May 3, 2023 by Jacqueline Chartier

Defeating Cancer Misinformation

I know what it’s like to be diagnosed with a terrifying, complex, and potentially life-threatening medical condition — I’m an 11-year survivor of endometrioid adenocarcinoma. When I first learned that cancer had invaded my body, I was shocked and devastated. There was also the concern that as a newly diagnosed patient I had insufficient knowledge about cancer, or more specifically gynecological cancer. I’d never even heard the term endometrioid adenocarcinoma, so I knew next to nothing about my disease or how it would be treated. But then when I struggled on my own to find information or to learn more, I was often confused and felt overwhelmed.

I discovered, much to my dismay, that those of us searching for information about cancer are buried by an avalanche of false claims, from well-meaning but dangerous advice to callous exploitation by charlatans. I was at the most vulnerable point in my life and I felt disillusioned, especially by much of what I was exposed to online or on social media.

One 2016 report found that more than half of the most widely shared cancer articles on Facebook consisted of medically discredited claims. A more recent study examined the 50 most popular social media articles on the four most common types of cancers. The review found dangerous misinformation in more than 30 per cent of the articles analyzed and, perversely, that these articles garnered more online engagement than factual articles.

I’ve made it one of my personal goals to help fight the abundance of misinformation that is present regarding cancer. Misinformation in the form of dangerous half-truths and lies is often spread uncontrolled, either through deliberate malice or woeful ignorance. As a cancer survivor, I have particular distain for individuals, groups or organizations that deliberately attempt to exploit our vulnerability—it’s morally repulsive that they endeavor to benefit from our plight. We as cancer patents have access to millions of informational resources, but we’re forced to remain ever vigilant as we try to distinguish facts from a tide of lies and falsehoods.

How to Recognize Cancer Quacks

Use these important guidelines for spotting all categories of misinformation online.

Consider the primary source. Click away from the story you are reading to investigate the complete website, its mission and its contact information.

Read beyond the link or the first few lines of an article. Sometimes headlines can be outrageous in an effort to get clicks. What’s the whole story?

Confirm the author is reliable. Perform a quick search to get information on the author. Are they credible? Are they real?

If an article has listed supporting sources you should investigate by clicking on those links or searching for the sources. Determine if the source material that is given actually supports the content of the story.

Check the date. Reposting old news stories doesn’t mean they are still relevant to current events. New details or updated evidence on a topic are always emerging.

Is it a joke? If it is too outlandish, it might be intended as satire. Research the site and author to be sure.

Biases can influence how someone responds to an article, so consider if your own beliefs or perspective could be affecting your judgement. Remember that most social media platforms suggest stories that match a person’s interests, opinions and browsing habits.

I still believe that ultimately the ability to access health information online is important and empowering and helps patients be proactive in their own care. But because so much information is now available, the burden of deciding what is true or false is increasingly falling on individual consumers, in this case cancer patients and their loved ones.

Health care professionals, research and health care organizations, government agencies, as well as technology and social media companies all need to take more responsibility and play a role in addressing the problem. They must try to help individuals be more critical consumers of information. To this end, many consumer and patient advocates argue that social media and health literacy opportunities should be incorporated into the K–12 and college curricula.

Fortunately, there are lessons that can be learned by the cancer community from interventions to counter scientific conspiracy theories, especially efforts to counter antivaccine propaganda. Previous studies indicate that improved communication of the scientific consensus can overcome some popular conspiratorial thinking on a wide variety of topics, from vaccines to climate change.

We can take the “hidden” cure for cancer narrative as one example. The scientific and medical communities can counter this narrative by explaining that, far from being a monolithic entity, cancer is not one illness but an entire family of more than 200 diseases. Furthermore, these illnesses differ greatly between tissue type and even individual. How these malignancies respond to different interventions varies hugely, rendering the idea of a single “magic bullet” for all these myriad types exceptionally unlikely. The benefit of this approach is that it takes concerns seriously while still showing the concerns to be unfounded, ultimately improving understanding.

Sources

David Robert Grimes; The Struggle against Cancer Misinformation. Cancer Discov 1 January 2022; 12 (1): 26–30. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1468

Elia Ben-Ari; Addressing the Challenges of Cancer Misinformation on Social Media. 9 September, 2021; published by the National Cancer Institute.

FactCheck.org’s 2016 article How to Spot Fake News

March 4, 2021September 27, 2022 by Jacqueline Chartier

Why Most Cancer Patients Should Be Vaccinated Against Covid-19

Sometimes I marvel that I’m alive because of medical science and what it’s capable of in the fight against cancer, during the search for a COVID-19 vaccine my sense of wonder was renewed. Never before in human history have vaccines for a pathogen entered final stage clinical trials and received approval for distribution to the public so rapidly. Just over a year ago, when the death toll from the coronavirus stood at one and neither it nor the disease it caused had a name, a team of Chinese scientists uploaded its genetic sequence to a public site. That kicked off the record-breaking rush to develop vaccines. It’s difficult to associate anything to do with this pandemic with good fortune, but the fact that the culprit was a coronavirus — one that was strikingly similar to others that had previously leapt from animals to people — meant scientists could quickly rejigger vaccine projects in the works for those. It was almost like swapping a blue Lego for a red one in their assemblies.

In December 2020, Health Canada authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Soon there was more encouraging news when they officially authorized a second vaccine for the virus, an injection manufactured by Moderna. The first Canadians to be offered the country’s limited inventory of the vaccines were those considered to be most vulnerable, the staff and residents of nursing homes and long-term care homes were prioritized. The frontline doctors and nurses who have been risking their own lives during this pandemic were also given appointments to receive their immunizations against COVID-19. I watched, as some of the health care workers receiving the vaccine shed tears of joy and relief. Many proudly posted photographs of themselves getting vaccinated on social media, reassuring the public and preparing us all for when it would eventually be our turn.

Naturally there are segments of the population that are hesitant or sceptical about the new COVID-19 vaccines and are unsure if they should be immunized. History reveals that vaccine scepticism is as old as vaccines themselves. Increased resistance to compulsory smallpox vaccination during the 1870s and 1880s exposed the fragility of trust in both the political and medical establishment. The most radical opponents to vaccines used demonstrations and publishing to rally their cause. The situation is similar today, many doctors and infectious disease experts acknowledge that their work has been made more challenging due to the anti-vaccine movement.

Making sure that patients receive clear and accurate information is essential and everyone has a role to play. Ultimately preventing misinformation is a shared responsibility. The flow of medical knowledge works best when researchers, journalists and the public are strongly connected and considerate of one another. Nineteenth-century doctors tried to maintain boundaries between scientific journalism and the media, but were unable to prevent the public and journalistic demand for health information. That desire remains with us today. But even working together, the solution isn’t simple, experts maintain that changing behaviour in vaccine hesitant patients, isn’t always as easy as correcting misinformation. There’s still an emotional gap and trust gap that physicians regularly need to bridge in order to elicit this behavioural change.

Like all informed people, I accept the scientific conclusion that if you have active cancer, you’re at a higher risk for more serious outcomes if you acquire COVID-19. Cancer is considered an underlying medical condition. It’s a scientific fact that many cancer treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy, can weaken your immune system, making it harder for you to fight the virus. Initial clinical trials on COVID-19 vaccines did not include people with cancer or those receiving treatments that can suppress the immune system. However, many professional organizations are endorsing the vaccines’ safety and efficacy for this group. Since individuals living with cancer are at increased risk of serious illness resulting from COVID-19, there is growing consensus among health authorities and oncologists that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. Some exceptions include people who are severely immunocompromised or who have certain severe allergies .The National Cancer Institute emphasizes that people, including those with underlying medical conditions such as cancer, may get vaccinated if they have no history of severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any component of the vaccine.

As a final point, cancer patients going through active treatment are definitely at higher risk for COVID-19 complications, but what about cancer survivors or those whose cancer is in remission, such as myself? Little data is available to date on how the virus affects cancer survivors, but some early research suggests that we might also be at a higher risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. One UK study found that the majority of comorbidities thought to be associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes were more common in the cancer survivors than the cancer-free controls. In general, cancer survivors had significantly higher rates of diabetes, asthma, and other respiratory disease, as well as more chronic heart, liver, and renal disease, and neurologic conditions, than controls. Nine years after my cancer diagnosis I appear fortunate to have few of these lasting health complications. Still I’ve made up my mind, after considering the research and the scientific facts, that I will be getting vaccinated as soon as I’m given the opportunity.

A Unique Kind of Fear

Finding out you have cancer, I can personally attest, is a unique kind of fear, but I believe this feeling is heightened even more for women who learn that they have ovarian cancer. It’s among the most feared and deadly cancers, one that tends to inhabit our worst nightmares of the disease. That is why patients with gynecologic cancer, especially ovarian, are frequently warned not to Google their condition or research it online. Admittedly most of the information that is available on websites is general or focusses on worst case scenarios. Oncologists are eager to remind us that broad statistics don’t take into consideration an individual patient’s age or overall health. In many cases the data presented is likely to overlook a lot of specific variables. Even so, when I go online the numbers pertaining to ovarian cancer are enough to terrify me.

Devastating Statistics

Ovarian cancer is the eighth leading cause of cancer in women, according to the World Health Organization. Nearly 300,000 women worldwide will develop it this year. On a global scale their prospects are often bleak, it’s estimated that one in six will die within three months of diagnosis and fewer than half will be alive in five years.

Each year about 3,100 Canadian women are newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer and an estimated 1,950 die from it. Mortality rates for ovarian cancer have declined only slightly in the forty years since the “War on Cancer” was declared. Most other cancers have shown a much greater reduction in mortality.

Ovarian cancer survival rates remain much lower than breast cancer and other cancers that affect women. Five-year survival rates are commonly used to compare different cancers. In Canada, the five-year net survival for ovarian cancer is approximately 44 per cent. This means that, on average, only about 44 per cent of the women who are diagnosed with ovarian cancer will survive for at least 5 years.

Like a Loaded Gun

One woman with ovarian cancer compared the fear of recurrence to a person always having a loaded gun pressed against her back. You never know when they will pull the trigger, or even if they will, but every minute you are conscious of them being there. I find this metaphor quite powerful, you never know if or when your cancer will return and this uncertainty is something that you must accept as part of your everyday life. A cancer recurrence happens because some cancer cells were left behind and eventually grow and become apparent. The cancer may come back to the same place as the original tumor or to another place in the body. According to the Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance around 70 per cent of patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer will have a recurrence. However, one of the most important factors in determining an individual’s risk of recurrence is the stage of their cancer at diagnosis.

Patients diagnosed with stage I have a 10 per cent chance of recurrence.

Patients diagnosed with stage II have a 30 per cent chance of recurrence.

Patients diagnosed with stage III have a 70 to 90 per cent chance of recurrence

Patients diagnosed with stage IV have a 90 to 95 per cent chance of recurrence.

Recurrent ovarian cancer is treatable but rarely curable. Women with recurrent ovarian cancer may have to undergo another surgery. Many women with recurrent ovarian cancer receive chemotherapy for a prolonged period of time, sometimes continuously for the rest of their life.

*Elly Mayday (1988-2019) continued her modelling career while undergoing treatment for ovarian cancer.*

Braver Than I Thought

I’ve learned that when you are diagnosed with cancer there are moments when you become overwhelmed and sense that your world is spinning violently out of control. However, the fundamental paradox for me is that I’m often in situations where I feel a sense of power, combined with courage and self-assurance. It’s as if I’m standing in life’s Category 5 hurricane and remaining steadfast and unbroken. I certainly don’t aspire to become a legend like Terry Fox or to be anything resembling a saint or a cancer hero. But still, I’ve discovered inner qualities and personal strengths that I never appreciated or properly acknowledged in myself. Subjected to the ultimate test, I’ve sometimes shocked myself with my enormous capacity to overcome adversity and to confront physical pain and suffering.

December 10, 2018 by Jacqueline Chartier

The Five W’s of Cancer

The moment I was diagnosed with cancer I entered a psychological realm where wanting to know everything about my disease alternated with fear and aversion. Once the initial shock wore off I realized that I would need accurate information in order to navigate my horrific, and sometimes terrifying, journey through ovarian cancer. Never in my life have I felt so simultaneously overwhelmed by an abundance of medial information and frustrated by a lack of it. This ambiguity of emotions is understandable in cancer patients, as they undergo treatment for some of the most complex and difficult to understand diseases within the field of medical science.

Simply explained, every cell in the body has a tightly regulated system that dictates when it needs to grow, mature and eventually die off. Cancer occurs when cells lose this control and divide and proliferate indiscriminately. Theories, treatments and possible explanations for cancer are abundant. They range from the factual or medically proven to the bizarre, absurd and downright dangerous. Regrettably there are a few contemptible individuals who knowingly try to profit from cancer patients or exploit our unique physical, emotional and psychological needs. I’m a journalism school graduate and I believe this has given me a better perspective than some patients when I’m confronted with information through online or traditional media.

newspaper

Whenever I read something pertaining to cancer I always keep in mind the Five W’s that I was taught when I was studying journalism.

Who?

Who carried out the research, and who funded them? If the Academy of American Poets or the League of Canadian Poets is telling you about a new study they funded showing that reading poetry is good for your health, it doesn’t mean that they’re wrong, but they have a vested interest. Knowing who is quoted in a story or who is commenting is also important. Stories often include comments from experts who weren’t involved in the study – these opinions have the power to help clarify how the results fit into the wider context, and whether they’re worth paying attention to. But still be aware of who’s commenting on the study.

What?

What did the researchers actually do? Was the study looking at cells in a dish, mice or patients? These are all crucial stages of testing a new cancer drug. New drugs can’t be tested in patients immediately – cell and animal studies are needed first to check if experimental treatments are safe, effective and worth further investigation. Keep in mind that in an ideal experiment only one thing will be changed at a time, so that you know any differences are because of that one change. In many cases it’s tricky, but not impossible, to try to pin down how much different variables affect cancer risk. Scientists can try to account for the things that cloud the picture, but there will always be gaps. And that’s why cancer research takes a long time, and needs to involve a lot of people.

Where?

Oncologists and cancer experts aim to publish their results in journals, where their findings are scrutinized by others in their field – a kind of quality assurance called peer review. But oncologists share their work in other ways, particularly at conferences. Often these results are preliminary or don’t have as much information as would be in a published paper. In addition, much of the data is not yet peer reviewed. Unfortunately, these findings are often reported in the news with the same prominence, even though the results might be a long way from the finished article that is beng worked on.

When?

When was the study carried out, and how long did it run for? A week? A month? A year? The longer the better – long-term effects might be missed if you only look at a short timeframe. And if the study looks at people, are the data from the last few years, or from decades ago? An older study might have had more time to look at long-term consequences, but a more recent study could mean that the findings are more relevant to current lifestyle habits.

How Many?

How many subjects took part in the research? And who or what were those participants. Was it 10 mice? 100 patients? 1000? Generally, the more used, the more reliable the results are.

How much?

A recent headline, People who eat organic food are 25 per cent less likely to get cancer, sounds as though you had better eat organic if you want to significantly reduce your cancer risk. However, the headline uses what’s called a relative risk. The study of almost 70.000 volunteers found only a tiny 0.6% reduction in terms of absolute risk. It might also be important to keep in mind that people who buy organic tend to be richer, eat more fruit and vegetables, consume less meat and drink less alcohol.

In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that I don’t mean to condemn cancer research or the media where many crucial findings are reported. Most reporting will be accurate and responsible, and even when it isn’t it doesn’t mean that there’s malice behind any mistakes. Communicating science is extremely complicated, and it’s impossible for science journalists to be flawless all the time.

July 6, 2017August 15, 2019 by Jacqueline Chartier

Keep Your Eyes on the Prize

Now only thing I did was wrong
Staying in the wilderness too long
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on

The only thing we did was right
Was the day we started to fight
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on

Popular American Civil Rights Anthem

When the provincial government unveiled the design for the new Calgary Cancer Centre last month, it was arguably the most significant moment for southern Alberta’s cancer community in a generation. The new centre will reportedly have twice as much space available for clinical trials and for patient treatment as the aging Tom Baker Centre now has. Construction of the facility at the Foothills Medical Centre, which is already Alberta’s largest hospital complex, will start later this year.

PCL Construction Management Inc. was awarded a $1.1 billion design-build contract for the cancer centre. Stantec in conjunction with DIALOG, will ultimately be responsible for the architectural and interior design of the new cancer centre, as well as structural and electrical engineering. Stantec will also provide civil and transportation engineering expertise.

The new facility will be located at the northeast corner of the Foothills campus. It will span more than one million square feet. The design includes a 1,650-stall underground parking garage and a 984-linear foot elevated walkway connecting it with other parts of the Foothills campus.

Services at the new cancer centre will include:

outpatient cancer clinics
more than 100 patient exam rooms
160 inpatient unit beds
more than 100 chemotherapy chairs
clinical and operational support services
double the space for clinical trials
research laboratories
12 radiation vaults
double the capacity to treat patients with the best technology

“What this building allows us to do is really integrate care across the cancer continuum and integrate cancer research and education within the cancer care delivery model,” said Dr. Sunil Verma, the medical lead for the new facility.

Verma said that with one in three Albertans expected to be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives and a five per cent growth rate each year, the existing Tom Baker Cancer Centre will soon be stretched beyond its capacity.

calgary-cancercentre — Premier Rachel Notley (left), Associate Minister of Health Brandy Payne, (centre) and cancer survivor Susan Cardinal examine a 3D model of the future Calgary Cancer Centre that will soon be under construction.

Personally, I’ll miss the iconic Tom Baker Centre, but I look forward to the opening of a desperately needed new building. Like the majority of patients undergoing treatment at the Baker Centre I have mixed feelings regarding my experience. I’m definitely impressed by the top-notch care I’ve received from the dedicated staff and volunteers. However, I’m alarmed by the all too obviously crowded quarters. On my visits I find it impossible not to notice how filled to capacity the building is—I’ve been subjected to the overflowing parking lot, the busy chemotherapy beds and the standing room only waiting areas.

The Tom Baker Cancer Centre has been serving men and women diagnosed with cancer for approximately a generation now; it opened its doors over 30 years ago in the early 1980s. At the time, Albertan’s marveled at the spacious and innovative new facility. There was incredible pride in the centre by those involved in its creation. The building had been meticulously designed to provide cancer care for Calgary’s population of 600,000 and the rest of southern Alberta. What is more, the new Baker Centre had cutting-edge technology, a first-rate young staff and space, an abundance of space.

I can imagine what it was like for those involved, because the sense of joy and anticipation among patients and their loved ones is once again palpable. It’s a sweet victory, we’ve waited over a decade and withstood the disappointment of several broken promises to build a new Calgary cancer centre. I can’t be certain what my future will bring or what role the new cancer will play in my life. But with construction scheduled to begin in just a few months, and completion planned by 2023, I definitely feel as though I have my eyes on the prize.

July 12, 2016February 3, 2020 by Jacqueline Chartier

Because it’s 2016: A New Era for Cancer Patients

One of the most stunning realizations that I’ve had since being diagnosed with cancer is how much cancer impacts the whole person—the disease can undermine almost every aspect of a person’s life. The field of oncology acknowledges this, at least more than it did four decades ago when my grandmother survived her breast cancer diagnosis. Today most cancer patients, including myself, have access to social workers, psychologists, dieticians and other skilled professionals. Treating the whole person and recognizing that each patient has unique issues and needs have become firmly entrenched and are part of the philosophy of cancer care.

At my cancer centre there are now two forms that patients are asked to fill out at every checkup. The first contains questions to gage a patient’s physical wellbeing as they go thorough treatment, but a second questionnaire was recently added. This latest form is used to gather information about the various psychosocial issues that are associated with cancer. Certain social, financial or mental health issues may need to be addressed. While I sometimes resent having to answer what I consider highly personal questions, I realize the importance of asking cancer patients about almost every aspect of their lives.

Research Breakthroughs

Dr. Barbara Vanderhyden, one of Canada’s preeminent ovarian cancer researchers, recalls that when she began her work she was one of the only people in Canada researching the disease. Over a decade ago Vanderhyden started the Canadian Conference on Ovarian Cancer Research and now the community has grown from three people to more than 60 ovarian cancer researchers across the country. This flourishing research community has led to a number of recent discoveries. For instance, it is now known that ovarian cancer is not one disease but a spectrum of diseases with different responses to treatment.

I’m frequently amazed at the lightening speed at which new cancer treatments are being discovered and implemented. For example, immunotherapy is an emerging approach to treatment that boosts the immune response to cancer. It enables the body to target and destroy cancer cells. There are three main areas of immunotherapy that are showing promise.

Vaccines that enhance immune system response
Inhibitors that affect how the immune system regulates itself
Adoptive T-cell transfer, which removes a patient’s cancer-fighting T-cells and activates them before returning them to the bloodstream

Although gynecological cancers, such as mine, have seen only modest breakthroughs in immunotherapy, melanoma and lung cancer are areas that are witnessing great progress.

New Targeted Treatments

According to many scientists a new era of cancer treatment is beginning in which patients get drugs matched specifically to their tumour. Patients experience longer survival and fewer toxic effects through this approach, which is being made possible by advances in genetic profiling of the tumour itself. Conventional chemotherapy and radiation treatments have both short-term and long-term side effects and can be absolutely brutal for patients to endure. These treatments kill a significant number of healthy cells in addition to the cancer cells. “At the moment it’s more like using a cannonball to kill an ant – and creating a whole lot of damage at the same time,” explains professor Roy Herbst, chief of medical oncology at Yale Cancer Centre.

Meanwhile a UK trial, called Optima, is being run by University College London and Cambridge University and funded by Cancer Research UK. Beginning this summer, it will recruit 4,500 women with breast cancer. The women’s tumours will be genetically tested as soon as they are diagnosed to establish which will respond to chemotherapy and which will not. Of the 50,000 or so women diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK each year, about 40 per cent, or 20,000, are currently given chemotherapy but only half of them do well as a result of it; in the other half, the benefit is unclear. The researchers hope to find out which of the latter group actually need chemotherapy. As one oncologist emphasized: “In some ways it is simple – it means that you can make sure you are giving the right drug to the right person at the right time. In others it is very complex, because there are so many pieces to the jigsaw. We need to put the puzzle together.”

May 6, 2016July 6, 2016 by Jacqueline Chartier

Relying on the Web: What Cancer Patients Should Know

When I was first diagnosed with cancer, I entered a psychological realm where wanting to know everything about the disease alternated with fear and aversion. Numb and in shock, I would often read over my three-page pathology report, using various websites to meticulously research the strange and frightening terminology it contained.

I’m not alone in feeling this way or in turning to the Internet for help. Nearly half of all Canadian adults are asking questions about cancer, and most turn first to the web for information. The problem is that this self-research is leaving many cancer patients confused, overwhelmed and stressed out. Although we tend to use the Internet as our first resource, most of us don’t have strong faith in the information that it provides.

According to a new survey commissioned by the Canadian Cancer Society, when it comes to getting definitive cancer information, doctors and healthcare professionals are trusted by 94 per cent of Canadians. In spite of that only eight per cent of Canadians contacted their healthcare team first with questions. Similarly, cancer organizations and charities are trusted by 87 per cent of those seeking information, but less than five per cent of Canadians searching for cancer information reached out to them. People are more skeptical of online sources with only 69 per cent trusting the information. Despite their uncertainty, 85 per cent of people with cancer questions first turned to a search engine.

Why do Canadians so frequently consult the web for information about cancer if they place more confidence in their oncologist and organizations such as the Canadian Cancer Society? According to the survey, convenience is an issue. While the web is easily accessible, more than half of respondents said it is challenging to get time to speak with their healthcare team. But ease of use comes with unexpected side effects. Two-thirds of Internet users felt overwhelmed with information, and 62 per cent felt stressed out and worried, jumping to 70 per cent among Canadians 18 to 34.

There are several alternatives to randomly searching the web that I would strongly recommend.

Use Only Reliable Internet Sites

My cancer facility, the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in Calgary, provides patients with a list of recommend websites. Here are a few of the most essential ones.

American Cancer Society
Canadian Cancer Society
National Cancer Institute
CancerNet
Oncolink

Use The Canadian Cancer Society’s Cancer Information Service

Since 1996, the Canadian Cancer Society has answered 1,250,000 questions through its Cancer Information Service. The Society’s toll-free bilingual Cancer Information Service can be reached at 1-888-939-3333. Assistance is available to cancer patients, caregivers, the general public and healthcare professionals. An information specialist will take all the time you need to answer your questions and provide you with information on the following topics:

cancer treatment and side effects
clinical trials
coping with cancer
emotional support services
prevention
help in the community
complementary therapies

The Canadian Cancer Society’s phone line is available during business hours Monday to Friday. You should also note that when you contact the Cancer Information Service for help, your privacy is protected and you will not be asked for donations or put on a mailing list.

Access Support Organizations for Your Specific Cancer Type

Instead of randomly searching the Internet try connecting with an organization that specializes in providing support to individuals with your type of cancer. For example, staff in Ovarian Cancer Canada’s regional offices are available to answer your questions and to provide support via telephone or email. Ovarian Cancer Canada hosts webinars, workshops and events that are relevant to women living with the disease. You can also listen to various educational recordings on their YouTube channel.

Finally, Ovarian Cancer Canada offers a comprehensive guide to support and inform women who have been newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer. The publication is called By Your Side and printed copies of this resource are provided free of charge across Canada. You can Order By Your Side by filling out an online form or by calling 1-877-413-7970 (toll free).

May 21, 2015July 6, 2016 by Jacqueline Chartier

Time Heals: Today’s Cancer Patients Owe a Debt of Gratitude to Generations Past

Only recently have I started to think a great deal about the history of cancer or the oncologists and patients that have come before me. I developed a fascination with these topics while watching the PBS miniseries Cancer: The Emperor of All Maladies. This three part series skillfully explores the medical and scientific aspects of cancer; even more impressive is the wonderful job that the producers have done of delving into its history and politics.

The creators of the groundbreaking television documentary based their project on a strong work of non-fiction by renowned oncologist and award winning journalist Siddhartha Mukherjee. Both the PBS documentary and Mukherjee’s Pulitzer Prize winning volume have one overriding theme. They bring to light that our current generation’s experience with cancer represents only a momentary chapter in an epic battle spanning thousands of years.

The Emergence of Modern Cancer Surgery

When I was diagnosed with fairly advanced cancer in my uterus and right ovary, the first, and most essential, part of my medical treatment involved surgery. I literally owe my life to the skill of my pelvic cancer surgeons and to the sophisticated surgical techniques available in the 21st century. Ovarian cancer is still the most serious of all women’s cancers, and the survival rates can be quite grim—the positive news is that the outlook has improved in recent decades, largely due to better surgical procedures.

For centuries surgery to remove cancerous tumours wasn’t a viable option, as the medical technology wasn’t yet available. In extremely rare cases a physician would attempt to cut out a cancerous growth. However, the circumstances would have been barbaric by today’s standards. There was no method to properly anesthetize patients and they were frequently operated on while conscious, in addition there was no use of modern antiseptics to keep the surgical wounds from becoming infected.

The late 19th century witnessed the origins of present-day cancer surgery. Anesthetics such as either were discovered and this made lengthier, more complex operations possible. Procedures such as the radical mastectomy for breast cancer were successfully devised and implemented during this era. As a matter of fact, the medical community firmly believed that it was possible to cure cancer through surgery alone. The nature of how cancer spreads to distant sites in the body wasn’t yet well understood. Most experts mistakenly believed that its recurrence months or years after surgery was strictly due to not taking out enough tissue, reappearance of the disease was caused by the growth of fragments of the principle tumour that were left behind.

The Development of Chemotherapy

Dr. Sidney Farber

The nature of metastasis is much better understood today and a patient with gynecological cancer, such as myself, is routinely offered chemotherapy following surgery. Of course only in the past 40 or 50 years have powerful chemotherapy drugs been introduced to the arsenal in the war against cancer. Oncologist Sidney Farber (1903-1973) is considered by most historians to be the father of chemotherapy. Farber and his team in Boston began trials on children with leukemia in the late 1940s. At this time leukemia was still a death sentence for any child diagnosed with the disease.

Farber’s new therapy was almost miraculous in the sense that it led to remission in many of his young patients. Some of the children, including a patient named Robert Sandler, had their lives extended by months after the potent chemicals were administered to them. The leukemia would virtually disappear and they would momentarily resume an active childhood. Throughout the 1950s and 60s, Farber continued to make advances in cancer research, notably the 1955 discovery that the antibiotic actinomycin D and radiation therapy could produce remission in Wilms’ tumor, a pediatric cancer of the kidneys.

What the Future Holds

As I battle ovarian cancer I try to be realistic about how far treatment has come, I know there is still an extremely long way to go in the war against this insidious disease. Over the last two decades, the five-year survival rate for patients with ovarian cancer has improved significantly. Yet, according to the experts, no more than 30 per cent of long-term ovarian cancers are currently being cured. Oncologists admit that they are facing enormous challenges. While surgical advances and new treatment approvals, including Lynparza (olaparib) and Avastin (bevacizumab), have improved the outlook for ovarian cancer patients, late diagnosis and tumour resistance remain as the two most significant barriers in overcoming the disease.

Meanwhile, the medical community is continuously developing new treatments for cancer, one of the most promising is called immunotherapy. For decades oncologists have known that the immune system plays an important role in certain types of cancer. They noted that there were rare spontaneous remissions of cancer without treatment and they suspected that this was because the immune system was attacking the tumour. Immunotherapy is designed to boost the body’s natural defenses to fight the cancer. Medical specialists use materials either made by the body or in a laboratory to improve, target, or restore immune system function.

At the present time it isn’t entirely clear how immunotherapy works against cancer, it may function by stopping or slowing the growth of cancer cells, stopping cancer from spreading to other parts of the body, or helping the immune system increase its effectiveness at eliminating cancer cells. There are currently several types of immunotherapy in use, including monoclonal antibodies, non-specific immunotherapies, and cancer vaccines.

The Teal Diaries: An Ovarian Cancer Journey

by Jacqueline Chartier

Category / cancer research