Will 30% of Early Stage (1-IIIA) go on to metastasize??
Comments
-
Yes, selizabeth, that is how mine is written and that's the conclusion that I got as well.
0 -
I had two different labs do my blood work. The first was before surgery, after biopsy and diagnosis: Neuts = 66; Lymphs = 24; Ratio = 2.75. Second labs drawn a little over 2 months later after surgery: Neuts = 50.1; Lymphs = 36.1; Ratio = 1.39. I don't have a copy of my latest blood work from Nov. of last year. But which number is the predictor? Before or after surgery? I guess it's good it went down. Would like to know what it is currently.
0 -
Interesting about the NLR. Mine at initial diagnosis was 3.58. Obviously I was higher risk than given credit for at initial diagnosis. Mine recently has been 3.02 and 2.09 at my last 2 visits, but my white count overall, is still a bit low.Of course, like anything, the big question is even if doctors do look at that number to see who may be at increased risk, what do they do with that information?
0 -
katcar, that is a great question. From what I read it is the ratio after diagnosis but before treatment starts. The reason seems to be that once treatment starts, ie: chemotherapy, it can lower the lymphs and thus the ratio will be high because of the treatment.
0 -
Dancemom, well that makes sense. My #'s prior to treatment were N 3 and L 1.5 making my total a 2
0 -
Dancermom - Thanks for that explanation. And I wish I didn't have another thing to worry about... and it seems strange to me that my MO does not seem the least bit concerned about anything I bring up to him! I guess I am not like any of his other patients from what he says (I always have "interesting" questions and "sure do my research"). It is nice to encounter questioning minds on this board, for which I am grateful. I need to get off my duff and stop procrastinating and find a new onc that "gets" me.
0 -
Would it make a difference how each was measured? I'm in Canada and my N's and L's were both measured in giga/L. My ratio a few months before dx was about 1.16 and five years later was much the same. During chemo when my neutrophils were at times very very low the ratio as calculated above would over 10.
0 -
Is it 30% of stage 1 that becomes metastatic , or 30 % of all early stage breast cancer ?
0 -
It's 30% of all early breast cancers, which includes everyone through stage 3. I think it might be only stage 3A, but maybe someone else can clarify?
0 -
There's a wealth of information in the previous pages that addresses the question
0 -
Early stage is st age 0-3A
0 -
The 30% stat is for invasive breast cancer and DOES NOT INCLUDE DCIS. It's 30% for Stages I - 3A.
0 -
Thanks for updating beesie. Need to stop posting first thing when I get up. I haven't even had my granola bar yet
0 -
I was just doing the math, I have just about the best prognosis you can hope for... Oncotype 14... Grade 1, Stage 1, highly ER+/PR+ . . . yada yada... but when the Tamoxifen didn't work out for me, I was told that my 11% distant recurrence probability doubles to 22% if I can't make some kind of anti-hormonal work out. . . and then there is a 10% local recurrence probability after the radiation, and like a 5% risk of a whole new second cancer... I know you can't add that all together, but it sure seems awfully high to me... at least 25% . . . this cancer stuff really does stink!
0 -
eggroll, you are going to be ok. The stats are with you. Enjoy.
0 -
The “risk goes down after 5 years” is for the more aggressive (especially TN) cancers that respond well to chemo. But if they are going to recur, they generally do so w/in 3-5 yrs. If you get to 5 yrs with a TN tumor w/o recurrence, you have roughly the same disease-free survival interval & percentage as us ER+/PR+ gals, provided endocrine therapy is followed for the prescribed 5 (perhaps 10, acc. to emerging research) years. Bear in mind that women who have had no problems or who live long enough without a recurrence to die of old-age diseases tend not to post here. Frankly, I’d never have discovered bco had my SNB incision not ruptured and my seroma not burst. I Googled “exploding seroma” and one of the hits was the cleverly-titled (as in “wish I’d thought of that”) “M-m-m-my Seroma” thread here on bco. I read that, poked around a bit and decided to register.
0 -
marieb....sorry about your sister but glad she is doing well. This is yet one more example of why Stage 1and 2 should have scans at the time of diagnosis. They keep telling us that it doesn't matter when Stage 4 is diagnosed but thats really hared to believe! Just don't get it. Good luck to all
0 -
I naively thought everyone had scans at diagnosis! Why wouldn't they? How could you stage someone without knowing if it's spread?
0 -
My onc is a big believer in scans and will order them generously. But she told me she frequently gets insurance push-back even for initial staging scans. Here in the U.S. it's all about $.
0 -
kayb, you do have a point about avoiding unnecessary radiation. At the same time, many insurance companies DO push-back when an oncologist wants to get an initial staging scan even when the cancer is NOT smaller, node negative, HER+.
My doctor's practice doesn't generate any extra income as a result of ordering scans. The imaging center and the radiologist and the ones who send the bills.
0 -
kayb - Thanks for that post. I'm always asking for unnecessary scans. I finally understand my MO's reasoning.
0 -
I never had a scan other than the MRI that I had before my surgery of both breasts. That was it. I was told no scans unless symptoms.
How long does it take for the symptoms...???
0 -
kay...speaking to the issue of when to image, we are moving closer to a model that one day, hopefully soon, fewer patients will require imaging. Blood markers will identify who will and who won't require imaging beyond what will be needed for surgery. It is really frustrating with all of the educating that Komen does, that there is sooo much misunderstanding regarding imaging. I wonder if in my lifetime if there will be an earth quivering moment that women will shake from and then realize how much money is wasted on frivelous imaging that could be earmarked instead for research that arrests cancer. Politics has to be removed from finding a cure. Insurance companies are usually the ones who get blamed for the "issues"...but I think there is lots of blame to go around beginning with the politicians who don't have the fortitude to speak up and recognize that the current model for fighting cancer doesn't work. I think politicians who might side with insurance companies would certainly lose their jobs come the following election year. We need enlightened politicians and patients alike who understand the complexity of what imaging is and ISN'T capable of doing. There is a very false sense of security when patients get the "all clear" following imaging. Cancer is sneaky and we all need to understand that! Sobering thought, I know! But maybe with that realization in mind, women will demand better methods of screening and better treatments and dare I say money better spent that finds its way towards finding a cure.
0 -
"How long does it take for the symptoms...???"
I was told to be on the lookout for symptoms that are persistent and progressive. Recurrence is likely to appear in the lymph nodes, brain, bones, lungs and liver.
0 -
VR - great post. I agree.
TravelText - interesting chart. I looked on the ABCD site but didn't see the chart. Can you post a link? From the phone number, it looks like this organization is in Milwaukee.
ThinkingPositive - unfortunately "how long does it take for symptoms" (of recurrence or metastases) is impossible to answer. It could be 2 years, like me, or it could be 20 years, like my good friend, or could be never, like another friend who had treatment at 35 and is now 85. The task is to remain vigilant while going on with your life and not agonizing every day. It's a difficult thing to do. Some days I do better than others.
0 -
KB, VR and -2 - thank you for continuing to reinforce these facts in our minds. You are appreciated!
0 -
Hmmm, couldn't find the ABCD site link, so have put my copy HERE.
0 -
Thanks travel text. I see it 's a UK company. I haven't seen a chart like this in the US, but I will be showing to my docs.
0 -
I actually just posted this question in a different thread, I should have looked here first. I'm a classic 1A, 0/6 nodes - all clear and nice clean margins.... I asked my Onc about getting a PET, because how can you actually stage me 1A if you don't know if I have Mets right? Isn't the literal staging T1: N:1, M:?? ? She agreed, but said she doesn't like to do PET scans with Node Negative 1A's unless they are adamantly requesting it. She is willing to do one if I demand it, but if PET scans are anything like CT scans, then don't they add to radiation? I've already had melanoma 6 years ago and even avoid airplane scanners in favor of the patdown due to radiation anxiety.
So the question really is... should 1 A people trust their staging if they've never gotten PET scans? The ONLY scan I was given was a breast MRI scan before my BMX and SNB... that's it.0 -
lisey...it is about having a trusting relationship with your team of physicians. I picked a team that I was comfortable with and 6 1/2 years out, I continue to respect their judgment.
For the record, I had a single MRI prior to surgery, for surgery purposes and that was that. For me, less is more.
Furthermore, population based screening mammography missed my tumor. Diagnostic songram found it.
0
