Monday, October 8, 2012

Whats the main difference between non small and small cell lung cancer

Whats the main difference between non small and small cell lung cancer?
From what i've seen, i've come to believe that non-small is when the cancer is stil relatively localized? and small cell is when its spreading rapidly already by the time it is diagonosed.... am i correct? I need to know this for a health project, so thanks for any answers..
Cancer - 4 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
No, they are two different types of lung cancer. Both are bad, but small cell lung cancer has a very bad prognosis, which is what I think you are being confused about. It has little to do with localization, because you can still have diffusely metastasized non-small cell cancer. In general, small cell cancer is rapidly progressive and by the time it is discovered by doctors, it has already metastasized to other parts of the body.
2 :
You are right. Lung cancers are usually divided into two main groups that account for about 95% of all cases. * The division into groups is based on the type of cells that make up the cancer. * The two main types of lung cancer are characterized by the cell size of the tumor when viewed under the microscope. They are called small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). NSCLC includes several subtypes of tumors. * SCLCs are less common, but they grow more quickly and are more likely to metastasize than NSCLCs. Often, SCLCs have already spread to other parts of the body when the cancer is diagnosed. * About 5% of lung cancers are of rare cell types, including carcinoid tumor, lymphoma, and others. http://www.cancertreatment-wecareindia.com/lung_cancer.html
3 :
Correct. Virtually all small-cell lung cancers have metastasized (spreading of cancer to other locations/organs) by the time of diagnosis. This makes it difficult to treat surgically, so chemotherapy, with or without radiation will be the treatment of choice. Non-small-cell lung cancers on the other hand, usually respond poorly to chemotherapy. Non-small cell lung cancers generally have a better prognosis than small-cell lung cancers.
4 :
Here is some very straightforward information on non small cell lung cancer, and small cell lung cancer. I hope you find this useful: http://www.nowwhat.org.au/info/cancer-types/lung-cancer

Read more discussions :

Thursday, October 4, 2012

am i more likely to get skin cancer or lung cancer

am i more likely to get skin cancer or lung cancer?
i tan in a tanning bed, and never go long enough to burn, but i do go nearly every week day for a month or two, then stop for like 6 months. my friend smokes daily, and probably a pack a day on weekends. which one of use are more likely to end up with cancer? she's lectures me about tanning, but i don't know that what i'm doing is any worse than what she is.
Cancer - 5 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
You're both going to get cancer eventually. Skin cancer is fairly common in people who tan though so I think you're probably going to get cancer first.
2 :
I think if you had someone close with cancer and could see for yourself what it does to a person, you would both quit doing something that is almost guaranteed to give cancer to you. It's not nice to see and very difficult to bear watching a loved one waste away from it.
3 :
she is more likely to get cancer. lung cancer is caused by arsenic in drinking water. there is no convincing evidence that there is anything that causes skin cancer. --world cancer research fund http://www.dietandcancerreport.org
4 :
Well...you're both playing with fire. Skin cancer is the more likely outcome from tanning. Smoking could bring on any number of health issues. Read the following to get a sobering look at tanning... http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22293079-1243,00.html
5 :
Having just watched my husband die from lung cancer at the early age of 58 I'd tell your friend to give up NOW! By the time you get symptoms it's already too late and often too far advanced for anything other than palliative treatment. To see someone go from a relatively fit younger than his age looking man to a shrunken husk who looks ninety in just 4 months is devastating! It's also not just Lung Cancer she needs to worry about. Smoking also increases the risks of heart disease and several other types of cancer. As for yourself, I'd give up the sun bed just as quickly. Everyday is far too much and having time off wont help. You increase your risk every time you use one. It will also age you faster, and there isn't a product on the market that can repair the damage done by sunbeds. Of course if you don't mind looking like an old woman when you are only in your 30's........

Read more discussions :

Monday, October 1, 2012

How long does it take lung cancer to kill you

How long does it take lung cancer to kill you?

Cancer - 5 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Months to years, My grandpa had it for years because he had a really good doctor but he died in 2005 when i was 9 :(
2 :
really short if you continue smoking
3 :
It depends on the stage and the type of lung cancer. If there is no spread in other organs and the removal and treatment done right away, one can live many years. If it has metastasized in other organs, or is secondary (metastasis from other area) then the time is more limited
4 :
It all depends on what stage it is at. The sooner it is found the better chance the person has of beating it. If it has already spread to other organs have faith, but the chances of the person dying are about 90% unfortunately. Stage 4, which is extremely deadly usually kills the patient in 4months to a year.
5 :
Depend on the stage. If not treated well, can die within months. It also depends on the person's attitude toward his disease: if he's positive thinking, he cares on his diet and eat supplements/multivitamins... he will surely survive longer.

Read more discussions :