Talk:Oncology

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hi

Hi, I think you may have outdated data. . Regarding, http://wikipedia.com/wiki/Oncology Specifically the paragraph: "A significant problem with treatment methods such as surgery and directed radiation is that destruction of the primary tumor often results in other dormant micrometastases becoming active. In other words, once the main cancer is removed, other cancer sites often pop up throughout the body." I have seen this information on PBS (KQED - San Francisco/Oakland) TV. However, according to information provided directly to me by Dr. Mitchel S. Berger M.D, this information has been disproven. According to Dr. Berger, MD, there is no scientific data that supports that primary tumor removal causes satellite/dormant tumor growth. If you wish to verify with Dr. Berger, MD: Dr. Berger, MD, Professor and Chairman, Department of Neurological Surgery http://cc.ucsf.edu/people/berger_mitchel.html http://www.som.ucsf.edu/departments/neuros/faculty_staff/department_faculty/berger.html Thank you. William M.

Why is this page dedicated almost completely to alternative and controversial approaches to cancer? How about the principles of oncological medicine, palliative care, radiotherapy and a condensation of chemotherapy? Jfdwolff 14:29, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Surgical Oncology

Why is it mentioned that "oncology", meaning therapeutic oncology, refers exclusively to "non-surgical" treatments? What of Surgical Oncology?

You are right. Do you think you could give a concise paragraph on surgical oncological practice??? JFW | T@lk 13:37, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi i would like to specialise in hematology oncology =D

Biological, Immunological and Hormonal therapies

Interesting observation by DocJohnny that immunological therapies more pertinant than biological. I would include immunological under the umbrella of biologicals in that they are part of the new wave of treatments which are not based on cytotoxics. Question of semantics really. The big money monoclonals (Rituximab, Cetuximab, Trastuzimab etc) are dominating the field at the moment. Whilst the EGFR inhibitors are antibodies, they are not immunological therapies in the same sense that vaccines or BCG are, since they are not primarily used to generate an immune response. Vaccine-type immunotherapy is really a long way behind. It is worth making a distinction.Jellytussle 04:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understood my point. I am just talking about the link, not about the treatments themselves. I understand your point, but did you look at the wiki page for biological? Is it as relevant to oncology as immunotherapy? I think the wiki article for immunotherapy is more pertinent to oncology than the wiki article for biological. I am not making any commentary on the relevance of the actual therapies. :P --DocJohnny 06:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I have had a go at cleaning this up. It now links to the article on monoclonals which is far more relevant. I'm still not completely happy with it.Jellytussle 06:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up

I'm not sure that the following belongs in Follow-up:

" specialized area of oncology is that of "secondary cancer", tumors caused by treatment for a different cancer. The rate of secondary cancer is improving as chemotherapy treatment schedules are becoming less toxic, but on the whole the incidence of cancer in previous cancer patients is substantially higher than in the general population."

Secondary malignancy is an important concern, but I am not aware of any oncologist with a specialist clinical practice in this area. Is the rate of secondary malignancies really decreasing? Better survival certainly increases the incidence of late radiation-induced malignancy, even if the use of alkylating agents is decreasing. It is confusing to discuss second cancers (as opposed to secondary cancers) in the same paragraph. One reason that the incidence of second cancers is higher is that these patients have already demonstrated a predisposition for the disease. Jellytussle 05:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The situation is hard to disentangle. If you think the paragraph is too suggestive please just remove it. JFW | T@lk 23:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Complementary and alternative therapies

I have rewritten the section on this potentially controversial subject. Removed references to specific therapies. Added link to Quackwatch.Jellytussle 19:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Palliative Care/Ethical Issues

I have substantially rewritten these sections, but had forgotten to sign in. Let me know any problems.Jellytussle 19:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to create wikilinks to relevant articles. JFW | T@lk 20:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oncology vs. Tumor Biology

Is there a difference between the two? - Bubbachuck 06:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Bit like the difference between zoology and veterinary medicine, or botany and farming. Tumour biology is the study of how tumours form, grow, respond to treatments in the laboratory. Oncology is a branch of medicine, ie treating people with cancer. Tumour biology provides an integral part of the rationale behind oncological treatments.Jellytussle 16:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for editorial attention

Tumor/cancer locations vs kinds

I

useful link

I am interested in the possibility of adding www.ecancermedicalscience.com as a useful link on this page. We are a not for profit online cancer journal which is completely free to read, publish and comment on oncology research. The journal is free to those across the globe including the developing world. I think it is a really benificial link to add to professionals/students accessing the oncology page on wiki....how does one go about adding this link without it being regarded as spam??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HannahRedmond (talk • contribs) 14:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Likewise, I see no readon why a link to a hematology news web site would not be useful to wiki users/visitors. There are currently no other external links to any news sites. Please take another look at hemonctoday.com and reconsider. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mellison (talk • contribs) 17:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is so cool and i love this i need to get a life —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.43.54 (talk) 05:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AllergoOncology merge discussion

AllergoOncology: This short stub hasn't shown any signs of being expandable for well over a year. It is proposed that it be merged into this article. --RexxS (talk) 21:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree merge.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, but perhaps carcinogenesis is more appropriate because oncology is mainly about the practical application of oncological treatments by professionals. JFW | T@lk 11:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oncology as a field of scientific investigation / History of oncology

Anyone? 82squaremetres (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone sort out the Greek derivation of Oncology, please?

This is the problematic text: "Oncology (from the Greek ogkos (όγκος), meaning bulk, mass" - Not likely to be 'ogkos' but the Greek letter here does look like a 'g' to me. (I think the Greek 'n' looks like an English 'v'). Thanks --Greenmaven (talk) 01:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Picture ???

What does an X-Ray Picture of two broken bones got to do with "Oncology" (cancer)? This picture should be replaced by anything more generally relevant, possibly an external tumor or a pathology exam micro-photo). Thanks. HalFonts (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Symptoms

This section is too confused. We need to describe the common symptoms first, then go to in details. Alphama (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need suggestions regarding one of my relative disease

Hello, I like to forward treatment related few documents for your suggestions. Will be appreciated if you please give me a feedback. Thank you. Md. Mahmud Hasan Sagor (talk) 04:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs rewrite

I think that currently this page would be a more approprate page for "cancer" or similar. Oncology is defined as "the study and treatment of tumours" (dictionary) and so the content of the page should be about the historoy and practice of the treatment of tumours.

Effervecent (talk) 10:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I agree, this needs work. Really weird that a page about oncology starts out with risk factors. Huh? Risk factors for oncology?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:B930:7B90:31AD:5E46:59D3:D3C4 (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have breast cancer n lukia I have not been treated it has been slot off years ago I don't now whare to go or how I am getthavímg slot of pain in my bones in the center of them and a constimt pain and sweating in my legs and pain in my neck going to my brain and I can't see what do I do

H 47.176.224.53 (talk) 11:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Self

In need off help 47.176.224.53 (talk) 11:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Outdated Data

I think this article uses out dated data for the times we are in now. Overall, I think the point of the article is good just some minor changes would help improve it. 74.136.138.224 (talk) 15:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Bio 401 Cell Biology S2024

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2024 and 9 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Throwshade (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Throwshade (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Oncology"