My appointment to oncologist Wednesday.

2

Comments

  • Kylez
    Kylez Member Posts: 3,761 Member
    #22
    MAJW said:

    Confused...
    Lisa if you are triple negative, you would NOT be going on an anti estrogen medication....triple negative bc is not estrogen driven...so I would suggest speaking with your oncologist again....and triple negative is a very aggressive type of bc...regardless of the size of the tumor....I am triple negative dealing with a recurrence....and I had the full treatment first go round...lumpectomy, chemo and radiation...clean clear margins, no lymph node involvement..... Yet it returned in my lymph nodes...Again, I would suggest you speak with your oncologist again....someone is confused...

    Best wishes....

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #23
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #24
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #25
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #26
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #27
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #28
    Kylez said:

    Lisa, I have to agree with
    Lisa, I have to agree with Nancy, that if you are triple negative, you don't need hormone therapy. Please talk to your oncologist again. Also, the size of a tumor, as far as I know, doesn't mean whether you should have chemo or not. I am confused by this..

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.
  • Rague
    Rague Member Posts: 3,653 Member
    #29
    Lisaepstein said:

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.

    How old are you?
    Blocking estrogen has a lot of effects on your body that are far rangeing. Osteoporosis is a real problem. Intimate encounters are different/problematic due to dryness and desire. There are many SE's to blocking estrogen. Please do research before you blindly take a drug that there is for something that you do not have. It is to block estrogen in poeple who have estrogen possitive cancer - but your cancer according to you is not estrogen positive.

    Just because a Dr is a 'well known' does not mean they are right in all cases.

    Please get a second opinion as from you've said it all doesn't add up.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #30
    Lisaepstein said:

    appointment with oncologist
    My doctor told me he still does not want my body to produce any estrogen because it can cause another bc. It was so small like a pen dot that he said its all out and i do not need chemo. I trust him he is a very well known oncologist!! I also had uterus cancer prior to the bc. I am going by what the doctor told me but I will mention this to him again.

    My doctor emailed me back:
    He said triple negative cancer would have been a very dangerous cancer if it has grown much bigger than mine which is 2.1mm. At 2.1 mm the cure rate he said is very high. This is why I do not need chem. He recommended Arimidex not to treat this cancer .He says this cancer has probably been cured. The Arimidex is to protect me from making new cancers.
  • Rague
    Rague Member Posts: 3,653 Member
    #31
    Lisaepstein said:

    My doctor emailed me back:
    He said triple negative cancer would have been a very dangerous cancer if it has grown much bigger than mine which is 2.1mm. At 2.1 mm the cure rate he said is very high. This is why I do not need chem. He recommended Arimidex not to treat this cancer .He says this cancer has probably been cured. The Arimidex is to protect me from making new cancers.

    There is no CURE for cancer!
    There is no CURE for cancer in today's world unfortunately. We can get No Evidence of Disease (NED) but not a cure.

    There is an earlier post where you say you are ER+ ; you can't be ER+ AND be Triple Negative as you have more recently stated. By the name Triple Negative is negative for ER, PR and HER2.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #32
    Rague said:

    There is no CURE for cancer!
    There is no CURE for cancer in today's world unfortunately. We can get No Evidence of Disease (NED) but not a cure.

    There is an earlier post where you say you are ER+ ; you can't be ER+ AND be Triple Negative as you have more recently stated. By the name Triple Negative is negative for ER, PR and HER2.

    This cancer is out and my doctors words it is cured!!!
    When I had my core biopsies before my surgery it was er positive, pr- and her2- after my surgery the report came back different it ended up I was all negative. Go explain, I too am confused!!!
  • Noel
    Noel Member Posts: 3,095 Member
    #33
    Lisaepstein said:

    My doctor emailed me back:
    He said triple negative cancer would have been a very dangerous cancer if it has grown much bigger than mine which is 2.1mm. At 2.1 mm the cure rate he said is very high. This is why I do not need chem. He recommended Arimidex not to treat this cancer .He says this cancer has probably been cured. The Arimidex is to protect me from making new cancers.

    I've never known an
    I've never known an oncologist to use the word cure, but, if yours did for you, then congrats. I am in remission and that is good enough for me.


    Good luck!
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #34
    Noel said:

    I've never known an
    I've never known an oncologist to use the word cure, but, if yours did for you, then congrats. I am in remission and that is good enough for me.


    Good luck!

    You know what it is he is
    You know what it is he is just like a normal person, he wants me to be reassured that I will be find. Thanks and good luck to you too! I guess I am in remission like you!
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #35
    Noel said:

    I've never known an
    I've never known an oncologist to use the word cure, but, if yours did for you, then congrats. I am in remission and that is good enough for me.


    Good luck!

    You know what it is he is
    You know what it is he is just like a normal person, he wants me to be reassured that I will be find. Thanks and good luck to you too! I guess I am in remission like you!
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #36
    Noel said:

    I've never known an
    I've never known an oncologist to use the word cure, but, if yours did for you, then congrats. I am in remission and that is good enough for me.


    Good luck!

    You know what it is he is
    You know what it is he is just like a normal person, he wants me to be reassured that I will be fine. Thanks and good luck to you too! I guess I am in remission like you!
  • Double Whammy
    Double Whammy Member Posts: 2,832 Member
    #37
    Lisaepstein said:

    You know what it is he is
    You know what it is he is just like a normal person, he wants me to be reassured that I will be fine. Thanks and good luck to you too! I guess I am in remission like you!

    I am befuddled
    Dear Lisa-
    Having confidence in our physicians is one of the most important aspects of our road to recovery. I am, however, a little befuddled by the no further treatment (except aromotase inhibitors) when you had a lumpectomy and have a breast remaining that may also contain some cancer cells.

    I hope you will take a look at the NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network)Guidelines www.nccn.org. These guidelines are written by leading oncologists for oncologists. They are, of course meant to be guidelines as every patient is different. You need to create an account with the site, but you do not need to be a physician. After you've logged on, you can look at the guidelines for treatment protocols of all cancers. Of course, you would look at breast cancer. It's put together like a booklet of flow charts. Page 2 lists the oncologist who write and update these guidelines. Page 3 is the table of contents. Under Invasive Breast Cancer, select Clinical Stage - Workup. This will take you to page 11. From what you've told us, you are T1,N0,M0 (tumor is stage 1, no positive nodes, no metastasis). Then go to Locoreginal Treatment link.
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #38
    Double Whammy said:

    I am befuddled
    Dear Lisa-
    Having confidence in our physicians is one of the most important aspects of our road to recovery. I am, however, a little befuddled by the no further treatment (except aromotase inhibitors) when you had a lumpectomy and have a breast remaining that may also contain some cancer cells.

    I hope you will take a look at the NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network)Guidelines www.nccn.org. These guidelines are written by leading oncologists for oncologists. They are, of course meant to be guidelines as every patient is different. You need to create an account with the site, but you do not need to be a physician. After you've logged on, you can look at the guidelines for treatment protocols of all cancers. Of course, you would look at breast cancer. It's put together like a booklet of flow charts. Page 2 lists the oncologist who write and update these guidelines. Page 3 is the table of contents. Under Invasive Breast Cancer, select Clinical Stage - Workup. This will take you to page 11. From what you've told us, you are T1,N0,M0 (tumor is stage 1, no positive nodes, no metastasis). Then go to Locoreginal Treatment link.

    I am also having 5 weeks of
    I am also having 5 weeks of radiation. Next week I am having the blood test for Brca1 and 2 . I will also check out that site thanks.
  • Double Whammy
    Double Whammy Member Posts: 2,832 Member
    #39
    Lisaepstein said:

    I am also having 5 weeks of
    I am also having 5 weeks of radiation. Next week I am having the blood test for Brca1 and 2 . I will also check out that site thanks.

    Oh, sorry
    I didn't "get" that you were having radiation. I was under he impression that you weren't. I am no longer befuddled.

    Suzanne
  • Lisaepstein
    Lisaepstein Member Posts: 62 Member
    #40
    Double Whammy said:

    Oh, sorry
    I didn't "get" that you were having radiation. I was under he impression that you weren't. I am no longer befuddled.

    Suzanne

    So confused
    Suzanne I am so confused by everything!! When I first had my biopsy before surgery I was er+. I had my surgery and the results changed. Now I am triple negative!!! Went to my oncologist who I believe is a great doctor I know many who have gone to him. He told me because the tumor was so so small 2.1mm that I would not need chemo. I will had radiation, BRCA test and he put me on an anti estrogen pill not for this cancer but to pervent any others. Every on here keeps sending me messages how TNC is very aggressive and they cant believe no chemo. This has me so worried!! I called the cancer hot line and spoke to a oncologist nurse and she told me my tumor is smaller than small and she read me a paragraph that says it the tumor is less than 6mm than no chemo.If it was 6mm or higher they would consider it!!! I even questioned him again and he said it is a dangerous cancers but because of the size there is a very high cure rate and i am in remission. He actually enters information in his computer and it states that if I wanted I could wait a year before I start radiation. Which I will not do!!! Maybe other women on here dont really understand how small 2.1mm really is. Any suggestions?
  • MAJW
    MAJW Member Posts: 2,510 Member
    #41
    Lisaepstein said:

    So confused
    Suzanne I am so confused by everything!! When I first had my biopsy before surgery I was er+. I had my surgery and the results changed. Now I am triple negative!!! Went to my oncologist who I believe is a great doctor I know many who have gone to him. He told me because the tumor was so so small 2.1mm that I would not need chemo. I will had radiation, BRCA test and he put me on an anti estrogen pill not for this cancer but to pervent any others. Every on here keeps sending me messages how TNC is very aggressive and they cant believe no chemo. This has me so worried!! I called the cancer hot line and spoke to a oncologist nurse and she told me my tumor is smaller than small and she read me a paragraph that says it the tumor is less than 6mm than no chemo.If it was 6mm or higher they would consider it!!! I even questioned him again and he said it is a dangerous cancers but because of the size there is a very high cure rate and i am in remission. He actually enters information in his computer and it states that if I wanted I could wait a year before I start radiation. Which I will not do!!! Maybe other women on here dont really understand how small 2.1mm really is. Any suggestions?

    Wait a year?????
    Wait a year to start radiation?????? This takes the cake! And yes we do understand the size....again, I ask....how was this " tiny" tumor found? You've never answered this... And exactly what type of cancer is he trying to prevent with an estrogen blocker...you've stated you had "uterus" cancer so it can't be for that....more confused than ever....

Discussion Boards