Would you do chemo if your pet was diagnosed with cancer? *Update post 27

[KalamazooMom]

Am wondering about what you would do if your beloved pet was diagnosed with cancer. You can see my previous post for my situation. I thought it would help me decide what to do to hear about other people's thoughts on this subject.

[micah_mae_]

Personally, I wouldn't. I believe that when it comes down to it, quality of life is more important than quantity.

[GreenGranolaMama]

Originally Posted by micah_mae_

Personally, I wouldn't. I believe that when it comes down to it, quality of life is more important than quantity.

I agree. But I would do whatever I could to make him comfortable and happy.

[Ruthla]

I don't see animal life as being sacred the way human life is. If my beloved pet was diagnosed with cancer, I'd consider palliative treatments and I'd consider euthanasia if the animal was really suffering.

For a human being, I'd be much more likely to try invasive treatments if there's a chance of remission/cure, and only go towards palliative care if there was little hope of recovery and/or the treatments were too painful to make life worth living. And I'd never, ever, consider euthanasia for a person.

OK, now that I've read your earlier post, I can give some advice specific to your situation.

The dog is currently happy and appears not to be in pain. Starting chemo would make her sick, and may not extend her life- but could "ruin" the time she has left.

Please, please, tell your children that the dog has cancer and is dying, so they can make the appropriate goodbyes, and so that they won't be too shocked when she goes.

[ShadowMoon]

I would, but only if my dog was still young, the cancer was in it's early stages, and it wouldn't be a long painful treatment. Those are pretty much the same guidelines I would use on myself.

[lucyem]

I only checked other because there is always a possibility of a chemo treatment for something minor in a young animal that would help them live a long life. That would be the only time I would consider it.

As much as it hurts I would let my pet go. I would give them the best last few weeks of their life and when it is time have the vet come to my house and put them down in the nicest way possible.

My opinion is based on experience with pets and humans with cancer and other serious diseases. Quality of life means everything. I would rather be sad and let my pet go a little early then to regret putting them through unnecessary pain.

[Ola_]

I would, but it would depend on the diagnosis, what the likely outcome is, and quality of life prognosis. From what I know about chemo treatments for pets vs. humans, the animal ones are quite different. They don't have the same side effects that people get (hairloss, etc) for example.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

No I wouldnt. To much stress for the animal with no real way to know just how badly they are hurting and their quality of life. Better to let them go peacefully than drag out the pain and discomfort.

I have never had a pet with cancer but I did deal with a similar situation where I could have done things to keep her with me a bit longer but that would have been selfish of me and in the end she would have died anyway.

[gingerstar]

I agree with Ruthla and lucyem. In your situation, I would use this time, while she is still happy, to give her a really good life, knowing she is loved, and using this time to help your children adjust and say goodbye.

People can cope with chemo (that is, intentionally ingested poison) by looking ahead and hoping for health in the future. Animals only know right now, y'know?

Best wishes to you and your family, and to Lacey.

[KalamazooMom]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

The dog is currently happy and appears not to be in pain. Starting chemo would make her sick, and may not extend her life- but could "ruin" the time she has left.

Right. That's my current thought as well. However the veterinary oncologist we saw said the don't give chemo to pets in the same high doses they do to people. She said dogs don't usually get sick, though some do. She said some sleep a lot. And some don't seem to have a problem at all. Of course there's no way of knowing how any particular dog would react. But I keep thinking chemo is not going to be a cure, it's just going to give her more time with us.

[Logan's Mom]

Originally Posted by lucyem

I only checked other because there is always a possibility of a chemo treatment for something minor in a young animal that would help them live a long life. That would be the only time I would consider it.

[EviesMom]

I haven't read your other posts, so I don't know the situation. But about 18 months or a year ago, our dog was diagnosed with a cancerous lump. The regular vet removed as much as he could, but it was around an artery in her leg and couldn't all be removed. He referred us to a veterinary oncologist, who advised chemo.

We did that, as the dog was only 6 and it was expected to be a relatively simple treatment for 6-8 weeks, 1 visit in the office, then 3 days later a pill my DH gave her (the vet said as I was bf-ing, that was safest, although I could technically have given it). She didn't lose hair, she felt nauseated and was slower than usual, she didn't go to the dog run as her immune system was depressed; however, she walked outside normally, she had a dog friend come over to play, she played with the kids, she ate mostly normally, a little less than usual. Mostly she had diarreah after each of the treatments for a day or two. Gross but, not *that* bad!

And now it's a year + later, the lump is gone, she has a normal healthy life. We just check for lumps and the vet does too. I would do it again if we had to, the main problem was the cost. If it wasn't expected to help her live more than a year of normal healthy life after the chemo though, I would have made a different decision.

[EviesMom]

Oh dear, having read your other post, I don't think I would do chemo in that situation. What does the oncologist suggest? Do they think there's a decent chance of survival if they do chemo? If it's a faint chance of survival, I would probably not do chemo and would say goodbyes, personally.

[SophieAnn]

I would:

1) IF there was a good prognosis for cure/healthy future

2) IF the dog has a good amount of time left in expected lifetime (example: if the breed has an average lifetime of 12-14 years and it's a 4 year old dog)

3) IF after discussing the side-effects with my vet I was comfortable with the side-effects and how effectively we can treat/manage them

If the above 3 conditions were met, then money would not be a concern. We'd find a way to make it happen.

For the OP - have you sought a 2nd opinion before making your decision? If there is a vet college in your area, they would most likely be able to offer you more options/specialists/better care. I know in our area the vet college is the best care possible.

[KalamazooMom]

Yes, we did get a second opinion. We saw 2 vets down here, and then we spent the day at the Veterinary Teaching Hospital at Michigan State in Lansing. We saw a veterinary oncologist there. She did encourage us to do the chemo. I asked about how the heartworm might effect the chemo and she didn't really have an answer for that and she said she had no experience with chemo on a dog with HW disease. I suspect that's why they would like us to do it since that is in fact a research and teaching hospital?

We don't know how old the dog is. She was a stray who we adopted her through the Animal Rescue. When we got her they said they thought she was about 3. But the vet we saw in October said he thought she was probably 7 or 8. We also don't know what breed she is. She's about 50 pounds. Best guesses are: Retreiver, Corgi, Beagle, or anything you can think of.

[littlecityfarmer]

1) IF there was a good prognosis for cure/healthy future

2) IF the dog has a good amount of time left in expected lifetime (example: if the breed has an average lifetime of 12-14 years and it's a 4 year old dog)

3) IF after discussing the side-effects with my vet I was comfortable with the side-effects and how effectively we can treat/manage them

I voted no, but I totally agree with the above.

We went though a similar line of reasoning when one of our cats was developed Fibrosarcoma-- he was only 3 years old. I knew something wasn't right, but he acted normal until the last 3 or 4 weeks of his life, when his kidneys started to shut down. By then, his cancer was too advanced and in too many organs (kidneys, liver, heart, eyes, possibly brain) to treat, though if we had caught it earlier and there was a reasonable chance of long-term survival with a good quality of life for him. We ended up deciding to put him to sleep-- even it we had gone ahead with chemo, it wouldn't have extended his life by very much (a month or two, maybe), and he would have had to go through a lot of painful procedures that would have severly limited his quality of life. We know we made the right decision, but it was still heartbreaking

[SophieAnn]

OP I have now gone and read your situation.

In your situation it sounds to me like prognosis is not good. So my #1 IF for chemo would mean that no, I don't think I would proceed in your case. Cancer has spread from lung to brain, the cancer is an agressive form, and there is the unknown complications of the heartworm. Without a good chance for cure I would not go ahead.

If you do decide not to move forward with chemo, focus on keeping Lacey comfortable and make the most of the time you have left with her.

We just lost our 3 1/2 year old dog very suddenly a month ago (bloat).... so I understand the pain of losing a dog WAY too early. It's just not fair. If I had known we were going to lose him just one day before we did... I would have hugged and kissed him all day long.

[greenmagick]

There would be a lot of factors involved in making my decision. It would depend on the dogs age, the type of cancer, the expected treatment plan, etc etc. I have known several dogs who have gone through Chemo...some didnt seem to phased by it and went on to have long lives afterwards. Others were already old and the chemo was only projected to add about 3-6 months. I lean towards no, but if it was a young dog and the vet thought response to chemo would be good and high rate of success with it, I may do it. I would look into other options first definitely though.

[mamallama]

I voted yes, but under conditions.

If my dog were young & the prognosis was promising, then yes, I'd consider it.

I agree with the quality over quantity sentiment.

I wouldn't treat an aggressive cancer. I wouldn't treat an older dog. I wouldn't do chemo on a dog with advanced heartworm.

I'm so sorry

[Breathless Wonder]

I voted no, simply because I know too many people who have done it, and then lost the dog anyway in a short period of time.