chemo generations

A bit more on the "generation" - @Zoffiel (Marg) hullo there, your analogy is brilliant - the big thing in chemo evolution is the introduction of the taxanes which are 3rd gen I think ... Anyway the thing is they can have "better" outcomes but only for certain varieties of the disease - nobody even knew these variants existed a few years ago- and the "cost" is often higher in terms of side effects. So you buy a new Holden which turns out to be a German engineered disguised Opel and it does great if you are in a big hurry on the Autobahn but it is horrible on gravel roads outside Yackandanda where the old Holden ute will be a lot more reliable and cost a lot less. For me using the various predict tools suggested a taxane would add a small percentage improvement in survival at a high cost in likely side effects because of existing comorbidities and my age. In the event I said no to chemo altogether and one onco I saw agreed that was a good decision providing I went on the Letrozole and stayed on it. But there are no guarantees and (all sing together) "Everyone is Different" . Thinking of you Becca you will get through this!

Excellent analogy!  Our medical team has us as their number one priority 

Take care

What @Annski said!  The only real prediction that anyone can give you is that you will probably, on the law of averages, live longer if you embark on some treatment program. As Rikki explained, the ''generation' thing reflects progression in the drugs we are given.
Now, before anyone gets stressed because they have been recommended an early generation treatment, a scientist mate of mine gave me a good anology which may help explain this. Car companies are constantly coming up with new models. They may be more comfortable and have fancy names, but the reality is their purpose has remained the same. Getting us from point A to point B. All the safety features in the world can not guarantee you won't have an accident and they are harder to fix when they break down. Sometimes an older model is more reliable and a better option, depending on the road you are travelling. Mxx

@Sister  thanks, yes I don't seem to know many with ILC either. & mine was diagnosed late & only due to my persistence in saying that something was wrong after 2 'all clear' mammograms 

@Annski   thanks for that. 
I am a person that like 'to know' or to have answers so I can make informed decisions. I have another health issue I am dealing with so it's difficult to make decisions.
I'm also not sure how safe my job is after a call I just received - all I need!

My surgeon once said "What causes cancer is still a mystery. But we are getting much better at treating it". Complex diseases may well have complex triggers.

@beccabecca I think part of the problem is with ILC.  My onc did give me stats at the time (can't remember them now) but he did tell me that it was "about".  As I understand it, ILC hasn't been identified as a distinct type for that many years.  Due to it's presentation, it's often found at a later stage than IDC and it accounts for about 5-15% of breast cancer diagnoses (depending on which source you read).  This all means that it doesn't factor into the predictive tools particularly well and that the sample group is smaller.  Of course, lower numbers of patients also means less research, although I did read on a US site that if taken as a distinct cancer, ILC would be the 6th most likely cancer to affect women.

@beccabecca it's so frustrating isn't it. At the early stages of diagnosis and treatment I was angry all the time because I believed the medical team so-called was keeping information from me deliberately but I have reached the conclusion they just don't know the answers to our most compelling questions. Everyone chants "everyone is different" but really the random way research gets done in this field means the kind of questions you are asking cannot be accurately answered. BC is one of the most mysterious and complex of diseases. The disconnect between scientific research in the lab, clinical work and epidemiology is profound. Predictive tools have come a long way and will get better but it is still almost impossible to get an estimate of rate of recurrence or time to metastases for different cancer variants at different stages. The models being used are not up to it. But I have stopped being angry and upset, at least it's nothing personal and we are all in the same boat. Warm wishes to you, A.

@Riki_BCNA   thanks for the link. My oncologist doesn't give me answers to questions I've asked. Even when I ask things like what % difference for recurrence is this drug over that, or not taking anything etc. That's why I've had to look for answers myself 

Hello@beccabecca the chemotherapy generations refer to the changes over time as a result of research and the benefits found with combinations of chemotherapy agents. Treatment is based on individual pathology and a range of other considerations. If you have any questions about your regime and why it is chosen for you it is a very worthwhile discussion to have with your oncologist. The following article talks about the generations of chemotherapy and advances in knowledge over time https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-015-0439-8