Hmmm. I can understand if Oncotype's reply is differentiating between 'spread' of an original cancer versus a later, new cancer deemed a 'recurrence' by virtue of chronology, though conceptually the same cancer just not fully destroyed by treatment or surgery. That could be considered, incorrectly, a 'local' recurrence?
I talked to a senior science guy at the company and when he used the word 'local' he meant in the same general area, but not necessarily the same site. And said the risk percentage applied to 'loco-regional' recurrence. To me, the reply you received raises more questions, starting with exactly what they're calling 'distant.' Would cancer in the opposite breast be 'distant'?
The terms are important.
I'll try to talk to the same senior person at the company who clarified some stuff before for me. I have some lingering questions anyway, including how to get a copy of which genes were assayed and if there were any mutations found and what the Recurrence Score means. One thing that he told me, which I found interesting, is that the test result is based strictly on what the lab sees. The results aren't further tweaked for any demographic variables or other risk assumptions.
If I get a clearer answer, if it's OK with you, I'll private message you to prevent skewing off topic for those not interested.
I’m very interested and would greatly appreciate it if you message me as well. I