Sister
7 years agoMember
Paclitaxol and Peripheral Neuropathy
I had an interesting discussion with my onc, yesterday. Now, he's a gently spoken and very considered man and I've been told by other professionals that he's not one for pretence. He may have talked about this at the first consultation but I honestly have little recollection of the nuts and bolts of that one but I have been getting more anxious about the peripheral neuropathy and whether I'll be able to finish treatment. I went into chemo with the advice that it was believed that surgery had gotten the cancer and that chemo was to mop up, so I would have 4 x 3 weekly AC and 12 x 1 weekly Paclitaxol. The neuropathy started around Week 6 or 7 of the taxol, very mildly. At that appointment, I saw the Registrar and she said that we would try to get me to No. 9 as that was the most important landmark. At the time, I accepted it as she said without question but I have still been anxious as the neuropathy has gradually asserted itself.
Well, long story but getting to the point. Going in for No. 11 yesterday, I asked the onc what the deal was. If chemo was an added insurance, then what was the significance of either 9 or 12 (or any other number)? His answer was that they just don't know - the studies have been about 12 dose treatment regimens and some of those people in the studies will not have been able to reach the full amount. What they do know is that the chemo is very effective and that most people can tolerate 12 but I think he said that more than that tends to be problematic. Some people show very early on that they are too sensitive to the drug and have to be taken off. With a number of people, the effects of nerve damage are considered to be too debilitating towards the end of the treatment meaning that it is considered not worth the risk to continue.
Now, please understand that this is me paraphrasing my doctor not quoting him so there may be some thing in what I've said that is slightly wrong. If this is a concern for you, speak to your own doctor. What this has left me with is less of a worry if he pulls the plug on the last treatment which is still very possible. I would still prefer to do the whole thing but I no longer feel it is a war between beating the cancer and permanent nerve damage.
Well, long story but getting to the point. Going in for No. 11 yesterday, I asked the onc what the deal was. If chemo was an added insurance, then what was the significance of either 9 or 12 (or any other number)? His answer was that they just don't know - the studies have been about 12 dose treatment regimens and some of those people in the studies will not have been able to reach the full amount. What they do know is that the chemo is very effective and that most people can tolerate 12 but I think he said that more than that tends to be problematic. Some people show very early on that they are too sensitive to the drug and have to be taken off. With a number of people, the effects of nerve damage are considered to be too debilitating towards the end of the treatment meaning that it is considered not worth the risk to continue.
Now, please understand that this is me paraphrasing my doctor not quoting him so there may be some thing in what I've said that is slightly wrong. If this is a concern for you, speak to your own doctor. What this has left me with is less of a worry if he pulls the plug on the last treatment which is still very possible. I would still prefer to do the whole thing but I no longer feel it is a war between beating the cancer and permanent nerve damage.