The Guardian has information on the Government’s latest cancer plan - mammograms for women from 47 onwards, digital mammogram machines to speed them up by 2010, more radiotherapy machines and operators. Apparently despite heavy investment mortality is close to Poland which spends much less. There’s also going to be more resources directed to areas with highest health needs - and more GPs for these areas.
sorry to be cynical but living in Newham I will believe it when I see it
Mole
And how many of us on here were too young for the new age limit? In America they screen from age 40. Being dx at 44 I would have been screened in the US but still not here.
Just looked again and the limit will be extended from 47 to 73 but not from aged 40
Mind you, the research seems to indicate screening below aged 50 does not affect mortality due to breast density pre menopause
so they should go on screening after 73
Apropos of this, it was interesting to see Mike Richards having to defend the indefensible i.e. that cancer treatment is so bad here compared with France and many other European countries. A major factor seems to be the scarcity of radiotherapy in England and the lack of radiotherapists. All I can say is that the machinery I was sent to lie on three or so months after surgery is idle at weekends, in the evenings, and during public holidays. So staffing is a major factor let alone lack of equipment.
Well, having just read the short report in the Guardian, I’m feeling grumpy and cynical too. I see Mike Richards says the priorities should be surgery, radiotherapy and prevention rather than ‘expensive new drugs’. Fair enough up to a point, but mammograms for 47 year olds are not about prevention…they are about detection…something quite different.
Why is France spending twice as much on cancer drugs than the UK? Why are drugs on the horizon which could help people like me with triple negative disease not used routinely as they are in the USA. What about avastin? Women are going to Germany and Israel to get this drug. What about erbitux and PARP inhibtors?? Never heard of them? Well they are being used right now for women with triple negative bc in the USA but not available here.
And another thing! The five year survival rates for breast cancer in the UK are 77%, 5% lower than in France. A bad thing…but what really really gets me is that no one splashes about the 6 years survival stats, let alone the 10 year survival stats. I’m hoping to make 5 years in 10 months time but I doubt I’ll make 10…now maybe as I’m 58 already you reckon that doesn’t matter Mr Richards…but what about those 27 year olds and the 41 years olds with young children…have they to be satisfied with 5 and a bit years to get themselves into the lauded ‘survival’ statistics.
Rant over for now.
Jane
Hi
I haven’t read newspapers today and have not read the detail of the plan but I think I’m with you JaneRA. Why after so many years of a government supposedly committed to improvement in this area are we still setting our sights so low? Why can’t anyone tell us why the last big push for improvement has not delivered more? Why is it acceptable that we do not to get access to the latest drugs when European and US women do? It is not. We are the fourth largest economy in the world. This is not OK. I’m a lifelong Labour person (so far!) so my complaints are not rooted in political antipathies. But this plan seems so unambitious, so much ‘more of the same’ which has not been delivered in the past.
As for mammograms for pre-menopausal women…as someone who is here on this website despite two mammograms and a biopsy (paid for privately) which did not pick up my cancer, I am not predisposed to thinking that this is a major breakthrough. The failure rates for detection by mammogram for pre-menopausal women are very very high.
I agree too about the use of 5 year statistics. Its political nonsense. If survival statistics and the general picture have improved so much why are we still satisfied with using 5 years and not 10 years?
uurrggh…
Jo
xxx
Anyone wanting to read fuller stuff from the horse’s mouth go to:
dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_080975
Seems some of it was written months ago so (Breast Cancer vision was dated June), was there any real consultation?
Also, at the top of the Breast Cancer vision was:
“This vision does not represent government policy but provides useful insight into how
breast cancer services might develop over the next 5 years”
So it is NOT government policy despite the fact that they started this review? No guarantees of anything happening?
I expected little so was not disappointed. How much money was wasted on management consultations and spin doctors to come up with this?
As Holey says, these documents are dated June and much of their content (as far as mets goes anyway) is what was said at the secondary task force event the other month. What was the point of asking our opinion if decisions had already been made? Indeed it all sounds like a load of old spin and a waste of time and money.
Bah humbug.
Jenny.
Hi
I meant to say in my post that I am here now on this website with spread to lymph nodes despite two mammograms (obviously mammograms could not stop me getting cancer…) but somehow left that out. I blame the taxotere for my current state!
Jo
xxx
I’m pleased about reducing the age to 47. Loads of people seem to be diagnosed at their first routine mammogram having had no symptoms and i don’t mean DCIS. My cancer had spread to my nodes. I’m convinced a mammogram a year earlier would have caught it before it had spread and i may have avoided a mastectomy.
Regards
Kelley
I had another look at the Guardian article today and Mike Richards was emphasising that surgery is the best cancer treatment, and downplaying the role that cancer drugs play. So looked like back pedalling to me. Surgery has been used since egyptian times for breast cancer and it has been proved that radical surgery is no better for breast cancer than more conservative treatment at least for smaller tumours. So I don’t know why he is promoting cutting it off, that’s hardly considering the prevention agenda
Mole
It looks like the government can’t even get the statistics right.
I followed the link to the breast cancer vision and it starts off by saying that 37,000 people were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004 and over 10,000 died in 2005.
Why then do I think that over 44,000 are diagnosed each year and about 12,500 die? Ah yes its because I’ve read the (reliable?) CRUK statistics whcih tell me that yes there are over 44,000 new diagnoses each year and that in 2005 12,509 people (99% women) died of breast cancer. I haven’t checked back to thr Office of Statistics but these discrrpancies do nothing for the reputation of the cancer plan and not a lot for the reputation of statistics either.
Another interesting figure from CRUK. 20 years survival fro breast cancer currently 64% (but lot lot lower of course for anyone diagnosed at Stage 3 or Stage 4 and higher for those diagnosed with early breast cancer.)
Jane
37,000 is for England. Does the 44,000 plus relate to the UK?
Margaret
Christine Fogg, Joint Chief Executive of Breast Cancer Care, said in a press release:
“We are delighted to see that the Government has listened to patients and committed to a raft of new measures that could markedly improve the experience of those diagnosed, treated for and living with the disease. "
Did she not notice the dates of the documents? How does she now feel about BCC being put to wasted effort and expense collecting our views when we clearly haven’t been listened to?
Are any of the other charities involved offended?
Hi all
Vicky has asked me to post this.
Ann
Interactive Services Manager
Hello everyone
I have read your comments regarding the Department of Health’s Breast Cancer Vision. The consultation did indeed take place in June, with Emma Pennery, Nurse Consultant and Jane Hatfield, Director of Client Services, representing Breast Cancer Care. There was also a patient group, of which the DoH website has more details, but there wasn’t a wide public consultation.
Unfortunately the process from a consultation taking place where views are sought, gathering the information and then writing the Cancer Reform Strategy does take a long time - which is why the dates of the consultation are in June, but the Strategy only emerged this week.
At the Secondary Taskforce event we were able to put forward the issues relating to the Breast Cancer Vision as this is what we were aware of at the time, and the Secondary Taskforce will continue working to raise issues of access to treatments and psycho-social aspects of care as part of their campaigning work.
I hope this has helped. At Breast Cancer Care we really value your views and input, and work hard to ensure that the voices of those affected by breast cancer are heard.
If you would like to contact me to talk about this further, or have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at <script type=“text/javascript”>eval(unescape(‘%64%6f%63%75%6d%65%6e%74%2e%77%72%69%74%65%28%27%3c%61%20%68%72%65%66%3d%22%6d%61%69%6c%74%6f%3a%76%69%63%6b%79%6c%61%40%62%72%65%61%73%74%63%61%6e%63%65%72%63%61%72%65%2e%6f%72%67%2e%75%6b%22%3e%76%69%63%6b%79%6c%61%40%62%72%65%61%73%74%63%61%6e%63%65%72%63%61%72%65%2e%6f%72%67%2e%75%6b%3c%2f%61%3e%27%29%3b’))</script> or on 0845 092 0800
Kind regards
Vicky
Hi Vicky,
I went to the Secondary event in good faith and now I really feel it was a waste of time and money. We were being fed a line and many of the real questions that women wanted answers to were glossed over (i.e. access to drugs and trials). I will be far less likely to participate in any future initiatives. I am disappointed.
Jenny.
I think Jenny is referring to the “Time to be heard” Campaign launched 24 October?
How do others who attended, feel about this?
Lowering the age for screening wouldn’t have helped me because I was 39 at diagnosis. Because I was diagnosed at Stage IV I can’t have surgery or radiotherapy so none of those suggestions are any blooming use to me! Approximately 10% of new cases are diagnosed at Stage IV and any cancer plan needs to recognise the needs of patients who don’t conveniently fit into their neat little boxes.
Well said silverlady
Jane
I was the same as you Silverlady as I was just 40 when I was first diagnosed even though I had a strong family history but nothing was done until I actually found a lump.
Pinkdove
x