I’m in a grey area and confused
Hi, recently diagnosed early breast cancer. Invasive ductal carcinoma. Lumpectomy and reconstruction (breast reduction). ER and PR +, Her2 -, Tumor grade 2 10mm, KI67 very low, 1 out of 3 lymph nodes...
Forum Discussion
Hello @jo_c
Our stories sound very similar. I was also diagnosed with early stage, hormone positive, HER2 negative breast cancer. However, I had 2 lumps in my right breast and one in my left, therefore multifocal and simultaneously bilateral (which really scared me, but surgeon said was not a bad thing). I also had a micromet in one node (discovered after surgery which my oncos said posed no threat at all, and I was still considered stage 1). The lumps were grades 1 and 2, which was a positive. I was told if I had a DMX, that I wouldn’t need chemo or radiation, so I agreed. After surgery, my first surgeon told me I was a good candidate for chemo, simply because I was ‘young’ (39 at the time). I was gutted because he knew my age before the surgery and still told me what he told me. They couldn’t give me a better reason for having it. So, then I saw a medical onco who told me it was a grey area, and ultimately was my decision also. He said I didn’t really need it because the surgery did the job, but chemo would just be an extra help. I felt like crying because it was a huge decision to make on my own, and not enough time to make it. Too much unwanted pressure. I actually didn’t want chemo because I know the damage chemo can do, and my reasoning was that I also want to live a long time being so young, yet chemo can cause issues with vital organs which would’ve meant more medication, more side effects etc, and that also scared me. Plus, the benefit was only an extra 2%. Finally, I asked the oncologist’s registrar, who was also a young woman, what she would do in my situation. She said (in short) that she’s risk averse and wouldn’t opt for it. She had also said at a previous appointment that too many women choose to throw ‘everything’ at it, which isn’t always a good thing as lots of times, the risks seriously outweigh the benefits, so we need to make choices based on ourselves (her words), and that the hormone therapy would be more effective in my case. I liked her answer because I actually agree with it, and finally chose not to do chemo.
Our stories sound very similar. I was also diagnosed with early stage, hormone positive, HER2 negative breast cancer. However, I had 2 lumps in my right breast and one in my left, therefore multifocal and simultaneously bilateral (which really scared me, but surgeon said was not a bad thing). I also had a micromet in one node (discovered after surgery which my oncos said posed no threat at all, and I was still considered stage 1). The lumps were grades 1 and 2, which was a positive. I was told if I had a DMX, that I wouldn’t need chemo or radiation, so I agreed. After surgery, my first surgeon told me I was a good candidate for chemo, simply because I was ‘young’ (39 at the time). I was gutted because he knew my age before the surgery and still told me what he told me. They couldn’t give me a better reason for having it. So, then I saw a medical onco who told me it was a grey area, and ultimately was my decision also. He said I didn’t really need it because the surgery did the job, but chemo would just be an extra help. I felt like crying because it was a huge decision to make on my own, and not enough time to make it. Too much unwanted pressure. I actually didn’t want chemo because I know the damage chemo can do, and my reasoning was that I also want to live a long time being so young, yet chemo can cause issues with vital organs which would’ve meant more medication, more side effects etc, and that also scared me. Plus, the benefit was only an extra 2%. Finally, I asked the oncologist’s registrar, who was also a young woman, what she would do in my situation. She said (in short) that she’s risk averse and wouldn’t opt for it. She had also said at a previous appointment that too many women choose to throw ‘everything’ at it, which isn’t always a good thing as lots of times, the risks seriously outweigh the benefits, so we need to make choices based on ourselves (her words), and that the hormone therapy would be more effective in my case. I liked her answer because I actually agree with it, and finally chose not to do chemo.
Then, I saw my radiation onco and it turned out that suspicious tissue had been left behind (despite having a double mastectomy, hence me changing surgeons) and I ended up needing bilateral radiation as well. So, do I regret not having chemo 4 years later? Nope, I’m very happy with my decision. I think the surgery and radiation, plus 3 years of hormone suppressing therapy was enough. You can’t ever wipe out all cancer cells, because they’re always present in everybody. It’s just how the body functions. We just need a healthy and strong immune system to wipe these rogue cells out before they multiply out of control. So, I figured I’d change my diet, start exercising, see a therapist etc instead, to try and boost my immune system so it’s healthy and robust again, instead of having more poisons injected. That’s how I'm getting that extra 2% (and more) benefit for my body instead of via chemo. I’m not denying that chemo can help, because it does help heaps of women, but it is toxic to the body and not necessary for everybody. There are other ways to improve our health.
This was my reasoning only, for myself. We all need to make choices for our individual selves. As long as you’re happy and confident with your choice, I think that’s all that matters.
Sorry my answer is so long, but this ride is never a smooth one as we know. So many things happen that need explaining for these types of questions. I hope you figure it out ♥️.