CancerCompass message board discussion started by ConcernedinKC on 6/23/2008 http://www.cancercompass.com/message-board/message/all,25335,0.htm Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://backend.userland.com/rss RSS.NET: http://www.rssdotnet.com/ My dad had a cancerous tumor removed from his rectum on May 2, 2008. Prior to surgery, he had 5 weeks of radiation followed b 6 weeks of rest before the surgery. The pathology report showed a T2 tumor, but they think it might have been a T3 but the radiation prior to surgery made it look like a T2. Fast forward, today, June 22, 2008, he was told by an oncologist that if he gets chemo, his five year survival rate would be increase by about 20%. The oncologist recommended chemo interveneously (if he chooses chemo) once a week for 2 hours for 6 weeks, then two weeks off; and this cycle repeated 2 more times for a total of 6 months.But he could also get the chemo orally. Do you think he should get chemo? If so, orally or interveneously? Also, what is the survival rate overall of getting chemo vs. not getting chemo?How did the doctor get an "almost 20%" better survival rate? Thank you in advance for reading this and responding. ConcernedinKC Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT