Comments on: Cancer as Evolution, part 2 http://emergentfool.com/2008/08/22/cancer-as-evolution-part-2/ ...explorations in complex adaptive systems... Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:50:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Cancer as Evolution — 2008 Summary « Complex Adaptive Systems http://emergentfool.com/2008/08/22/cancer-as-evolution-part-2/#comment-1524 Cancer as Evolution — 2008 Summary « Complex Adaptive Systems Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:36 +0000 http://rafefurst.wordpress.com/?p=238#comment-1524 [...] implications for treatment will come as more of a shock to the cancer industry.  I’ve suggested before that somatic evolution contraindicates cytotoxic and non-targeted chemotherapy in many cases.  The [...] [...] implications for treatment will come as more of a shock to the cancer industry.  I’ve suggested before that somatic evolution contraindicates cytotoxic and non-targeted chemotherapy in many cases.  The [...]

]]> By: Cancer as Evolution, part 4 « Complex Adaptive Systems http://emergentfool.com/2008/08/22/cancer-as-evolution-part-2/#comment-1527 Cancer as Evolution, part 4 « Complex Adaptive Systems Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:03:31 +0000 http://rafefurst.wordpress.com/?p=238#comment-1527 [...] Part 2 [...] [...] Part 2 [...]

]]> By: Cancer as Evolution, part 3 « Complex Adaptive Systems http://emergentfool.com/2008/08/22/cancer-as-evolution-part-2/#comment-1526 Cancer as Evolution, part 3 « Complex Adaptive Systems Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:21:19 +0000 http://rafefurst.wordpress.com/?p=238#comment-1526 [...] as Evolution, part 3 Kevin points out that perhaps I am giving chemotherapy short shrift and not looking at the bigger picture.  I would [...] [...] as Evolution, part 3 Kevin points out that perhaps I am giving chemotherapy short shrift and not looking at the bigger picture.  I would [...]

]]> By: kevindick http://emergentfool.com/2008/08/22/cancer-as-evolution-part-2/#comment-1525 kevindick Sat, 23 Aug 2008 20:48:29 +0000 http://rafefurst.wordpress.com/?p=238#comment-1525 I think your analysis of chemotherapy and radiation suffers from applying a single figure of merit. In networks, we distinguish between two quality of service measures: throughput and latency. It seems like we can make an analogous distinction for cancer treatment effectiveness. It seems to me like the cancer death rate is equivalent to throughput. We may very well not be able to affect that much with chemotherapy and radiation. However, they may improve (in this case, increase) the latency. What's the evidence say about mean survival times for cancer at various stages? Note that (as you well know) it's important to have a common longitudinal baseline for the cancer stage because detection technology advancements make cancers detectable earlier. I think your analysis of chemotherapy and radiation suffers from applying a single figure of merit. In networks, we distinguish between two quality of service measures: throughput and latency. It seems like we can make an analogous distinction for cancer treatment effectiveness.

It seems to me like the cancer death rate is equivalent to throughput. We may very well not be able to affect that much with chemotherapy and radiation. However, they may improve (in this case, increase) the latency. What’s the evidence say about mean survival times for cancer at various stages?

Note that (as you well know) it’s important to have a common longitudinal baseline for the cancer stage because detection technology advancements make cancers detectable earlier.

]]>