PBS and The Emperor of All Maladies

Started by anonymous, April 07, 2015
6 replies for this topic
anonymous

N/A
N/A
Posted on
April 07, 2015
When I heard that filmmaker Ken Burns was taking on The Emperor of All Maladies for one of his epic television documentaries, I had my doubts that he could tell the story of cancer in a way that captured the power of the book. But he has. And, except for a few omissions, this documentary will get the awards it deserves.

The Pulitzer-Prize winning book by Siddhartha Mukherjee tells the history of cancer, and one of the best messages is that the more we learn about cancer the more we understand that each person’s cancer is different.

The three episodes have now aired and can be seen free on the PBS website. But, like the book, I wish a few things had been added and a few questions answered that weren’t.

My primary disappointment with the book and the show is the lack of voices from oncology nurses and their contribution to cancer research and the psychosocial support they have demanded for their patients – and which is provided more by nurses than doctors. To leave out these contributions is a huge omission on the part of Mukherjee. Nurses have from the beginning of cancer care been the ones who have addressed the pain and suffering of patients, and, while they showed a wonderful young woman oncologist talking with an elderly patient about his upcoming death, this role is shared if no dominated by nurses.
 
For those of us whose cancer predated targeted therapies that appeared in 2000 or there about, it was exciting to see how far we have come, particularly with the development of the first drug that truly does “cure” a cancer with Gleevec for CML. In breast cancer, we now know that women with the Her2 oncogene have a strong drug in Herceptin. And one of the most dramatic moments of the documentary was to see Barbara Bradfield, one of the first of a handful of women dying of metastatic breast cancer to try Herceptin. Bradfield had multiple tumors in her lungs and a tumor in her neck that could be seen and felt. It became the touchstone for the dozen or so women in the trial who agreed to try Herceptin as a last ditch effort to live.

Mukherjee told the story in the book, but having Bradfield tell it was chilling. When they came together to receive the second dose of Herceptin, each woman who touched her tumor could tell it was different, softer and smaller – and a sign of life.

Herceptin was the most dramatic discovery for breast cancer in the past 20 years, but it only helps the 25 percent who have the Her2 oncogene. What of the other 75 percent and what of those who have triple-negative who have no identified weapons against this deadly form of the disease? This became apparent with the story of an African-American surgeon named Lori Wilson, who dealt with her own triple-negative breast cancer in the documentary. She had two different kinds of breast cancer, one in each breast. Nowhere when they were discussing her diagnosis did they say that triple negative is more common in African-American women – another unanswered question.

Do I think the documentary was too positive? In part, yes. The majority of treatment still given is chemotherapy, not immunotherapy, which has not been found to expand survival enough for it to enter the mainstream in most cases. I know these issues are complex to explain but I was disappointed no one took a shot at it.

While we watched the young woman oncologist talking with her patient about his impending death, I was touched, but I couldn’t help thinking how few oncologists really do that. They just won’t, and it is usually the nurses whose job it is to relay the news and comfort the family and come up with a plan when there is no one at home to care for someone who is dying.
What then?

And nowhere do they discuss life after cancer treatment ends and the fear we live with for years – or the second cancers brought on by treatment or the long term and late effects suffered by those who underwent over treatment during the era of, “if a little bit is good, more is better.”

The treatment for cancer and living is the dramatic part of the story. The rest is about us – the ones who go on in life, living with the result of the disease both physically and emotionally.
 
 
Report

Page 1 of 1 1

Kathy LaTour

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 07, 2015
When I heard that filmmaker Ken Burns was taking on The Emperor of All Maladies for one of his epic television documentaries, I had my doubts that he could tell the story of cancer in a way that captured the power of the book. But he has. And, except for a few omissions, this documentary will get the awards it deserves.

The Pulitzer-Prize winning book by Siddhartha Mukherjee tells the history of cancer, and one of the best messages is that the more we learn about cancer the more we understand that each person’s cancer is different.

The three episodes have now aired and can be seen free on the PBS website. But, like the book, I wish a few things had been added and a few questions answered that weren’t.

My primary disappointment with the book and the show is the lack of voices from oncology nurses and their contribution to cancer research and the psychosocial support they have demanded for their patients – and which is provided more by nurses than doctors. To leave out these contributions is a huge omission on the part of Mukherjee. Nurses have from the beginning of cancer care been the ones who have addressed the pain and suffering of patients, and, while they showed a wonderful young woman oncologist talking with an elderly patient about his upcoming death, this role is shared if no dominated by nurses.
 
For those of us whose cancer predated targeted therapies that appeared in 2000 or there about, it was exciting to see how far we have come, particularly with the development of the first drug that truly does “cure” a cancer with Gleevec for CML. In breast cancer, we now know that women with the Her2 oncogene have a strong drug in Herceptin. And one of the most dramatic moments of the documentary was to see Barbara Bradfield, one of the first of a handful of women dying of metastatic breast cancer to try Herceptin. Bradfield had multiple tumors in her lungs and a tumor in her neck that could be seen and felt. It became the touchstone for the dozen or so women in the trial who agreed to try Herceptin as a last ditch effort to live.

Mukherjee told the story in the book, but having Bradfield tell it was chilling. When they came together to receive the second dose of Herceptin, each woman who touched her tumor could tell it was different, softer and smaller – and a sign of life.

Herceptin was the most dramatic discovery for breast cancer in the past 20 years, but it only helps the 25 percent who have the Her2 oncogene. What of the other 75 percent and what of those who have triple-negative who have no identified weapons against this deadly form of the disease? This became apparent with the story of an African-American surgeon named Lori Wilson, who dealt with her own triple-negative breast cancer in the documentary. She had two different kinds of breast cancer, one in each breast. Nowhere when they were discussing her diagnosis did they say that triple negative is more common in African-American women – another unanswered question.

Do I think the documentary was too positive? In part, yes. The majority of treatment still given is chemotherapy, not immunotherapy, which has not been found to expand survival enough for it to enter the mainstream in most cases. I know these issues are complex to explain but I was disappointed no one took a shot at it.

While we watched the young woman oncologist talking with her patient about his impending death, I was touched, but I couldn’t help thinking how few oncologists really do that. They just won’t, and it is usually the nurses whose job it is to relay the news and comfort the family and come up with a plan when there is no one at home to care for someone who is dying.
What then?

And nowhere do they discuss life after cancer treatment ends and the fear we live with for years – or the second cancers brought on by treatment or the long term and late effects suffered by those who underwent over treatment during the era of, “if a little bit is good, more is better.”

The treatment for cancer and living is the dramatic part of the story. The rest is about us – the ones who go on in life, living with the result of the disease both physically and emotionally.
 
 
Report
BillCurry

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 07, 2015
Ms. La Tour likes to criticize works of art based on the storyline she *thinks* should be told. "The Fault in Our Stars" doesn't portray the graphic reality of cancer, which, in her view, it should. It's always "the omissions" that, she thinks, are un-omittable. OK, "Romeo and Juliet," the same-same story line as The Fault (young love interrupted by death), doesn't portray the ugliness of suicide and the grief of those left behind. Does that mean it's a bad play? Shame on you, Shakespeare! Now The Emperor similarly doesn't focus on what she thinks it should focus on, what her version of the story would be. I have a suggestion: Instead of picking apart the works of others, she should write the book/movie/TV series she thinks needs to be told, the stories that, in her opinion, everyone else is missing. I look forward to reading the book and seeing the movie of her rendition. C'mon, Kathy, go for it!
Report
Pascale

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 08, 2015
I couldn't agree with Bill Curry more. As Ms. La Tour states; "The Pulitzer-Prize winning book by Siddhartha Mukherjee tells the history of CANCER, and one of the best messages is that the more we learn about cancer the more we understand that each person’s cancer is different". By reading the book, you learn that the main character is "Cancer" not oncology nurses and the psychosocial support given to cancer patients (vs. oncologist) as she states "and which is provided more by nurses than doctors. As a caregiver; that statement would be debatable. Which is another book more properly labeled…"Top 10 nursing complaints spoken while treating their patients" Why the negativity amongst so many nurses? With any knowledge of the fear of recurrence or secondary cancers brought on by treatment or treatment side effects, Ms. La Tour should realize another 3 novels 10 episodes would need to be written. Plus, the information is already there if you search. Clearly, we tuned in to learn about cancer and the outlook for patients with cancer. Let's give credit to Siddhartha Mukherjee for his amazing work and the questions he did answer not to mention the monumental pieces of information pertaining to Cancer past history, present devleopments and future outlook. 3 thumps up for he Emperor of All Maladies by Siddhartha Mukherjee and Director Ken Burns.
Report
Decor8

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 09, 2015
I think ones take on this documentary depends on how Cancer has affected your life. As a Cancer patient who ihas been diagnosed with a non curable form of Lymphoma..I found aspects of it to be very informative, yet I also felt it did not give the whole picture regarding current immunotherapies. I would like to have seen more discussion of various types, not just Herceptin...I have received Rituxan...a monoclonal antibody to treat my lymphoma...it has controlled my disease for now. 15 years ago, I would have been subjected to chemo...thank goodness for other drugs. I also felt that they could have touched more on living with Cancer as a chronic condition.
Report
PJ

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 15, 2015
That's me - posted above. PJ Haylock, RN
Report
Jean Di Carlo-Wagner

Member
0 Replies
Posted on
April 24, 2015
At the same time PBS was running "The Emperor of All Maladies", I was watching an 11 part series called "The Quest for the Cure" about integrative medicine. In my 12 years as a survivor, I have watched carefully the West meets East approaches. There were several doctors on the "Quest" who were diagnosed with cancer and chose not to do chemotherapy, but used alternative treatments which included diet, exercise and stress management. Watching both series, I am still saddened that there is a such a rift between the two approaches. I would have liked to have seen both documentaries acknowledge the work of the "other side". As a patient advocate, I believe that a combination of both approaches seems to give the patient the best quality of life, no matter the longevity. Cancer is too complex to be treated with one bomb or even a series a bullets. I look toward the further integration of approaches. Jean Di Carlo-Wagner, M.A., Yoga Therapist, Patient Advocate & Activist I
Report

Page 1 of 1 1

You must log in to use this feature, please click here to login.
×

Sign In

Not a member? Sign up now!