This unique book provides a retrospective analysis of the changes in survival outcomes at the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center over the past six decades. Since opening its doors in 1944, M.D. Anderson has kept a continuous, uninterrupted data repository of the treatment and outcomes of each of its patients. It is this visionary database from the center s tumor registry which makes this groundbreaking book possible. Tracking results across time, this book shows radical shifts in outcomes trends, where great progress has been made, and where there is still a long way to go, and offers a snapshot into the parallel history of developments in care. Such data is crucial to informing how patients are counseled, how treatment decisions are determined, and how prognoses are made.

"60 Years of Survival Outcomes at the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center" is the only book to concurrently present longitudinal data on survival outcomes across the spectrum of rare and common cancers. Each chapter deals with a specific disease site, discussing current management approaches and presenting key data replete with illustrative charts, graphs, and tables. With the resources available only to the practitioners at this inimitable institution, this book heralds a cornerstone moment in the study of survival outcomes and the depth of our knowledge of cancer care. "

Fernando Cabanillas In 1993, Fisher et al. published the results of a randomized trial comparing three third-generation regimens against the classic CHOP combination. For several years, the oncology community had been convinced that the third generation regimens were clearly superior to CHOP. It came as a shock to many that there was no difference in outcome between the four arms of this clinical trial. The logical conclusion is that CHOP is as good as any of the other regimens tested in that study. Unfortunately, this excellent study has been misinterpreted by many as proving that there has not been any progress in the field of lymphoma during the last 20 years. Furthermore, it has led to a fatalistic attitude in the reasoning of many clinicians who feel that 'nothing works better than CHOP' and therefore that it is not worth testing new drugs or developing novel regimens. However, the process by which we move forward in the oncology field is seldom by dramatic breakthroughs. Frequently, what appears at first glance to be a breakthrough turns out later to be just a modest step forward. Several steps forward eventually add up to a major advance, but this advance goes unnoticed because of the slow nature of the process. In this volume, we have chosen to discuss several of these steps, which we feel are clearly making a positive impact on the field of lymphomas and which soon should make a major difference in therapeutic results."

Fernando Cabanillas In 1993, Fisher et al. published the results of a randomized trial comparing three third-generation regimens against the classic CHOP combination. For several years, the oncology community had been convinced that the third generation regimens were clearly superior to CHOP. It came as a shock to many that there was no difference in outcome between the four arms of this clinical trial. The logical conclusion is that CHOP is as good as any of the other regimens tested in that study. Unfortunately, this excellent study has been misinterpreted by many as proving that there has not been any progress in the field of lymphoma during the last 20 years. Furthermore, it has led to a fatalistic attitude in the reasoning of many clinicians who feel that 'nothing works better than CHOP' and therefore that it is not worth testing new drugs or developing novel regimens. However, the process by which we move forward in the oncology field is seldom by dramatic breakthroughs. Frequently, what appears at first glance to be a breakthrough turns out later to be just a modest step forward. Several steps forward eventually add up to a major advance, but this advance goes unnoticed because of the slow nature of the process. In this volume, we have chosen to discuss several of these steps, which we feel are clearly making a positive impact on the field of lymphomas and which soon should make a major difference in therapeutic results."

This unique book provides a retrospective analysis of the changes in survival outcomes at the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center over the past six decades. Since opening its doors in 1944, M.D. Anderson has kept a continuous, uninterrupted data repository of the treatment and outcomes of each of its patients. It is this visionary database from the center's tumor registry which makes this groundbreaking book possible. Tracking results across time, this book shows radical shifts in outcomes trends, where great progress has been made, and where there is still a long way to go, and offers a snapshot into the parallel history of developments in care. Such data is crucial to informing how patients are counseled, how treatment decisions are determined, and how prognoses are made. 60 Years of Survival Outcomes at the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center is the only book to concurrently present longitudinal data on survival outcomes across the spectrum of rare and common cancers. Each chapter deals with a specific disease site, discussing current management approaches and presenting key data replete with illustrative charts, graphs, and tables. With the resources available only to the practitioners at this inimitable institution, this book heralds a cornerstone moment in the study of survival outcomes and the depth of our knowledge of cancer care.