Talk:Hodgkin lymphoma

Medicine B‑class High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:MedportalSA

Redirection

I noticed that "Hodgkin lymphoma" is redirected to "Hodgkin's lymphoma". Really, everything should redirect to "Hodgkin Lymphoma". The WHO classification system has followed a general trend in medicine of removing the possessive form of eponymous names (Dr. Hodgkin did not create the disease, or even suffer from it). Although many people still use terms such as Hodgkin's lymphoma or Burkitt's lymphoma, these are properly referred to as Hodgkin or Burkitt lymphoma. Also, in parts of the article it is called "Hodgkin's Disease". This is a term that was popularized before it was established with certainty that Hodgkin lymphoma was, in fact, a lymphoma (only recently has a marker been developed that consistently classifies this disease as a B-cell lymphoma). If we're going for accuracy here, we should always call it Hodgkin lymphoma. User:Anonymous 18 October 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.88.150.157 (talk) 06:26, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are various opinions here, and we are not required to follow the WHO's choice. Generally, Wikipedia leaves articles wherever the original author chose to put them. The redirects take people directly to the page no matter which version they search for, so it's really, really unimportant. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By that rationale, why not call the main page Hodgkin's Disease? Or Lymphosarcoma? It's not about the redirect, it's about where the redirects actually redirect. If the convention is to call it Hodgkin Lymphoma by experts in Hodgkin lymphoma, then why shouldn't we do that? Don't we want it to be as accurate as possible? User:Anonymous 18:50 19 October 2008

Those looking for help and information

Obviously, an encyclopedia entry will not help you much in looking for information for you or your loved one if they have cancer. I suggest you consider going to the reference websites at the bottom of the article. Also, contact a charitable organization in your country to ask for information. A directory of lymphoma information by country is at http://www.lymphomainfo.net/info/org.html but there are others, even in your phone book. Ask the associations to mail you information. Mikebar 04:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrity diagnoses

The article doesn't seem to flow well with the "Celebrity diagnoses" section. I would suggest removing it because it doesn't seem pertinent to the article.
Pnswmr 12:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could make a good additional article later but not pertinent as written. Mikebar 12:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

name?

lymphogranulomatosis ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.133.109.79 (talk) 02:52, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma article.

External links

Wikipedia's external links policy and the specific guidelines for medicine-related articles do not permit the inclusion of external links to non-encyclopedic material, particularly including: patient support groups, personal experience/survivor stories, internet chat boards, e-mail discussion groups, recruiters for clinical trials, healthcare providers, fundraisers, or similar pages.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising opportunity or a support group for patients or their families. Please do not re-insert links that do not conform to the standard rules.

External links are not required in Wikipedia articles. They are permitted in limited numbers and in accordance with the policies linked above. If you want to include one or more external links in this article, please link directly to a webpage that provides detailed, encyclopedic information about the disease. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second this - the growing list of people who want to link their personal sites to wikipedia articles is taking away from making good articles. Mikebar (talk) 06:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Stanford V was inferior..." study

The study referenced was a European study done without accurately following the Stanford protocol. For instance, a large number of patients in the suspect study never received radiotherapy, a key component of Stanford V. The bad study was superseded later by studies, some in Europe, following Stanford V accurately and those studies closely matched the results of the Stanford trials. This oft-quoted bad study is in my opinion an example of regional bias in patient treatment options. I will identify one or two of the counter studies this weekend and update the article to correct the effect of the biased study, unless I see reasonable objection here. Curious Violet (talk) 07:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk contribution moved from Hodgkin's Disease redirect page

This paragraph was clogging up the redirect. I moved it here for conservational reasons. More of a curiosity. -- megA (talk) 13:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hodgkin's disease (lymphoma) is a fascinating disease to hematopathologists like myself from both the standpoint of the unusual bimodal age incidence, assocation with the Epstein-Barr virus, and the presence of a prominent infiltrate of reactive lymphocytes whose role in the disease is entirely mysterious. Most lymphomas are composed of monotonous sheets or nodules of tumor cells - but not Hodgkin's ! 16:27, 14 January 2005, by 129.109.157.141

Spam

I'm sure you've all noticed the recent efforts of the new editor to promote a specific lymphoma-related charity. I assume that the editor is probably an employee or fundraising volunteer. I've been meaning to say for months now that the "charities" subsection of ==External links== is just spambait. We can't list them all -- there are dozens of good, legitimate charities in this area -- and it's not really fair to pick our favorites. Furthermore, the point is to provide information, not "please donate!" or "look, charities exist!" links. I firmly believe that our readers are smart enough to "Ask Mr Google" if they want to find an appropriate charity.

Would anyone mind if we just remove all the general lymphoma-related charity links (but not those pointing to a particularly informative page that just happens to be hosted by a charity)? This would also make this article follow the pattern set at Leukemia, which lists no charities. I've made the same proposal at Lymphoma. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --Arcadian (talk) 00:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Line in introductory paragraph

"More recent trials are showing much higher five-year survival rates than have previously been seen, often on the order of 98% for many patients.[1]"

I think the phrase "on the order of 98% for many patients" makes no sense at all. How can a patient show 98% survival? A population of patients may show 98% survival. Since this isn't my area of expertise, I don't want to make a change. However, I would recommend that the sentence simply be:

"More recent trials are showing much higher five-year survival rates than have previously been seen, often on the order of 98%.[1]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingle.chris (talk • contribs) 00:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"On the order of" is entirely inappropriate in this context. The five-year survival rates are not somewhere between 9.8% and 980%. I will atttempt to correct the problem. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The change made, i.e, "for patients in earlier stages", is now more informative and accurate!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingle.chris (talk • contribs) 22:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]