Invasive lobular gr 2.. best treatments?.
Hi I am getting mixed msgs from my breast surgeon. At the beginning of all this I was told I was unlikely to need radio or chemo. Then it changed to prob need radio. Then it changed again to radio ...
Forum Discussion
@lemonade I've had a similar diagnosis: ILC OR+ PR+ HER-, very slow-growing. Originally thought to be 2.5cm with no nodes and undertook wide incision and sentinel node biopsy. Surgery and following path report showed 4.5cm without clear margins and 3 nodes involved so went back for full mastectomy and axillary dissection (8 nodes taken altogether without further involvement). My surgeon is also Jim Kollias in Adelaide who has co-ordinated my treatment so far and I have complete confidence in him. Originally, I was told that rads were almost certain, hormone therapy a given, but that chemo might not be necessary. That changed with the node involvement. My onc is Tony Michele at Adelaide Oncology at Calvary. One of the things I keep getting told by each specialist is that at 54, I am considered "young". And for that reason, given that breast cancer is still very much something that is treated with very blunt instruments, the statistics show that my long-term survival chances are increased by 5% with chemo. I can't say that I'm thrilled about having chemo (and if that blood test to check for floating cancer cells was available now, and reliable, it might show that I do not need it) but I'm determined to be here as healthy as possible for as long as I can. Jim Kollias is reasonably sure that I am cancer free from surgery but cancer is a sneaky beast and I don't want to find out 5 years down the track that some rogue cells got away. So, I have had 1 AC so far, 3 to go, then 12 taxol treatment. Then I go for 15 days of rads at RAH (doing that public). Then I get to discuss hormones. I'm not sure how the HER status affects treatment - I think it's just the type of hormone therapy but I'm sure someone else can provide info on that. By the way, my onc also said that with ILC, the predictive tools will give unreliable results. They're all mostly based on ductal carcinoma stats and ILC behaves very differently.
And if you're wondering about whether 5% stats are worth it to you, I read a post (here?) that someone wrote about imagining people in a room, a number getting a reprieve because they've had treatment, and imagining you're one of the ones left. I'm explaining this very badly (5am and I've been awake since 3am) but maybe someone else may have seen it and can explain better.
Hope this helps.
And if you're wondering about whether 5% stats are worth it to you, I read a post (here?) that someone wrote about imagining people in a room, a number getting a reprieve because they've had treatment, and imagining you're one of the ones left. I'm explaining this very badly (5am and I've been awake since 3am) but maybe someone else may have seen it and can explain better.
Hope this helps.