Forum Discussion
Radiation Therapy Omission
Hello, I have been informed by a radiation oncologist that I am at a increased risk of developing radiation-induced fibrosis (RIF) from radiation therapy (RT) due to my having a connective tissue d...
Hi Klio, Bluebell-1 , maxis and Hopeday , there seems to be more and more questions being raised within the medical community about the value of RT in certain BC situations. I have included an excerpt below from an online article published in January last Year and there are many scientific articles that have been published in the last couple of years debating the value of radiation in a number of different situations (please read below).
My point is that you are all absolutely right to question the value of RT in your specific cases and get answers directly related to your personal situations. It’s impressive to see more and more women advocating for themselves. I didn’t and I regret it.
“The purpose of radiation is to kill cancer cells in a targeted way. With breast cancer, it is often used after surgery to kill off any cancer cells that may remain in the breast or surrounding area. But there are three main areas of debate about radiation all with the focus of reducing side effects while maximizing outcomes, says Dr. Chirag Shah, Director of Breast Radiation Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic Cancer Center. There’s the question of whether to radiate the whole breast versus partial breast radiation, there’s debate about whether some patients even need radiation at all, and there’s debate about which radiation techniques offer the best outcomes with the least side effects.”
FlatNina that was a very interesting read thank you. In 2024 my radiotherapist explained because my DCIS was slow growing and the tumour was small and oestrogen positive studies in America and the UK had shown some women over 65 could omit radiotherapy after having a lumpectomy and by choosing to take Anastrazol or one of the other estrogen blockers for 5 years after surgery. He said in some countries the age was 70. From memory he mentioned in Australia the age was 70. I was 66 1/2. He also said without radiotherapy I had a 90% of no re occurrence in either 5 or 10 years I can't remember which. With radiotherapy I had a 96% of no re occurrence. When I had my 1st proper consultation not the post op one with my surgeon she asked me what I chose do do. I told her and she said that is a reasonable choice. I was very concerned about how my life would be if my heart and or lungs were damaged by radiotherapy. I already have health issues and my husband has stage 4 rectal cancer and I am supporting him. Would I choose the same way again I think I would but I don't know. I did find an article on line by Harvard Health publishing ( Harvard medical school )on small, estrogen positive cancers that says similar to what my radiotherapist explained to me.