What is the survival rate of pancreatic cancer?
According to the American Cancer Society, for all stages of pancreatic cancer combined, the one-year relative survival rate is 20% and the five-year rate is 4%. These low survival rates are attributable to the fact that fewer than 10% of patients' tumors are confined to the pancreas alone at the time of diagnosis. In most cases, the malignancy has already progressed to the point where surgical removal is impossible.
3 people found this useful
Answer . Of all those people diagnosed with cancer of the gallbladder fewer than 1 in 20 people (5%) will be alive 5 years later.\n. \nStage 0 and 1\nIf you have such an …early stage of cancer of the gallbladder, you are most likely to have a simple cholecystectomy. About 60 out of every 100 people (60%) diagnosed with stage 0 disease and 50 out of every 100 people (50%) diagnosed with stage 1 gallbladder cancer will live for at least 5 years after this operation. \n. \nSome surgeons believe that taking out nearby lymph nodes and some liver tissue during the operation helps stop the cancer returning. They believe this will improve the long term outcome for people with stage 1 gallbladder cancer. This operation is called an extended cholecystectomy. In some countries (such as Japan, where incidence rates for gallbladder cancer are higher than the UK or USA) this operation is standard treatment for stage 1 gallbladder cancer. The 5 year survival rates for stage 1 gallbladder cancer are better in Japan. Between 70 and 80 out of every 100 people (70 - 80%) diagnosed with stage 1 gallbladder cancer in Japan will survive 5 years or longer after an extended cholecystectomy.\n. \nStage 2\nFewer than 20 out of every 100 people (20%) will survive 5 years or longer with stage 2 gallbladder cancer . If you have an extended cholecystectomy or more extensive surgery, then you may have a slightly better chance than this.\n. \nStage 3\nAs you might expect, the survival statistics fall as the stage of gallbladder cancer goes up. About 5 out of every 100 people (5%) diagnosed with stage 3 gallbladder cancer live for at least 5 years. For people whose cancer is too far advanced for surgery when they are diagnosed, the average survival time is about 6 months but some may live for up to 2 years.\n. \nStage 4\nUnfortunately most people diagnosed have stage 4 gallbladder cancer, so their cancer has already spread. Understandably, the survival statistics are lower than for stage 3 gallbladder cancers. Doctors generally think a patient is doing very well if they are still alive 2 years after being diagnosed with gallbladder cancer that has spread. Fewer than 2 out of every 100 people (2%) diagnosed with stage 4 gallbladder cancer live for 5 years or more.\n. \nHow reliable are cancer statistics?\nNo statistics can tell you what will happen to you. Your cancer is unique. The same type of cancer can grow at different rates in different people for example. \n. \nThe statistics are not detailed enough to tell you about the different treatments people may have had. And how that treatment may have affected their prognosis. There are many individual factors that will determine your treatment and prognosis.
"Survival Rates for Cancer" basics . There are many factors when it comes to "Survival rates for cancer". At what stage was the cancer discovered? For example mammograms …are used as a preventative measure against breast cancer. Older men are routinely screened for PSA in their blood as a way of early detection of prostate cancer. Other cancers are harder to detect, such as lung cancer, ovarian cancer to name a few. Good screening practices are in development for these cancers as well as many others. Early detection generally means a better survival rate for most cancers-not all of them though. Another factor is age, children's survival rates on average for cancer-in general, are as high as 80%. Older and elderly people have a higher mortality rate in comparison. Another factor is if the cancer is discovered, how big is it? Has is grown quickly? Has it spread to other areas of the body? All of that will affect survial rates for cancer. Survival rates vary widely around the world and vary depending on the prevelance of a specific type of cancer in a specific country. For example, cervival cancer is the number one cancer for women in Morroco, which is not the case in the United States-which also happens to have pap smears as a standard form of a woman's gynecological exam, and are excellent for early detection of extrodinarily early abnormal cervical cancerous cells which can be treated. I would hazard a guess, based on the statistics that that is not the case for women in Morroco-to make sure, I would go to the World Health Organization's web site for the most current statistics. Here are some web sites that may help:. www.nih.gov web site of the National Institute of Health www.who.org web site of the World Health Organization
The breast cancer survival rate varies greatly on the patient andtheir response to treatment. Breast cancer survival rates for earlydetection are 100%. Stage 2 breast cancer h…as a survival rate of 93percent, the stage 3 survival rate is 72 percent, and the stage 4survival rate is 22 percent.
The survival rate depends on what stage your cancer is diagnosedin. For one, it is 74 percent, for stage four, it is 6 percent.
When tumors are in the early stages and have not grown into the bladder wall, they can usually be removed by an outpatient surgical procedure. The five-year survival rate for …patients with early stage bladder cancer is 85%. Fortunately, most patients with bladder cancer (up to 80%) will be diagnosed with a superficial tumor. If a tumor has grown into the wall of the bladder but has not spread to other organs, treatment usually involves surgical removal of the tumor, or combined chemotherapy and radiation therapy, with a five-year survival rate of 60%-75%. In more advanced cases, with spread of the cancer to other sites in the body, more aggressive treatment plans must be considered. Per: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=47973
If we take a look at all pancreatic cancers, one-year survival rate is about 20%. The five-year rate drops to about 5%. These dismal figures are probably due to the fact that …about 9 out of 10 patients have a tumor or tumors in other places as well as the pancreas when they are diagnosed. Very often it is seen that malignancy is extensive and outside surgical intervention.. Should resection be done, a patient might expect to survive for one and a half to two years. The five-year rate rises to about 10%. It may get into the 20% to 25% range if complete removal of the tumor is accomplished, provided the lymph nodes are free of invasion.. The American Cancer Society generally has data (including statistics) for the different types of cancer. A link to their posting on pancreatic cancer can be found below.
The breast cancer survival rate in today's society varies. It depends a great deal on how far the cancer has spread. If surgery, chemo, or radiation work, the survival rate …is 100%, but sadly if the cancer is too far spread or does not respond to treatment the rate is poor.
No, not by conventional, allopathic medicine as promoted by the FDA, AMA and the Rockefellers. The Rockefellers are intersted in population reduction, making money, influencin…g government legislation, world government, and so on.. My sister's inlaws did not want to hear about any alternative medicine methods for treatment of her mother-in-law's pancreatic cancer. These inlaws mostly did not graduate high school, and worshipped medical practitioners as gods. The mother-in-law was diagnosed after the actor Patrick Swayze. Whereas she plunged whole heartedly into allopathc medical treatments for the cancer including intense radiation, chemotherapy around November, Swayze did not. She died months later in 2008 in late February or early March from the treatments--not the disease. Patrick Swayze died one year and six months after this inlaw died. Some places where you look, you will find that statistics indicate that conventionally treated patients live shorter than alternatively treated ones. Months before being diagnosed, she was being heavily treated with various medications for pain and infection after she took a fall down the stairs and fractured vertabrae in her neck and had to wear a metal support system that was screwed into her skull to permit her neck to heal. This injury and the medication, and booze may have assisted the cancerous condition to take hold, and possibly delay the proper diagnosis from being made sooner. . If you think about it a bit, if a medical study is fraudulent, you are less likely to discover it because there are all sorts of hidden tricks that can be done to make the study turn out the way that the sponsors of the study want it to. You are looking at a team of a few smart doctor medical scientists who 97% of the time have a financial conflict of interest because they were and may still be employed by the drug company or hospitals carrying out the treatments that they are trying to prove is / are good ones. . On the otherhand, tens of thousands of individuals have come forward with testimonials saying that one or another of very many different alternative cancer treatments saved their individual lives even after they were pronounced a lost cause by conventional medicine. What is the likelihood that a person who is disinterested in your case, who was pronounced at the virge of death's door, who tried any number of diet and herb or super cheap electromedicine treatments is lying to you--they have nothing to sell to you, and have only found themselves in this situation after conventional medicine had given them up for dead, and have told you their solution to cancer for free. I think that the honesty of the vested interests of the medical scientists have to be called into question before any of the thousands of alternative medicine patient cancer survivors' honesty is called into question--it is just the law of averages that the few vested interests who want your money directly are going to be dishonest before thousands of strangers who were patients trying all sorts of different methods to save their own lives are going lie--these patients have nothing to gain from you. . There are very many historical accounts of suppressed cures for all sorts of diseases, inventions, and scientific discoveries. Many of these have a common thread--money. . The current "money powers that be" do not want to have low cost competing products and services introduced onto the market place. To prevent this they have lobbied governments heavily to enact legislation to stop it. These money men are monopolists who want a monopoly as your ownly choice from which to receive treatment. In the case of medicine, the history is fairly clear. Ever since the USA 1910 Flexner report was presented, Western medicine has all but outlawed anything that does not push patented, money making drugs, and expensive chronic disease treatment methods. The conventional medical research since the 1930s has made virtually no progress for many forms of cancer since five year survival rates remain the same. . Laetrile / amygdalin, the Beck Protocol, Budwig diet, Gerson therapy, chelation therapy, Royal Rife radio frequency treatments, Antione Priore machine treatments, Georges Lahkovsky multiple wave oscillator treatments, metabolic therapy, medical ozone therapy, anti-fungal treatments (see Cancer as a fungus), oxygen therapy, peroxide treatments, cansema black salve medication, THC hemp oil extract (See the Rick Simpson Story). All of these alternative therapies and more are pooh-poohed unscientifically by the invested interest groups comprised of surgeons, drug companies, medical schools, and allopathic medical practitioners. . Some non-vested, non-conflicted medical studies are finally starting to happen. South Korean medical scientists have labeled Laetrile as a very promising cancer control. Lots of studies of THC are being done in Europe whereas Rockefeller / drug company induced prohibition on cannabis in America has prevented researhers here from experimenting with the natural, unpatentable substance--otherwise they would face stiff jail time for possession, and attempting to re-prove / confirm its many anti-cancer benefits. . Chemotherapy involves taking a known cellular toxic substance and injecting it into the bloodstream of the patient. These toxins kill everything at varying rates. The goal is to kill fast growing cells like cancer tumor cells. Unfortunately hair cells are also fast growing and get killed off by chemotherapy. The human immune system is also fast growing so that it can change and adapt to newly introduced germs-it too is killed off by chemotherapy. By killing the immune system, and poisoning many other types of cells, chemotherapy risks doing too much damage to the entire body by making it defenseless to all sorts of other secondary infectious diseases, and also risks that the cancer spread unchecked by the immune system that would normally attempt to destroy diseased cells. . See the related links below.
The cancer industry as practiced by Western medicine is corrupted by money powers who historically have influenced medical training and the funding of science to insure their …monopoly control. The system has been so structured to prevent competition with existing money making drugs and treatment methods. . Because of this medical mafia, health freedom in many Western societies is gone. The survival rate is largely that of this conventional type of medicine that has been characterized accurately as cutting (surgery), burning (radiation), and poisoning (use of patentable pharmaceutical drugs). The statistics for 5 year survival is very nearly zero for conventional cancer therapies because the underlying cause of the disease which usually is a poorly balanced diet, and genetic susceptibility to environmental toxins is rarely if ever addressed. . Dr. Ralph Moss exposed the Rockefeller controlled Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center for having covered up many successful double blind studies conducted on Laetrile / Amygdalin. . Electro-medicine can be used to treat cancer. Its use is instantly, unscientifically dismissed as quackery and nostrums by mainstream / Rockefeller-supported scientists, and medical practitioners who see this as a huge threat to business as usual since it would otherwise successfully compete with many of their ineffective, and prohibitively expensive chronic treatments of various diseases. . According to an on-line acquaintance of mine, wood pulp run paper mill owners bribed congressmen to license, then ban the growth of hemp / cannabis in 1937 while up until that time hemp was one of the largest cash crops in America where paper, cloth, rope, and medicines were made from the natural substance that could not be patented. The properties of THC, and cannabinoids now being studied must now be conducted in Europe due to "new world order" laws made by corrupt money powers supporting the phony war on drugs that spends 90% of its funds incarcerating non-violent marijuana possession and dealing cases in America, Canada, and the UK. . The AMA, FDA and other government departments create and enforce laws that foster the growth and monopoly of the corrupt money powers in the world by stifling new, competing medical treatments that would threaten planned and implemented money schemes. . Mainstream medicine and alternative medicine camps agree that overall health is improved with good diet. The arguments come when deciding what items to include in a good diet. . The money powers had taken partial control of mainstream media since around the time of WW1 when in 1917 Texas Congressman Oscar Callaway entered into the record that 25 of the most influential newspapers had been taken over by J.P. Morgan, and other powerful industrial and banking interests to generally control the editorial policy to be able to steer the opinions of the public the the aims and desires of the tycoons. The tycoons did this in 1915 so that they could get the USA into WW1 to both make wartime armament sales and to make huge international banking loans to both sides of the war with the explicit understanding that the winner would pay the debts of the loser. . In modern times there is practically a monopoly control of the mainstream media where only about 8 corporations own all of the major TV, newspaper, and radio stations in the USA. This makes the chances of learning about any contrary medical or science information very slim. . Every major war in the last 100 years has been enticed by trickery of the money powers in order to make more money. In recent times, a quiet disclosure was made by a Vietnam war cabinet member. . An extract From "The Fog of War". An interview with Robert S McNamara who was Secretary of Defense during the Kennedy and Johnson presidencies during the Vietnam war has it that the Gulf of Tonkin incident that kicked off full scale war efforts during the Vietnam war never actually happened. It was a mistake of sonar operators who were seeing water temperature anomalies and thinking that they were torpedo attacks, all of which somehow managed to miss their battle ship. . See the links and related questions below...
Thyroid cancer has a good outlook of survival, with 95%.
Depending on the course of treatment your doctor may decide on (eg, removing the tumor(s), administering steroids to reduce inflammation, radiotherapy), your survival rate can… be anywhere from 75-90%, so long as the cancer doesn't metastisise anywhere else.
picture of nasal cancer outside-how does it look and what is the survival rate
pancreatic cancer is one of the most deadly cancers out there. most people that are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer live for about 6 months. that is average. i know someone w…ho lived for about a year in a half with this deadly cancer!! it is still a possibility that you could become cancer free.
Unfortunately this question is vague - This is extremely dependent on staging of the cancer. It's also dependent on type of cancerous cells. I'll give staging for invasive epi…thelial ovarian cancer and we'll go from there... The numbers after the --> are % relative 5-year survival I --> 89% IA --> 94% IB --> 91% IC --> 80% II --> 66% IIA --> 76% IIB -->67% IIC --> 57% III --> 34% IIIA --> 45% IIIB --> 39% IIIC --> 35% IV --> 18% Now this does change when you have different tumors or malignancies. Here's a comparison for staging for 5 year survival for Ovarian tumors of low malignant potential: I --> 99% II --> 98% III --> 96% IV --> 77% I wish you or your loved one good luck. Source of the information is below.
For cervical cancers that are diagnosed in the preinvasive stage, the five-year-survival rate is almost 100%. When cervical cancer is detected in the early invasive stages, ap…proximately 91% of women survive five years or more.
depending on the stage within the first 5 years there is a 90-95% survival rate as long as the tumor if there is one is less than 4cm large. hope this answer helped!