Forum Discussion
Predict - Breast Cancer app
I’ve just discovered an app called ‘Predict - Breast Cancer’. I may be late to the party on this one and you might all know about it but I’d like to know your opinions if you’ve used it and if you’ve discussed it with your oncologists.
It strongly recommends that patients use this tool in consultation with their doctor.
The app’s blurb says:
“This tool applies to women who have had surgery for early invasive breast cancer and are deciding which other treatments to have.”
”Predict is a tool that helps show how breast cancer treatments after surgery might improve survival rates. Once details about the patient and their cancer have been entered, the tool will show how different treatments would be expected to improve survival rates up to 15 years after diagnosis. This is based on data from similar women in the past. It is important to note that these treatments have side effects which should also be considered when deciding on a treatment.”
It claims:
”Development of the model was a collaborative project between the Cambridge Breast Unit, University of Cambridge Department of Oncology and the UK's Eastern Cancer Information and Registration Centre (ECRIC) (now part of the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service) and was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer Limited (the company had no input into the model at all).
The website has been built by the Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence Communication at the University of Cambridge who are funded by a generous donation from the David and Claudia Harding Foundation and the Winton Charitable Foundation.
Predict has been endorsed by the American Joint Committee on Cancer.”
This is a link to the app:
https://breast.v3.predict.cam/tool
5 Replies
SYLV1E As with Moomincorn Back when I was diagnosed, it was wasn't available to the public - only to the Oncs (hiding the screen - so I took notes AND recorded it!) They used this tool to give you an idea of how effective your treatment plan should be, showing 'survivability' percentages from said plan - usually using the 10 year anniversary as being 'good'! From memory, mine indicated that up to 90% re my diagnosis, tumour size & treatments should survive longer than 10 years. (I am in my 9th year now.)
It was suggested to me that my results were inconclusive if radiation would increase my 'survivability' .... so it was my option to have it or not. I said "YES, I will have it" as I didn't want the 'what ifs' if it came back earlier than the 10 years. ILC in particular is a much slower growing BC than the others .... and sadly, can pop back up again even 15-20 years later (as happened to a girlfriend.)
As you say - it should really only be used in consultation with your Onc - as, if the incorrect info is put in (accidentally) the results might scare the pants off you!I know I always say that 'Knowledge is Power' ..... but conversely, 'Too Little Knowledge can be Dangerous!' .... so put your trust in your team xx
Take care & all the best xx
Thanksarpie, for replying. I don’t have a problem trusting my team but after way too many misdiagnosis’s over the years, I won’t trust them blindly. I ask all the questions and want to see all the reports and that doesn’t always go down so well with some doctors. 😄
My best example of this was about 5 years ago when my asthma was making it hard to breathe and I was also having trouble swallowing as food seemed to be getting stuck. My GP sent me for scans and when I went back for the results and asked for a copy of the report.
The conclusion at the bottom said everything was fine but as I’m reading the report, I noticed somewhere halfway down the page the comment ‘right-sided aortic arch noted.’ I asked my GP what that might mean and she didn’t know. I had a phone appointment with my cardiologist the next day so I asked him and he said he’d never heard of it. He checked his book (wta) and advised that it wasn’t in his book so mustn’t be too serious.
So, when I get home im straight on the internet, found right sided aortic arch and all variations of it with photos of scans and all. So I jumped onto my Hunter Imaging portal and sure enough, my scans looked similar.
I sent an email to my cardiologist and asked if this is what I had and attached the online info and scans and my scans. No reply, but ended up at Emergency the next weekend because I was struggling to breath and handed over all my research and again to be dismissed as it was ‘very rare’ so not likely to be the problem and got sent for a scan for pulmonary embolism which was all clear. After threatening to call the REACH number, one of the younger doctors had a proper look at my scans and pointed to the one with my name on it and asked “is that you?” 🤦🏻♀️
She took off to find someone from the Cardiothoracic Team and next thing I know, I had an appointment at Westmead Hospital with one of the top Cardiothoracic Surgeons two days later. Turns out I have a congenital defect where my ascending aorta crosses over to the right side of my chest instead of staying on the left and my descending aorta comes down midline, so in front of my spine but behind my oesophagus and trachea.
So, that’s just one, very protracted, example of why I like to do my own research, and that’s the short version. 😄
And I apologise if you’ve waded all the way through that. 😂😂Holy Moly, SYLV1E ... well done YOU for advocating SO strongly for yourself xx. And thank god you did! Yep, I always ask for printed copies of my report .... and it is good we can now see our own scans, once they did away with the old 'plastic/seethru' Xrays.
Yep - and specially being 'rural/regional' (and being female!) we are not always given the thorough 'check' that a guy would be given, if it was HIS report.Keep doing your researching!
SYLV1E I read about it on these forums a while back and have played with the tool a few times as my situation became more clear. I've always been a bit of a nerd for numbers :)
My medical oncologist used either that or a similar tool (he had the screen angled away from me) to talk through numbers with me. I was surprised not to be given anything on paper however the things he mentioned sounded similar to the predict tool.
I've found it useful to tinker with the options - changing some values has bigger impact than others - so I've better understood my specific situation, how it differs from others, and why the medical team has recommended this path.
Thank you so much for your response. I wasn’t sure how accurate this would be or if the medical professionals would approve of it as we know how they can be. 😁
It’s interesting that your medical oncologist used something similar. While I respect the professionals, I always like to do my own research and have advocated for myself and my daughter on several occasions and most really, really don’t like that. 😁
