 Patient Advocate (1000+ posts)
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 1,384 Likes: 1 | Dare I say perhaps the "guidlines" are a clue to why recurrance survival statistics are so dismal?
Quoted statistics about the manual palpation is that 20 to 30% of the time it is not accurate. Yup I know we have been down this path before but I can't help but think that these "recurrances" are not recurrant at all! The cancer was there the whole time.
Advocacy is what this is all about and I think the guidelines are not considering technology improvements. Even the guidelines are rather "loose": 1 to 3 months, 2 to 4 ect. I believe that latitude is to allow for "CLOSER" followup as might be desirable in more advanced cases.
In my humble opinion, treatment (and followup) modalities based upon statistics of outcome will bring virtually no improvement in outcome. It also seem to me that the medical "industry" (which includes the insurers) are inclined to take a "this is the best we can do" position, when in fact there is much more that might be done.
Just as early detection is important in the origional diagnosis, Logic dictates it is important in "recurrant cases" as well.
Mark, 21 Year survivor, SCC right tonsil, 3 nodes positive, one with extra-capsular spread. I never asked what stage (would have scared me anyway) Right side tonsillectomy, radical neck dissection right side, maximum radiation to both sides, no chemo, no PEG, age 40 when diagnosed.
| 
