On Aug 20, 5:56 pm, "James M. Knox" wrote:
wrote in news:e483c736-5b9d-4690-8b0d-c81c232718d8
@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

I'd like to know about the decision making process an MD might have
made to send a patient to Dana in Boston (5th best cancer hospital in
the US according to US News) instead of Sloan in NYC (2nd best). There
would have been no reason for anyone to have suspected this tragic
result, of course, just wondering why the physically nearer and
somewhat superior hospital would not have been first choice, and maybe
learn a hidden lesson from this awful crash.

I can give you a general answer (i.e. may or may not be the case for this
particular patient). Most of our patients are in *experimental* cancer
programs. The protocol for those is that they are usually allowed at a
VERY limited number of sites - sometimes only one location in the US.

The result is that you either find a way to get to the hospital that IS
doing the trial (and that may be thousands of miles away), or you don't get
the treatment. That simple. And insurance, even if you have it, won't pay
for the travel.

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1300 Koenig Lane West fax 512-371-5716
Suite 200
Austin, Tx 78756
-----------------------------------------------

I've sat on several IRBs and overlooked the possibility he might have
been a subject in a clinical trial! Thanks for pointing that out. That
possibility makes the flight much more reasonable,