Childhood cancer is still considered
a rare a childhood disease.
Advances in survival of childhood cancer over the past three
decades have been promising. Today approximately 75 percent
of childhood cancers are potentially curable. This is achievable
by the combination of three important therapeutic modalities:
chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy - and by aggressive
clinical trials comparing the best known therapy with new treatment
innovations. These trials have been conducted by multidisciplinary
teams working together. The combined and shared expertise greatly
improves the chance and quality of survival.
But the bottom line that all experts agree upon is that timely
and proper diagnosis of Ewing’s sarcoma is crucial to
the success of the childhood cancer treatment by further increasing
an optimal outcome.
The chance of Edwin’s sarcoma recovery and choice of treatment
depends on the location, size, and stage of the cancer or how
far the childhood cancer has spread, how the sarcoma cancer
cells react to the treatment, and the child’s age and
general health.
Except for hematological (blood-related) cancers and brain tumors,
the principal childhood cancers are seldom seen in adults. In
children, deep-seated sarcomas and embryonic tumors are the
rule. Many of the well-known classic warning signs of adult
cancer apply to carcinomas that are extremely rare in children.
Pediatric tumors do not involve epithelial tissues so they do
not bleed externally or exfoliate cells. Screening techniques
useful in adults, such as stool blood tests or Pap smears, have
no counterparts in children.
Childhood cancer theories: How do children
differ from adults in getting cancer?
Children grow very rapidly; therefore they are continually producing
new cells, leading to growth, and also heal faster of any damage.
Children have stronger immune systems; a child is usually stronger
and healthier in all respects, including immunity.
Children have fewer years on the planet so they have less exposure
to toxins, bacteria, and viruses.
Children have less raging hormones; pre-puberty children do
not have active sex hormones fluctuating throughout the body.
All of this circumstantial childhood cancer evidence can be
interpreted various ways. Perhaps the childhood cancers are
more pure, arising naturally from internal DNA errors, without
any environmental triggers. Children have not been subject to
years of environmental radiation and toxins. Children don’t
have hormonal fluctuations, which are more direct triggers than
rare DNA duplication errors. Hence, their skin and other surface
cells do not have enough damage to cause cancers.
Perhaps children's DNA repair mechanisms are better except for
these particular cell types. An alternative medicine theory
might propose that children are less stressed and happier, and
only get cancers that are non-stress-related.
