Topic: 16 tx's vs 25? What do you think?

Posted on: Nov 17, 2009 08:13 pm

NY
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 979

cookiegal wrote:

I had my consultation with the radiation oncologist today. I have a choice of 16 higher dose treatments or 25 lower dose treatments.

I read a few studies on this, and to be honest they were a little bit over my level of techical comprehension.

The doctor says the results and se's are about the same. I am not working and live walking distance from the hospital so the convenience is not a big factor, and I am going to be doing this right through the holidays either way.

I have larger breasts and sensitive skin, as well as one positive node.

Opinions?

Posts 1 - 8 (8 total)
Titan Joined: May 2009 Posts: 692	Log in to post a reply Nov 17, 2009 09:58 pm Titan wrote: Sounds like you could go either way...Rads DO effect the skin..especialy later on..so if it doesn't matter to you as far as convenience or time go with the low dose..if you just want to get it over with..maybe deal with more skin irrations go with with high dose...sounds like you have a choice to get it done earlier...or go a few more doses....remember..if your skin does "break through"..they will hold you off a day or two any way...not really a tough decision...am I rambling? Am I any help..if it were me...I would go with the 16 days...just to get it over and done with... Diagnosis: 3/18/2009, IDC, 1cm, Stage I, Grade 3, 0/5 nodes, ER-/PR-, HER2-
lexislove Joined: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,522	Log in to post a reply Nov 17, 2009 10:04 pm lexislove wrote: I wish I was given the choice!!! I did 28 rads, it would be nice to get it over and done with faster. Good luck! Dx: Sep 2007, IDC 8cm, 0/6 nodes, ACT Chemo, R Mastectomy, 1 yr Herceptin, 28 Rads,Currently on Lupron, Tamox & Zometa. Exchange Sx Fall 2009, BRCA -
cookiegal NY Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 979	Log in to post a reply Nov 17, 2009 10:19 pm cookiegal wrote: those numbers don't include the boost btw...so I guess it is really 21 or 30. Fraction-something they called it.
hlya Joined: Apr 2009 Posts: 256	Log in to post a reply Nov 18, 2009 12:37 am, edited Nov 18, 2009 12:44 AM by hlya hlya wrote: One of my friend was given 16 x RADs instead of 28 after mastectomy, but she heard 28 x low dose would be good to breast skin for reconstruction, so she asked for 28. But her radiologist said 16 high dose is the best treatment to her based on her situation....Sounds like 16 is more harsh, 'cause she had grade 3 HER2+ tumor. Also she got her breast area swollen after starting RAd for a while, the doctor told her that was probably caused by RAD
cookiegal NY Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 979	Log in to post a reply Nov 18, 2009 01:05 am, edited Nov 18, 2009 04:28 PM by cookiegal cookiegal wrote: So far what I have discovered is the medical benefit seems ever so slightly favor 16, the se benefit seems slightly favor the traditional course. Still have no idea what to do!
knowledgefo… NC Joined: Jan 2009 Posts: 128	Log in to post a reply Nov 18, 2009 05:23 pm knowledgeforpower wrote: I did 18 sessions, 15 regular and 3 boosts. I have been extremely happy with my decision. I had no major side effects, just a slight itchy rash towards the end. I was very happy to not have to adjust my work schedule for a longer treatment plan. If you search this board under the word shortened you should find additional posts. Studies have shown the shortened plan is as effective as the longer version. If offered the shorter plan again, I would take it. Good luck with your decision. Diagnosis: 1/16/2009, IDC, <1cm, Stage Ib, Grade 3, 0/2 nodes, ER+/PR+, HER2-
hlya Joined: Apr 2009 Posts: 256	Log in to post a reply Nov 21, 2009 03:23 am hlya wrote: cookiegal: If your doctor didn't say you definitely 16 x RADs, I assume your BC is not as aggressive as my friend's. then you have to balance what's more important to you? You want to get the treatment done quickly? Worry about 28 would not be harsh enough? Worry about SEs ? Or Worry about your breast tissue (not sure whether you got mastectomy).....Then decide which one is better to you.
cookiegal NY Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 979	Log in to post a reply Nov 21, 2009 10:14 am cookiegal wrote: I I think that is very interesting that for the worst cases they suggest the 16's. I asked my medical onc, he said if I did not want the convenience of the 16's he would suggest the 25's since I am younger. His thinking is that they only know the se's 12 years out at this point. Unfortunately this question is no longer as urgent as I thought it would be, they now want me to consider chemo.

↑Back to Top