancer, the important thing is to stay positive and optimistic, regardless of the stage.
My mother has been diagnosed with stage 3a limited small cell lung cancer. She is starting her chemotherapy next week along with radiation after her 2nd round of chemo. She's 71 and has COPD also. What do you think her 2-5 yr survival rate is....?
20-40% at 2 years. There is pretty extensive data on patients with small cell lung cancer (sclc). The vast majority will respond to treatment, and also will recur. Data from the literature quote 20-40 % of limited sclc survive to 2 years and 10-13% to 5 years. Good luck, I hope she is one of those! I assume you are referring to limited stage sclc; stage 3a is used in non-sclc and the numbers are different.
Guarded. Long term prognosis, unfortunately, not good over all 5 % survival, but the response is getting better each day with advances in chemotherapy and follow the advice of oncologist.
Depends. Localized or extensive. Localized has a 5 year survival of around 30-40%. Extensive has much worse odds.
Depends on stage. Treated limited stage has a median survival over a year and have about 5% survivors at 5 years extensive stage has about 9 months of median survival.
>25 % In a large randomized study testing radiotherapy and chemotherapy for non-metastatic small cell lung cancer, ~ 25% of patients were alive after 5 years. Since then, advances in imaging, treatment techniques, and supportive care may have increased this rate slightly.
Maybe. Radiation for stage 4 lung cancer is most commonly used to treat the symptoms of cancer (such as pain), rather than to increase survival. Though one may live longer, the goal of radiation is usually to live better.
Not really. While radiation is good for local control and some relief of symptoms, it is unlikely to affect survival in stage IV disease. It may improve your quality of life, but not the length.
Need more info. Need to know more about the type of cancer (small cell vs. Non-small cell), tumor size and location. Small cell, larger, closer to the center of the chest and metastases all carry a worse prognosis. Consider radiation - it is generally easier to tolerate than chemo and will prolong lifespan, if appropriate to the type and location of the cancer.
Nobody knows. It could be few minutes or a few years depending on type and stage. Your doctor can give you a better estimate.
Depends: type/stage. There are different types of cancer (small cell, non-small cell, thymoma, etc.) and stage (tiny lesion, all over). Generally the smaller it is at first, the more time you have without any therapy. The more widely it has spread, the less time you have. A tiny lesion may leave you with over a year, disease all over the place may only give you weeks. This is impossible to exactly know/answer.
Positive margins. Positive surgical margins, meaning some disease is left behind. Radiation can be used to sterilize the field. Sometimes radiation is given to treat the regional lymph nodes as well.
Positive margin. If a patient had early stage cancer that surgery would be the definitive treatment, but after pathology comes back showing a positive margin then radiation would be used without chemotherapy. However more adverse findings such as nodes would mean chemotherapy is necessary.
S+RT but no C. Not at all common. The case I can imagine is a person unable to tolerate the chemotherapy. The most common clear indicaton for radiotherapy in lung cancer is after chemotherapy if med. Nodes +. Positive bronchial margins or chest wall invasion are other plausible scenarios.
Lung cancer and xrt. I usually see this when there is a question of close or questionable surgical margins. That means the surgeon thinks he got all of the tumor but isn't quite positive.
Generally no. Surgical treatment is generally the only cure for lung cancer. Surgical treatment means that it was small enough or even if in lymph nodes they are all in the same area. If treating with chemo/radiation, stage is at least a 2B and no cure should be expected but treatment can give over 5 yr survival. Also I have seen people cured even without surgery so a lot depends on the type of cancer/person.
Rarely. Lung cancer is a very bad actor. When metastasis to local, intra lung nodes is present, there are occasional surgical cures. If beyond to regional nodes, some surgical, and adjuvant therapy cures occur. Unusual to have cure with only chemo radiation in my experience.
Why dont lung cancer patients usually get lung transplants? Wouldnt this be better than chemo or radiation to get rid of the cancer lung?
Lung cancer spreads. Transplants are only useful if we can first eradicate the cancer, which is not possible in the case of Lung cancer. Further there is reduced immunity following transplants which encourages the cancer to grow faster and spread as the immune system is what keeps the Cancer under check for most of the time.