Primary lung cancer after treatment with chemo
Just read this article - https://www.epicresearch.org/articles/women-with-breast-cancer-especially-those-who-received-chemotherapy-at-increased-risk-for-subsequent-lung-cancer
Apparently new information has come out showing a higher rate for primary lung cancer after breast cancer treatment with chemo. Something like a 57% increase from those treated with just radiation. Any other info on this that anyone has heard? Curious if there are certain types of chemo more associated than others. Although in general, this kind of info sucks. BC is just the gift that keeps giving isn't it…..
Comments
-
I found these other 2 resources. I sent emails to my US state reps on asking CDC to change their lung cancer screening guidelines and also went to the site to log a request for change with the links to these 3 articles. I will be seeing my MO next week and have a note to myself to ask him to get me a screening.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10775166/https://www.jto.org/article/S1556-0864(21)02293-0/fulltext
0 -
I won't be asking for a screening since I'm one who only wants screening upon symptoms or if the screening is proven to save lives. But I definitely think if you're comfortable with screenings it's probably not a bad thing to ask for.
0 -
Studies on this risk have been around for many years. Please bear in mind that while treatment does increase the relative risk of developing lung cancer, the absolute risk still remains quite low. The worst case scenario in that study is a 4% chance of developing lung cancer if one has had chemo. That means that 96% of those women will NOT develop lung cancer five years after diagnosis. The risk is lower for those with only radiation or endocrine therapy. And the study doesn't break down smokers v. non-smokers, and one has to presume smokers have a higher risk. Current guidelines already recommend that female smokers (or former smokers) get annual lung cancer screenings. Beyond that, as kaynotrealname points out, it is an individual decision.
1 -
Even with former smokers there is a certain amount you've needed to smoke to qualify. But at any rate, yes, they've already started recommending screenings for certain individuals.
Ratherbesailing, it's interesting because one of the studies Zen posted actually listed a protective element in chemo as far as developing lung cancer. It'll be interesting to see if further studies tries to tease out the actual risk and for whom because it doesn't appear to be at all decided either way.
0 -
I agree on the relative risk vs absolute risk, as nonetheless risk is a probability among statistics. Reason I would be asking for a screening is that lung cancer, early stage, does not produce much symptoms. The 5 yr survival rate for early stage, localized, is about 61%. Not that great a number.
0 -
I didn’t see any discussion of hormone receptor type. I know HER2 can be expressed in primary lung cancer, so perhaps patients in the triple negative or HER2+ are receiving more chemo, but maybe have a physiology to develop more aggressive forms of any cancer. I never had chemo or breast radiation and developed a lung primary, as did some of my friends who had radiation and hormone therapy and no chemo.
0 -
Wonder if they've noticed the rate increase with people who've had chemo for other cancers? If not then yes, it would seem to reflect the physiology of the person and not the treatment.
0