Stephens Tanya
Haberfield Veterinary Hospital, Haberfield, NSW 2045, Australia.
Animals (Basel). 2019 Jul 14;9(7):441. doi: 10.3390/ani9070441.
Despite the emergence some years ago of oncology as a veterinary specialty, there has been very little in the way of ethical debate on the use of chemotherapy in dogs. The purpose of this article is to undertake an ethical analysis to critically examine the use of chemotherapy to prolong the life of dogs suffering from cancer. If dogs have no concept of the future and are likely to suffer at least some adverse effects with such treatments, consideration should be given as to whether it is ethical and in the animal's best interests to use chemotherapy. Chemotherapeutic drugs are mutagenic, carcinogenic, teratogenic and may be irritant. Furthermore, chemotherapy may involve multiple trips to the veterinarian, multiple procedures and periods in isolation. Cancer-associated pain has been shown to be under-diagnosed and pet owners overestimate the effects of chemotherapy on treatment survival time. Of additional concern is the public health risks associated with chemotherapeutic drugs. As chemotherapy is not generally considered curative, it is in effect palliative care. However, palliative care may not be in the best interests of a terminally ill animal. As the specialty of veterinary oncology continues to grow and as the use of chemotherapy becomes more commonplace in the treatment of animals with cancer, it is imperative that there is an ongoing ethical debate on the use of chemotherapy in animals.
尽管数年前肿瘤学已成为兽医专业领域，但在犬类化疗应用方面，伦理辩论却非常少。本文旨在进行伦理分析，以批判性地审视使用化疗延长患癌犬类生命的情况。如果犬类没有对未来的概念，且此类治疗可能至少会使其遭受一些不良反应，那么就应考虑使用化疗是否符合伦理以及是否符合动物的最大利益。化疗药物具有致突变性、致癌性、致畸性，且可能具有刺激性。此外，化疗可能需要多次前往兽医处、进行多项操作并经历隔离期。研究表明，与癌症相关的疼痛未得到充分诊断，而宠物主人高估了化疗对治疗存活时间的影响。另外令人担忧的是与化疗药物相关的公共健康风险。由于化疗一般不被视为治愈性手段，实际上它属于姑息治疗。然而，姑息治疗可能并不符合绝症动物的最大利益。随着兽医肿瘤学专业领域的不断发展，以及化疗在癌症动物治疗中的应用变得越来越普遍，对动物化疗应用进行持续的伦理辩论势在必行。
