"Cure for Breast Cancer in Just 11 Days"…Media Outlets Continue To Promote Drugs in Misleading Manner

  • 2016-03-29
  • 12

Less than a month ago, some electronic sites circulated a misleading story about a drug for treating cancer, which these sites said "completely cured" 94% of its users. Between 11 and 13 March, some media outlets again circulated a story about the discovery of a new cure for breast cancer, which they said could make tumors "disappear" or "reduce" their size in just 11 days. This means dispensing with chemotherapy and surgery. Dr. Lina Mar"i, oncologist at the King Hussein Cancer Center, said that this story was published in most local media in a "misleading" manner. The story says that a British study proved the effectiveness of a treatment, according to which patients were given a combination of two drugs, which are [1] Herceptin and [2] Tyverb, and that tumors completely disappeared in the case of 11% of women who received the treatment, while the size of tumors in 17% of them was reduced. This was achieved within a period of 11 days. According to the story, this treatment could do away with chemotherapy and surgery.

The story about this treatment, including the details of the study, was first published in some Western media outlets, including The Independent, BBC, and The Guardian. It was disseminated simultaneously, in different ways, by Arab or Arabic-speaking media outlets, including Al Jazeera, The New Arab , Russia Today, and BBC Arabic. Local media were divided in terms of the sources from which they copied the news.  Most of them reported the very short version published by Russia Today and The New Arab, while others reported a version that included some details, such as the one published by BBC Arabic.

The misleading part in the above story, as Dr. Mar"i explained to AKEED, is as follows:

1. On most sites that ran the story, the headline and the body of the item suggested that the intended treatment fits breast cancer in general, while in fact it concerns a particular type of breast cancer, which is called HER2. Although all stories referred to this type of breast cancer in the body of the item, only some of them stated explicitly that the said treatment pertains to this particular type only. In the version reported by most local media outlets, there was a reference to HER2 by way of providing general information that speaks about the percentage of breast cancer worldwide. This version did not say explicitly that the treatment was solely developed for this type.

2. The number of women who were included in the study was 127, divided into three groups. One group was treated by Herceptin only; the second was treated by Herceptin and Tyverb; while the third did not receive any treatment. According to Dr. Mar"i, when we say that the tumor disappeared in 11% only and shrank in 17% within the group that was treated by two drugs, we are talking about a total that does not exceed 12 women for which the treatment achieved good results. These figures, according to Dr. Mar"i, are, by scientific standards of studies, "very low" and are completely not enough to reach generalizable results in the way followed by some media outlets. Judging by these figures, the results are "promising," but only as a beginning that can be built on through further studies and research.

It is noteworthy that some of the coverage reported the caveat by researchers that there was a need for further studies, but the version reported by most local sites neglected this and portrayed the treatment as complete and ready to be generalized.

3. Most of the stories circulated by local sites said that this method of treatment would do away with chemotherapy and surgery, which is a misleading claim for two reasons. The first reason, as Dr. Mar"i explains, has to do with chemotherapy, which was not part of the treatment procedures explored by the said study. Therefore, it is not right to judge that the aforementioned treatment is better than chemotherapy. The sample, as was explained before, was divided into three groups, one of which was treated with one drug, the other with two drugs, and the third was given no drugs. Scientifically speaking, comparison should be between the results of these three procedures only. If it is to be compared with the results of chemotherapy, the study must contain a group that was subjected to this procedure in the first place, which was not the case.  

The second reason has to do with surgery. According to Dr. Mar"i, there is a piece of information contained in the study, which news reports did not mention; namely, that all women included in the study eventually had surgery. Thus, it is untrue that this treatment does away with surgery. In all events, Dr. Mar"i confirms, to judge the effectiveness of the results, we need a long time during which research should be completed and the condition of those patients should be observed after surgery to know if the tumor returned or not.

In this context, Dr. Mar"i points out that a specialist who reads such news immediately thinks about the procedures of the study, the size and type of the sample, the duration, and other key details to evaluate the importance and credibility of the results. However, the ordinary reader does not do that. Instead, he takes information as established facts. Hence, the need for media outlets to be careful when handling medical news, especially news that promotes certain types of drugs and treatment procedures. This news must not be published except after running it by specialists to confirm the accuracy of the information it contains.

[1] The scientific name for it is "trastuzumab."

[2] The scientific name for it is "lapatinib."a