Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 Patty -- Thank you for such a good, intelligent post. I have an invasive ductal grade 3, though it is only stage 2A. (No nodes, no vascular invasion, clean margins, 2.4 cm.) I am looking at stats too with even a little less survival rate than you speak of (though it's true I don't know if my good stage will mean a lot). It doesn't look good for me either so I keep trying to think what the surgeon's said " a 2% chance each year for recurrence, cut in half if I take Tamoxifen -- so that's a 5% chance of recurrence in 5 years " What a discrepance between 95% survival for five years and 50% chance! One person said a person with a smaller, cleaner tumor could do worse than me. And stats are like my neighbor ate a whole chicken for lunch and I ate none. Statistically, we each ate half a chicken... As far as sites, I liked Dr. Leo's new site (see former messages this site) but don't know if he will answer the whole question or not. I think I'll ask him before I write it all out since I have the same type of question. breastcancer.org is excellent at all the fundamentals and has a section on reading your path. report but I don't remember it containing all that extra stuff. I think the doctors know how to keep our spirits up and we could so easily be in the number of survivors, right? So why not. I make a bit of a religious quest of it, too. Peace. And good sense. Luv, Janie > I hear from so many different sources that with all the chemo and etc, the > actual survival rate for breast cancer really isn't that much better than it > was a few years ago. I have the pathology report from the Drs. At least > what is currently available as it is still being worked in terms of estrogen > sensitivity and etc. > According to the mammogram, there is a palpable abnormality 3 cm ill-defined > zone of high density fibroglandular tissue with minimal architectural > distortion. The second palpable mass in left axilla is not visible on > mammogram. > US > Right breast is normal > Palpable abnormality is a 5cm mass in the left breast > The boundaries of the mass are indistinct. The area covering the mss > exhibits skin thickening. The second palpable abnormality is the result of > two pathological left axillary lymph nodes measuring 5 cm and 2 cm in > diameter respectively. The findings are highly suspicious for invasive > malignancy with regional metastases. > From the biopsy > The sections demonstrate breast core biopsies all of which have areas of > tumor composed of rounded nests of tumor cells. The tumor was felt to be > invasive with some ductal cacinoma in situ with solid and cribriforming > patterns. The block from this case was sent to Applied Diagnostics Lab for > a smooth muscle mysocin stain which revealed that most of the tumor is > invasive. The tumor cells are mostly Blacks modified nuclear grade I with > some grade 2 in the in-situ component. > I have looked up the survival rate. It is obvious to me that I have at the > least a stage 3 cancer with 5 year survival rate ranging from 49% to 56% and > 7 year survival less than 40%. The various alternative methods people say > over and over that survival rate hasn't really improved with all the chemo > and etc and I have to say, it doesn't look good. Can anyone help me? Also, > can anyone send me to a web page or etc that will help explain these > different things on the pathology reports. > I still really believe that I can win this fight but I am also, really > scared. > Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 Patty -- Thank you for such a good, intelligent post. I have an invasive ductal grade 3, though it is only stage 2A. (No nodes, no vascular invasion, clean margins, 2.4 cm.) I am looking at stats too with even a little less survival rate than you speak of (though it's true I don't know if my good stage will mean a lot). It doesn't look good for me either so I keep trying to think what the surgeon's said " a 2% chance each year for recurrence, cut in half if I take Tamoxifen -- so that's a 5% chance of recurrence in 5 years " What a discrepance between 95% survival for five years and 50% chance! One person said a person with a smaller, cleaner tumor could do worse than me. And stats are like my neighbor ate a whole chicken for lunch and I ate none. Statistically, we each ate half a chicken... As far as sites, I liked Dr. Leo's new site (see former messages this site) but don't know if he will answer the whole question or not. I think I'll ask him before I write it all out since I have the same type of question. breastcancer.org is excellent at all the fundamentals and has a section on reading your path. report but I don't remember it containing all that extra stuff. I think the doctors know how to keep our spirits up and we could so easily be in the number of survivors, right? So why not. I make a bit of a religious quest of it, too. Peace. And good sense. Luv, Janie > I hear from so many different sources that with all the chemo and etc, the > actual survival rate for breast cancer really isn't that much better than it > was a few years ago. I have the pathology report from the Drs. At least > what is currently available as it is still being worked in terms of estrogen > sensitivity and etc. > According to the mammogram, there is a palpable abnormality 3 cm ill-defined > zone of high density fibroglandular tissue with minimal architectural > distortion. The second palpable mass in left axilla is not visible on > mammogram. > US > Right breast is normal > Palpable abnormality is a 5cm mass in the left breast > The boundaries of the mass are indistinct. The area covering the mss > exhibits skin thickening. The second palpable abnormality is the result of > two pathological left axillary lymph nodes measuring 5 cm and 2 cm in > diameter respectively. The findings are highly suspicious for invasive > malignancy with regional metastases. > From the biopsy > The sections demonstrate breast core biopsies all of which have areas of > tumor composed of rounded nests of tumor cells. The tumor was felt to be > invasive with some ductal cacinoma in situ with solid and cribriforming > patterns. The block from this case was sent to Applied Diagnostics Lab for > a smooth muscle mysocin stain which revealed that most of the tumor is > invasive. The tumor cells are mostly Blacks modified nuclear grade I with > some grade 2 in the in-situ component. > I have looked up the survival rate. It is obvious to me that I have at the > least a stage 3 cancer with 5 year survival rate ranging from 49% to 56% and > 7 year survival less than 40%. The various alternative methods people say > over and over that survival rate hasn't really improved with all the chemo > and etc and I have to say, it doesn't look good. Can anyone help me? Also, > can anyone send me to a web page or etc that will help explain these > different things on the pathology reports. > I still really believe that I can win this fight but I am also, really > scared. > Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 Doesn't this just suck the most? It is so awful to have to make these decisions. From what I read from the ladies, there are a lot of negatives from the tamoxifin. You know, a month ago, I couldn't have told that medicine for nothing and now it is a regular part of my vocabulary. The flax seed oil and cottage cheese diet may replace the need for the tamoxifin. I don't know what I am going to do if that if it applies to me. All I know right now is one day at a time. That is all I can do. You have my prayers. I firmly believe we can make. We just have to keep doing one day at a time. Thank you for your thoughts and I just know we are going to make it. If I don't make it, it sure as heck will not for lack of trying!!:>))) Patty -----Original Message-----From: janie8002000 Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 2:22 PMTo: breastcancer2 Subject: Re: survival ratePatty --Thank you for such a good, intelligent post. I have an invasive ductal grade 3, though it is only stage 2A. (No nodes, no vascular invasion, clean margins, 2.4 cm.) I am looking at stats too with even a little less survival rate than you speak of (though it's true I don't know if my good stage will mean a lot). It doesn't look good for me either so I keep trying to think what the surgeon's said "a 2% chance each year for recurrence, cut in half if I take Tamoxifen -- so that's a 5% chance of recurrence in 5 years" What a discrepance between 95% survival for five years and 50% chance! One person said a person with a smaller, cleaner tumor could do worse than me. And stats are like my neighbor ate a whole chicken for lunch and I ate none. Statistically, we each ate half a chicken...As far as sites, I liked Dr. Leo's new site (see former messages this site) but don't know if he will answer the whole question or not. I think I'll ask him before I write it all out since I have the same type of question. breastcancer.org is excellent at all the fundamentals and has a section on reading your path. report but I don't remember it containing all that extra stuff.I think the doctors know how to keep our spirits up and we could so easily be in the number of survivors, right? So why not. I make a bit of a religious quest of it, too.Peace. And good sense.Luv,Janie > I hear from so many different sources that with all the chemo and etc, the> actual survival rate for breast cancer really isn't that much better than it> was a few years ago. I have the pathology report from the Drs. At least> what is currently available as it is still being worked in terms of estrogen> sensitivity and etc.> According to the mammogram, there is a palpable abnormality 3 cm ill-defined> zone of high density fibroglandular tissue with minimal architectural> distortion. The second palpable mass in left axilla is not visible on> mammogram.> US> Right breast is normal> Palpable abnormality is a 5cm mass in the left breast> The boundaries of the mass are indistinct. The area covering the mss> exhibits skin thickening. The second palpable abnormality is the result of> two pathological left axillary lymph nodes measuring 5 cm and 2 cm in> diameter respectively. The findings are highly suspicious for invasive> malignancy with regional metastases.> From the biopsy> The sections demonstrate breast core biopsies all of which have areas of> tumor composed of rounded nests of tumor cells. The tumor was felt to be> invasive with some ductal cacinoma in situ with solid and cribriforming> patterns. The block from this case was sent to Applied Diagnostics Lab for> a smooth muscle mysocin stain which revealed that most of the tumor is> invasive. The tumor cells are mostly Blacks modified nuclear grade I with> some grade 2 in the in-situ component.> I have looked up the survival rate. It is obvious to me that I have at the> least a stage 3 cancer with 5 year survival rate ranging from 49% to 56% and> 7 year survival less than 40%. The various alternative methods people say> over and over that survival rate hasn't really improved with all the chemo> and etc and I have to say, it doesn't look good. Can anyone help me? Also,> can anyone send me to a web page or etc that will help explain these> different things on the pathology reports.> I still really believe that I can win this fight but I am also, really> scared.> Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 Doesn't this just suck the most? It is so awful to have to make these decisions. From what I read from the ladies, there are a lot of negatives from the tamoxifin. You know, a month ago, I couldn't have told that medicine for nothing and now it is a regular part of my vocabulary. The flax seed oil and cottage cheese diet may replace the need for the tamoxifin. I don't know what I am going to do if that if it applies to me. All I know right now is one day at a time. That is all I can do. You have my prayers. I firmly believe we can make. We just have to keep doing one day at a time. Thank you for your thoughts and I just know we are going to make it. If I don't make it, it sure as heck will not for lack of trying!!:>))) Patty -----Original Message-----From: janie8002000 Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 2:22 PMTo: breastcancer2 Subject: Re: survival ratePatty --Thank you for such a good, intelligent post. I have an invasive ductal grade 3, though it is only stage 2A. (No nodes, no vascular invasion, clean margins, 2.4 cm.) I am looking at stats too with even a little less survival rate than you speak of (though it's true I don't know if my good stage will mean a lot). It doesn't look good for me either so I keep trying to think what the surgeon's said "a 2% chance each year for recurrence, cut in half if I take Tamoxifen -- so that's a 5% chance of recurrence in 5 years" What a discrepance between 95% survival for five years and 50% chance! One person said a person with a smaller, cleaner tumor could do worse than me. And stats are like my neighbor ate a whole chicken for lunch and I ate none. Statistically, we each ate half a chicken...As far as sites, I liked Dr. Leo's new site (see former messages this site) but don't know if he will answer the whole question or not. I think I'll ask him before I write it all out since I have the same type of question. breastcancer.org is excellent at all the fundamentals and has a section on reading your path. report but I don't remember it containing all that extra stuff.I think the doctors know how to keep our spirits up and we could so easily be in the number of survivors, right? So why not. I make a bit of a religious quest of it, too.Peace. And good sense.Luv,Janie > I hear from so many different sources that with all the chemo and etc, the> actual survival rate for breast cancer really isn't that much better than it> was a few years ago. I have the pathology report from the Drs. At least> what is currently available as it is still being worked in terms of estrogen> sensitivity and etc.> According to the mammogram, there is a palpable abnormality 3 cm ill-defined> zone of high density fibroglandular tissue with minimal architectural> distortion. The second palpable mass in left axilla is not visible on> mammogram.> US> Right breast is normal> Palpable abnormality is a 5cm mass in the left breast> The boundaries of the mass are indistinct. The area covering the mss> exhibits skin thickening. The second palpable abnormality is the result of> two pathological left axillary lymph nodes measuring 5 cm and 2 cm in> diameter respectively. The findings are highly suspicious for invasive> malignancy with regional metastases.> From the biopsy> The sections demonstrate breast core biopsies all of which have areas of> tumor composed of rounded nests of tumor cells. The tumor was felt to be> invasive with some ductal cacinoma in situ with solid and cribriforming> patterns. The block from this case was sent to Applied Diagnostics Lab for> a smooth muscle mysocin stain which revealed that most of the tumor is> invasive. The tumor cells are mostly Blacks modified nuclear grade I with> some grade 2 in the in-situ component.> I have looked up the survival rate. It is obvious to me that I have at the> least a stage 3 cancer with 5 year survival rate ranging from 49% to 56% and> 7 year survival less than 40%. The various alternative methods people say> over and over that survival rate hasn't really improved with all the chemo> and etc and I have to say, it doesn't look good. Can anyone help me? Also,> can anyone send me to a web page or etc that will help explain these> different things on the pathology reports.> I still really believe that I can win this fight but I am also, really> scared.> Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 From what I hear, the survival rate is much better but for those who do not find theirs early, then the rate is not much better. Because we are all being more educated and doing our monthly BSE's, getting our yearly mammograms and being more aware of our health, I think that the survival rate is better for that group of women. For those who ignore the chances to help ourselves or who have had the lumps overlooked (and even the mammograms and BSE do not catch all of them), then it is not as good. To get really good answers to your questions, go to the Komen web site www.komen.org and then call the hotline number they have listed. It's 1-800 Imaware Doris > I hear from so many different sources that with all the chemo and etc, the > actual survival rate for breast cancer really isn't that much better than it > was a few years ago. I have the pathology report from the Drs. At least > what is currently available as it is still being worked in terms of estrogen > sensitivity and etc. > According to the mammogram, there is a palpable abnormality 3 cm ill-defined > zone of high density fibroglandular tissue with minimal architectural > distortion. The second palpable mass in left axilla is not visible on > mammogram. > US > Right breast is normal > Palpable abnormality is a 5cm mass in the left breast > The boundaries of the mass are indistinct. The area covering the mss > exhibits skin thickening. The second palpable abnormality is the result of > two pathological left axillary lymph nodes measuring 5 cm and 2 cm in > diameter respectively. The findings are highly suspicious for invasive > malignancy with regional metastases. > From the biopsy > The sections demonstrate breast core biopsies all of which have areas of > tumor composed of rounded nests of tumor cells. The tumor was felt to be > invasive with some ductal cacinoma in situ with solid and cribriforming > patterns. The block from this case was sent to Applied Diagnostics Lab for > a smooth muscle mysocin stain which revealed that most of the tumor is > invasive. The tumor cells are mostly Blacks modified nuclear grade I with > some grade 2 in the in-situ component. > I have looked up the survival rate. It is obvious to me that I have at the > least a stage 3 cancer with 5 year survival rate ranging from 49% to 56% and > 7 year survival less than 40%. The various alternative methods people say > over and over that survival rate hasn't really improved with all the chemo > and etc and I have to say, it doesn't look good. Can anyone help me? Also, > can anyone send me to a web page or etc that will help explain these > different things on the pathology reports. > I still really believe that I can win this fight but I am also, really > scared. > Patty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.