I don't know if this makes any difference but when I look at numbers that are predictive, e.g., the odds that something will happen, I sometimes look at the obverse as well for perspective. When I first had a cancer diagnosis followed by lumpectomy every recurrence number took on a disproportionate importance in a certain sense and I treated them differently than I would have any other predictive number. I work in finance and economics so I'm used to looking at numbers, assessing their importance and putting them in the perspective with respect to other data points.

This may not affect your decision in any way but one way to look at this is that an 11% chance that X will happen is also an 89% chance that it won't. I think recurrence numbers are so imprecise and problematic and emotion-inducing in the first place, that it helps to see look at the non-recurrence number as well.

Another way to think of it is that if 1 in 8 American women get breast cancer, someone who has not had breast cancer has a 12.5% chance of developing it and 11% is lower than that though admittedly far from the 0% that we all would love to be assured of.

@marker I wanted to continue my aromatase inhibitor, letrozole, after 5 years but I did a test called the Breast Cancer Index, which tells you two thing: risk level and whether extended meds are of benefit.

I got high risk, but no benefit from further meds.

Maybe ask your doc about this test. I found it myself and my doc is now using it and it is also now in the NCCN guidelines.