Conventional Treatment Essay

Excerpt from Essay :

Therapies Deprive Patients From Conventional Cancer Therapies

Future Ethical Prospective

Do public demand for, and clinicians' tendencies to prescribe novel targeted cancer therapies in a resource starved healthcare system deprive other patients of conventional treatment? If so, can it be justified?

Over the years, there have been several studies which have shown that a small but noteworthy fraction of cancer patients drop one or more conventional cancer treatments and use novel targeted cancer therapies instead. When it comes to recent public demands in healthcare, research into cancer control has addressed issues relevant to novel targeted cancer therapies in a resource starved healthcare system. Disparities have been addressed to a much greater degree than before, with studies of the conventional treatment of cancer especially in our variety of ethnic and socioeconomic settings. Conventional treatment have a greater social impact and the demand for such treatments of many (male and female) of all ages and social classes and of thousands of families discloses an interest demonstrating that there is a trend reversal, concerning rather or not people are more interested in novel targeted cancer therapies. Today, ever more individuals are surviving cancer. It is on account of clinical trials, many of which are led at Penn Medicine, that patients are advancing from recent breakthrough target therapies and treatments. These fresh advances in cancer treatment are occurring each day, giving patients hope that even greater findings lie ahead. Researchers agree that targeted therapies are not a replacement for traditional therapies. There are some researchers that agree that targeted therapies are not a replacement for traditional therapies. However, there are some experts that would agree that the healthcare system is being starved by these therapies because some people find it to be invaluable to their treatment With that said, it appears that the demand for, and clinicians' tendencies to prescribe novel targeted cancer therapies in a resource starved healthcare system deprive other patients of conventional treatment.

Novel Targeted Therapies

Targeted therapy is the outcome of about 100 years of research devoted to accepting the differences among normal cells and cancer cells. To date, cancer treatment has focused primarily on killing speedily dividing cells because one feature of cancer cells is that they divide at a Fast pace. Unluckily, some of the cells that are normal divide rapidly too, causing side effects that are multiple.

Benefits and Challenges

The main benefit of biomarker-driven targeted therapy is the gift to be able to identify individuals more likely to benefit from a specific drug and to avoid treatment improbable to be effective. Shunning ineffective treatment has its own advantages, like stopping the side effects of that treatment in addition to evading the financial burden.

Targeted therapy deals with a lot of other benefits but some challenges also. One of the most important disadvantages of targeted therapy is that researchers have discovered that cancer cells often become resistant to the drug, or the drug becomes less effective over time. Researchers continue to look into ways to overcome resistance and believe that the answer necessitates a better understanding of how cell pathways with each other. Targeting a key pathway may be actual for a while, nonetheless over time, signals will be able to "escape" by going down another trail. Also, treatments that consist of multiple agents that target multiple pathways could be possibly more effective than treatment that targets just a pathway that is single. Research in this area continues. (Kundu, 2012).

Targeted therapy is not necessarily going to be the answer to every cancer. Basically, for some cancers, radiation therapy or conventional chemotherapy could still be the best option for treatment. Likewise, targeted therapy agents are frequently specified in mixture with chemotherapy. But then again targeted therapy is a main step forward for a lot of cancers, particularly advanced cancers, and is making a new age of personalized cancer treatment (Kim, 2003).


There are so many various targeted therapies have been accepted for use in cancer treatment. These therapies consist of signal transduction inhibitors, gene expression modulator, hormone therapies, apoptosis inducer, immunotherapies, angiogenesis inhibitor, and toxin delivery molecules.

Signal transduction inhibitors block the activities of molecules that take part in signal transduction, the procedure by which a cell answers to signals from its atmosphere.

Gene expression modulators adapt the function of proteins that play a part in controlling gene manifestation.

Apoptosis inducers cause cancer cells to experience a procedure of measured cell demise called apoptosis.

Angiogenesis inhibitors block the development of new blood vessels to growths (a procedure called cancer angiogenesis). A supply of blood is essential for tumors to grow beyond a definite size for the reason that blood offers the oxygen and nutrients that tumors need for nonstop growing.

How these therapies deprive patients from conventional cancer therapies

For many kinds of cancer, a lot of patients with that cancer will have an applicable target for a specific targeted therapy and, therefore, will be applicants to be treated with that therapy instead of conventional therapies. Different from conventional therapy, targeted therapies are calculated to intermingle with particular molecules that are part of the pathways and developments used by cancer cells to produce, divide, and spread for the duration of the course of the body. Targets are chosen very prudently. When researchers discover a potentially vulnerable molecule involved in a cancer process or pathway, they authenticate it by doing more investigation, and then, if everything goes right, they put together new therapies to disturb its activity with great exactness. With that said, these therapies seem to deprive conventional treatment because patients are not getting the radiation treatment that kills the cancer cells as a much faster rate. And 13% (just about 5.6 million Americans) were projected to be using novel targeted cancer therapies, just to get away from the typical radiation treatment (Papaetis, 2009). A lot of targeted therapies are related with fewer and less toxic side effects than conventional treatment which uses the standard chemotherapy or radiation for the reason that they cause little or no collateral impairment to cells that are normal. These therapies deprive patients from conventional treatment because it limits the cancer cells in the patient thus resisting the treatment making it ineffective. Conventional treatment does the exact opposite because it kills the cells on the spot. Some experts would agree that target therapies are robbing patients from the quicker treatment. Another reason why it is depriving patients from conventional therapies is because target therapy has much more limitations that conventional treatment. For instance, one limitation of targeted therapy at present that conventional usage does not have is that drugs for some identified targets are hard to develop for the reason that of the target's structure and/or the way its function is controlled in the cell. One example is called the Ras, a signaling protein that is mutated in as many as one-quarter of all cancers (and in the majority of certain cancer types, such as pancreatic cancer) (Kundu, 2012). Up to the present time, it has not been possible to develop inhibitors of Ras gesticulating with existing drug development technologies. On the other hand, promising approaches are such as conventional treatment offering hope that this limitation can be overcome for the patient.

These therapies deprive patients from conventional cancer therapies because unlike conventional treatment, targeted therapies usually only address one "target." For some patients, correcting one molecular or cellular target may be successful in cancer treatment; on the other hand, ever since there may be multiple molecular and cellular abnormalities involved, other patients may necessitate therapies that address more than one target like conventional treatment (Papaetis, 2009).

These therapies deprive patients from conventional cancer therapies because they believe that tiny secondary tumors are 100% effective under the therapy. However, advocates say that it is only effective under the chemotherapy treatment because it wipes out everything and that patients using target therapy have a really big chance of not killing all of the cancer cells, thus robbing the patient of getting a complete recovery. Target therapies have the assumption that tiny secondary tumors will not turn out to be a problem later on, but that's not definite; in some cases, such tumors have metastasized (Kundu, 2012). Then there is also the likelihood that cells from the primary tumor may have already spread to other parts of the body; these micrometastases can get away from detection with current technology. (Projected accurateness proportions for magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] in target range from 40% to 90%.) (Papaetis, 2009) Incomplete treatment or a missed spot of cancer could have profound consequences on the patient. And although one would think that the extent and number of difficulties would be less with target therapies than with whole-gland treatment that is not recognized for sure. Also, in adding additional information, therapies deprive patients from conventional cancer therapies because patients are not often told of some of the functional limitations of therapeutic antibodies which have been coming to light for instance insufficient pharmacokinetics and tissue accessibility in addition…

Cite This Essay:

"Conventional Treatment" (2014, May 21) Retrieved August 19, 2017, from

"Conventional Treatment" 21 May 2014. Web.19 August. 2017. <>

"Conventional Treatment", 21 May 2014, Accessed.19 August. 2017,