@vegada the TailorX trial was intended to determine whether patients with intermediate Oncotype scores (11-25) did as well with hormonal therapy alone, or with chemo as well.
It would seem the reason your tumor "characteristics were never part of the TailorX trial" is that your score was higher than 25. However with grade 1 and small size, the decision to forego chemo might be supported by many docs. I am glad the Mammaprint had a better score and that your doc is relying on that.
The TailorX trial was not relevant for scores outside that range, since most with scores 0-11 were doing hormonal therapy only and most with scores over 25 were doing chemo. The Oncotype was being well before the Tailor X and the Tailor X was supposed to clarify things for those who were in that gray area of intermediate. Your situation, with low grade and small size, and score close to 25, might be seen- and was seen- differently.
I had discordance in tests as well. I had grade 3, LVI, high ki67% but low Oncotype at 8. After 5 years on letrozole, I also had a Breast Cancer Index and Prosigna Assay done and my scores were higher risk.
I am 8 years out from diagnosis.
I also had a positive HER2 test, two equivocals and two negatives (borderline) but no chemo or meds for HER2.
It is disturbing to feel we cannot rely 100% on testing but we all do the best we can. I admire you for seeing 10 oncologists. I saw 4! 🙂 Good luck!
Jump to this post
I agree that it is very disturbing that we can't rely 100% on testing. What I am saying is that they don't recommend people with my tumor get the Oncotype test done because the tumor size that was studied started at 1cm and mine was 8mm. T1bN0 Cancer stage was not part of the Tailor X and so most doctors don't order the Oncotype or shall I say it has been published that doctors should not order an Oncotype for T1bN0.