› Forums › General Melanoma Community › melanoma outcome calculator
- This topic has 15 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
JC.
- Post
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:04 am
Hi, was wondering if anyone has seen this melanoma prediction calculator at melanomaprognosis.org. You enter in your individual factors and it gives average survival rates. I know the doctors don't really like to look at these average survival rates, but it seems fairly accurate, based on what my doctor has told me and from everything I have researched. Only thing I don't understand is that the 5 and 10 year survival rates go down. It's my understanding that when it gets that far out, the chances of recurrence goes down dramatically.
Hi, was wondering if anyone has seen this melanoma prediction calculator at melanomaprognosis.org. You enter in your individual factors and it gives average survival rates. I know the doctors don't really like to look at these average survival rates, but it seems fairly accurate, based on what my doctor has told me and from everything I have researched. Only thing I don't understand is that the 5 and 10 year survival rates go down. It's my understanding that when it gets that far out, the chances of recurrence goes down dramatically. I would like to hear what other peoples's opinion is of this.
- Replies
-
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:30 am
Your survival rates don't actually go down even though the numbers appear to say they do. Say you have 100 people. In the first 5 years, say 9 people pass away. That means the survival rates for the first five years would be 91%. Now say, in the next 5 years, only 5 people pass away. Almost 50% less people pass away (so your odds are going up – less people are dying as time goes on). But the 10 year survival rate now says that the survival rate is 86%. Survival rates are based on the INITIAL population of 100 and so they will always go down – but that doesn't mean an individual's odds go down – they don't. Your odds improve over time. I hope this little example will help you understand the statistics better.
Janner
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:55 am
Thanks Janner. That does make it a little clearer. I remember reading an article about John McCain's melanoma. It had been like seven or eight years at the time, and his doctor was quoted as saying his chances of recurrence were very small after that many years.
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:55 am
Thanks Janner. That does make it a little clearer. I remember reading an article about John McCain's melanoma. It had been like seven or eight years at the time, and his doctor was quoted as saying his chances of recurrence were very small after that many years.
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:55 am
Thanks Janner. That does make it a little clearer. I remember reading an article about John McCain's melanoma. It had been like seven or eight years at the time, and his doctor was quoted as saying his chances of recurrence were very small after that many years.
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:30 am
Your survival rates don't actually go down even though the numbers appear to say they do. Say you have 100 people. In the first 5 years, say 9 people pass away. That means the survival rates for the first five years would be 91%. Now say, in the next 5 years, only 5 people pass away. Almost 50% less people pass away (so your odds are going up – less people are dying as time goes on). But the 10 year survival rate now says that the survival rate is 86%. Survival rates are based on the INITIAL population of 100 and so they will always go down – but that doesn't mean an individual's odds go down – they don't. Your odds improve over time. I hope this little example will help you understand the statistics better.
Janner
-
- April 23, 2012 at 2:30 am
Your survival rates don't actually go down even though the numbers appear to say they do. Say you have 100 people. In the first 5 years, say 9 people pass away. That means the survival rates for the first five years would be 91%. Now say, in the next 5 years, only 5 people pass away. Almost 50% less people pass away (so your odds are going up – less people are dying as time goes on). But the 10 year survival rate now says that the survival rate is 86%. Survival rates are based on the INITIAL population of 100 and so they will always go down – but that doesn't mean an individual's odds go down – they don't. Your odds improve over time. I hope this little example will help you understand the statistics better.
Janner
-
- January 15, 2013 at 8:24 pm
other thing that doesn't make sense about these is how can it predict a lesion reduces someone's life by 0.8 years? I mean that seems ridiculous – people don't die 0.8 years earlier because of melanoma. . .it either cuts a lot of years off life or, it's "cured" . . .how can it be 0.8 years, that makes no sense
-
- January 16, 2013 at 5:28 am
And what do statistics have to do with MY individual survival? Statistics are based on numbers run on large numbers of people and do not foretell what WILL occcur in an individuals life.
-
- January 16, 2013 at 5:28 am
And what do statistics have to do with MY individual survival? Statistics are based on numbers run on large numbers of people and do not foretell what WILL occcur in an individuals life.
-
- January 16, 2013 at 5:28 am
And what do statistics have to do with MY individual survival? Statistics are based on numbers run on large numbers of people and do not foretell what WILL occcur in an individuals life.
-
- January 15, 2013 at 8:24 pm
other thing that doesn't make sense about these is how can it predict a lesion reduces someone's life by 0.8 years? I mean that seems ridiculous – people don't die 0.8 years earlier because of melanoma. . .it either cuts a lot of years off life or, it's "cured" . . .how can it be 0.8 years, that makes no sense
-
- January 15, 2013 at 8:24 pm
other thing that doesn't make sense about these is how can it predict a lesion reduces someone's life by 0.8 years? I mean that seems ridiculous – people don't die 0.8 years earlier because of melanoma. . .it either cuts a lot of years off life or, it's "cured" . . .how can it be 0.8 years, that makes no sense
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.