WOW! @Annski ... I'd never really thought about those who'd also taken themselves off the meds early or intermittently during their treatment as 'messing up' data and subsequent diagnosis of mets relative to the 'existing statistics' (I couldn't tolerate Letrozole! :( ) ... but it really needs a truthful investigation. It is such a huge area to be looked into - over a very long period of time.
As well as @romlas's explanation of the SEERS data - I think the 70% is just a loose acceptance that if up to 30% 'may' acquire random mets, then 70% 'shouldn't acquire them'! A comforting number - but how accurate, given the passage of time?!
As with you and your daughter - it is very disconcerting that we are not kept aware of the chances of Mets after our active treatment has finished .... and a HEAP of research is badly needed!
@Romla - what the breast surgeon explains sounds very promising for reducing the likelihood of mets in smaller tumours - that is good ..... and 2005 is such a bloody LONG TME AGO to still be quoting as 'statistical evidence' relative to 2019!
Let's hope that more research is done into this area SOON
