In response to your comment. In my mom's case, she was first diagnosed with breast cancer, a lumpectomy was performed without radiation. All was well for a while, but the breast cancer came back, this time she just opted to have the mastectomy, at that time, she was encouraged by one of her Dr's to do the radiation in order to heighten the chances of the breast cancer not returning, but was NOT informed of the risk associated with the radiation. She followed the Doctors advice, got the radiation after the mastectomy. All was well for some time, but then out of nowhere she factored a rib, she went thru further testing and was diagnosed with Angiosarcoma in the soft tissue between her ribs. At that time she was told that she had developed Angiosarcoma due to the radiation treatment. Which was a major blow to my mom, because if she was informed of the risk associated with the radiation she would have taken another route. I just don't understand that if its known that this form of radiation causes sarcomas, why would it be used to treat another form of cancer? Even after my mom was diagnosed with Angiosarcoma, Why would radiation be a part of her treatment option? I don't understand the logic in that at all! I would never encourage anyone to go against their Dr's orders or advice, but after witnessing my mom's journey, I would advise anyone to simply do their research! My mom put all of her trust in her team of Doctors, and that was her choice! They say Angiosarcoma is a rare form of cancer and they don't know much about it. But what they do know is that radiation causes it, and I'm saying...If that's the case then why is radiation being added the the arsenal to fight cancer? I don't understand that.