 |
 |
Hi Amy and EBH, I have found a few articles apart from the Cochrane database, which would be the first stop. To start you off try these links below; they also include reports from other parts of the world: http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/2003/letrozole http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/1/81.short http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/5/1128.full http://www.danaise.com/breast.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11378343 http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/breast/survival/ http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015737 http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/6/606.full http://breast-cancer-research.com/content/7/2/R256 http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/22/20/4067 Best wishes and Happy Christmas or whatever else you celebrate this time of year Jo ________________________________ From: Dr. Amy Price <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Wednesday, 21 December 2011, 0:39 Subject: Breast tumours Dear all, Does anyone know how to find out if people who have breast cancers removed have a higher longer survival rate than those who do not? The question was raised that perhaps those with lesions and successful surgery could have perhaps left them in there with no ill results? The thinking was that if it is cancer within a set number of years they will die anyway with or without intervention. I was too emotionally invested to look at this clearly initially however wilful ignorance does not solve problems but can be a source of alienation. What evidence is there that screening and consequent treatment is not helpful? I do understand that mass screening may be a waste of resources in terms of numbers needed to treat but it seems that the suggested guidelines seem to be evidence starved as well. Many thanks if someone could direct me to helpful links in this area. Best, Amy Amy Price PhD Http://empower2go.org Building Brain Potential