In the article he has written to accompany his upcoming education presentation at the 2014 ASCO meeting, the Mayo Clinic's Dr. Leif Bergsagel includes a very interesting -- and encouraging -- graph.
The graph shows shows how the five-year relative survival of multiple myeloma patients in the U.S. has evolved over the last 65 years. Here's the graph:
Based on recent trends in the 5-year relative survival rate, Dr. Bergsagel suggests that, for myeloma patients diagnosed in 2014, the relative survival rate may have reached as high as 66 percent -- more than double what it was just 15 years ago.
He ends his article with the following statement:
"During the last 6 years for which we have data ... the 5-year survival rate has been increasing each year by more than 2%. If we continue at this rate we will reach 100% in about 25 years. Given the new active drugs in development, and immunotherapeutic approaches on the horizon, we can be hopeful that we will reach that goal in an even shorter time, and our children will need to focus their attention on other tumors that have lagged behind the advances made in the field of multiple myeloma."
Dr. Bergsagel's article can be viewed in full at the following link:
http://meetinglibrary.asco.org/content/114000199-144
Note that relative survival is a slightly different concept than the typical, "absolute" survival which is discussed in most myeloma research articles.
If the absolute five-year survival for a cancer is 50 percent, for example, it means the average person diagnosed with that cancer has a 50 percent chance of living at least 5 years. This is the sort of "survival" that is typically discussed in Beacon articles.
If the relative survival is 50 percent for a type of cancer, it means something a little different. It means that patients with that type of cancer have 50 percent the chance of surviving at least five years as people who do not have the cancer.
For a more detailed explanation of the difference between absolute and relative survival rates, go to this link, which will take you to the survival rates explanation in a recent Beacon article on myeloma survival in the U.S.
Forums
Re: Multiple myeloma survival in 2014
We can all be grateful that we are living during a period of intense medical research and development in cancer generally and multiple myeloma in particular.
Since I was diagnosed 5 years ago, two new drugs have come on line and several new approaches are in development. The new treatments are not only extending life but also the qualify of life.
Since I was diagnosed 5 years ago, two new drugs have come on line and several new approaches are in development. The new treatments are not only extending life but also the qualify of life.
-
Ron Harvot - Name: Ron Harvot
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself
- When were you/they diagnosed?: Feb 2009
- Age at diagnosis: 56
Re: Multiple myeloma survival in 2014
That is a terrific graph and lets hope for ongoing improvements in survival too!
Was this overall survival of patients, or 'relative' survival? Relative survival is compared to one's age group's mortality from other causes. It takes into account how many people in an age group would have passed away from any cause. As people age, the relative survival statistics seem to be more important.
Was this overall survival of patients, or 'relative' survival? Relative survival is compared to one's age group's mortality from other causes. It takes into account how many people in an age group would have passed away from any cause. As people age, the relative survival statistics seem to be more important.
-
Nancy Shamanna - Name: Nancy Shamanna
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Self and others too
- When were you/they diagnosed?: July 2009
Re: Multiple myeloma survival in 2014
Having lost my sister to the disease in '95 and being 5 years past my diagnoses, I can appreciate the great stride in survival rates.
-
Wayne K - Name: Wayne
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself, my sister who passed in '95
- When were you/they diagnosed?: 03/09
- Age at diagnosis: 70
Re: Multiple myeloma survival in 2014
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Nancy - You ask a good question, and we've revised the initial posting we made to make clear that the survival rates plotted in the graph are relative, not absolute, survival rates.
It's not completely clear in Dr. Bergsagel's paper whether the rates are relative or absolute. However, we've checked with him and they are, in fact, relative survival rates (which we somewhat suspected just by looking at the data he plotted).
We've also included in the initial posting a short description of the difference between absolute and relative survival rates, and included a link to a somewhat longer description in a recent Beacon article.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Nancy - You ask a good question, and we've revised the initial posting we made to make clear that the survival rates plotted in the graph are relative, not absolute, survival rates.
It's not completely clear in Dr. Bergsagel's paper whether the rates are relative or absolute. However, we've checked with him and they are, in fact, relative survival rates (which we somewhat suspected just by looking at the data he plotted).
We've also included in the initial posting a short description of the difference between absolute and relative survival rates, and included a link to a somewhat longer description in a recent Beacon article.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Re: Multiple myeloma survival in 2014
Hello,
Just a different perspective from a snobbish engineer.
"If we continue at this rate we will reach 100% in about 25 years." Does this mean that the relative survival will be greater than 100% in thirty years; that is, given this is relative, people who have myeloma will outlive those who don't have myeloma?
There are problems with data extrapolation. Moreover, the graph presented also violates basic principles of statistics. It is surely a catchy article; but it is not statistically sound (though it is presented using statistics), and therefore, it may not describe what is really going on. As Mark Twain said, "There are lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics."
But I would agree with the author's idea that the survival rate of multiple myeloma patients has been improved significantly.
Please treat this writing as a very serious joke. Thanks!
Just a different perspective from a snobbish engineer.
"If we continue at this rate we will reach 100% in about 25 years." Does this mean that the relative survival will be greater than 100% in thirty years; that is, given this is relative, people who have myeloma will outlive those who don't have myeloma?
There are problems with data extrapolation. Moreover, the graph presented also violates basic principles of statistics. It is surely a catchy article; but it is not statistically sound (though it is presented using statistics), and therefore, it may not describe what is really going on. As Mark Twain said, "There are lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics."
But I would agree with the author's idea that the survival rate of multiple myeloma patients has been improved significantly.
Please treat this writing as a very serious joke. Thanks!
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1