Dedicated to Discovery. Committed to Care.

  • Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Selling hope

The recent discussion among Dana-Farber physicians and researchers on the topic of how cancer research is reported in the media provided many insights into the changing landscape of contemporary medical care.

The recent discussion among Dana-Farber physicians and researchers on the topic of how cancer research is reported in the media provided many insights into the changing landscape of contemporary medical care.

Lawrence Shulman, M.D., vice chair for clinical services, Department of Adult Oncology: "Despite some overblown news coverage, not many patients ask when we think we're going to cure cancer. There are some cancers we cure with regularity, and we've improved cure rates for others. But we're not likely to discover one 'magic bullet.'With all the excitement about new therapies, there should be some acknowledgement that — even in the best of circumstances — they won't cure all cancers. We ran up against that with the early articles on Endostatin [a drug intended to cut off the blood supply in tumors.] Before the trial even opened, this was portrayed as the drug that was going to cure all cancer."

Stephen Sallan, M.D., chief of staff: "Part of it is just human nature. We want news, excitement, breakthroughs — and we want hope. Hope is what the media is selling in these articles about breakthroughs, and that's why one patient is enough. If it happens in one, can't it happen in two; can't it happen in you?"

Robert Mayer, M.D., vice chair for academic affairs, Department of Adult Oncology: "At a national medical meeting, for example, there may be a report about a new antibody that, in one patient, apparently affects that individual's clinical course. The patient may then find himself on the front page of USA Today and, the next morning, on a national TV program. Physicians and patients then call the manufacturer, which is both out of money and out of the drug. So everybody is teased by the publicity, and yet nothing has ever been published in the scientific literature to provide objective information. How should we do this differently? The new treatment may be very promising, so you don't want to censor it. Should we tell USA Today it shouldn't cover our meetings?"

Paths of Progress, Fall/Winter 2000

Paths of Progress Archive

Guidelines for Distinguishing Hope from Hype

A recent New England Journal of Medicine article reported that a high proportion of media coverage about new medications understated risks, glossed over costs, and failed to disclose researchers' financial ties to drug manufacturers.

With alternative therapies, such as nutritional supplements and herbal preparations that do not undergo the same governmental regulation as conventional medications, distinguishing between accurate and overstated claims can be even more problematic.
Read more