Aromatase Inhibitors: Did you decide to go on them or not?
Nanaloves: I’m about to start arimidex and just feel that the contraindications , bone issues etc. are overwhelming. I’m 70 years old, dodged a bullet I feel with zero stage DCIS but the follow up is pretty much no different then if it was more aggressive. I’ve just done 33 treatments of radiation and now they advise arimidex as a preventative. I’m not sure with the beginnings of arthritis and lower back. sensitivity already that I should take it. Anyone not take it and not have a recurrence within the 5 years.
Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Breast Cancer Support Group.
Thanks so much for your feedback. It really helps. At this moment(my opinion varies minute by minute it seems) I do plan to try anti hormone therapy but I’m pretty sure I won’t continue if it’s misery. I’m glad you did well and hope you continue to do so. Thanks again…it means so much!
The Breast Cancer Index and Prosigna Assay consider 5% to be "high risk." The Oncotype considers it low risk. So even at this basic level, decisions are confusing. It is good to remember that with hormonal cancers, risk continues to increase over the years. @jaynep my score was 8, and I did 5 years of Femara, with few problems. Someone else might make a different decision. My own view is that it is good to try a med before declining, because many do not have side effects that are troublesome.
I am curious about this question @pbnew. It seems @joanie760 has only taken an AI for 3 years, and the usual course is 5-10 years. Why wouldn't she continue (and with no metastasis) ?
There are two numbers you receive from the OncotypeDX. The "Recurrence Score Result (RS) and the "Distant Recurrence Risk at 9 Years." So I'm guessing that, in your case, the former is 13 and the latter is 4%? [My numbers were 9 and 3, respectively. The risk number is derived from the RS by some OncotypeDX algorithm but is not a linear, direct calculation from what they told me.]
That's good news and I hope it provides a bit of comfort. You might decide to 'throw everything at" the remaining cancer risk, or not, but take comfort that that cancer doesn't put you squarely in the country-wide risk with people who might have comorbities or negative lifestyle factors that you know don't apply to you.
I found the OncotypeDX test very helpful. For one thing, even if I took anti-hormone therapy drugs, I'd still have the remaining 3% risk in theory. I decided that the additional 2 percentage points of "no drugs and 5%" was my path. And if the cancer does recur, I'll know it had a 3% chance even if I had taken the anastrozole. Cancer is like a lot of situations in life where there are no perfect decisions except, maybe, in hindsight.
I also want to thank you for your reply. It really helps.
Do you mean the oncotype dx test? Yes, that has been submitted. I see the radiation oncologist on May 9th and the medical onco on May 12. However, the hospital system here posts test results before you see the doctor and my score is 13 and there’s a notation that nine year recurrence with AI and Tam only is 4%. Not sure what all this means but I guess I’ll find out.
Thank you so much for your prayers and encouragement. They are greatly appreciated as is your sharing of your experiences. I will be praying for you as well.
Did your cancer metastasize.? If not what is the reasoning for continuing with an aromatase inhibitor?
If there are cancer cells found, there may be enough for submission to a genetic testing firm that can give you its recurrence risk analysis. The result might help you and your oncologist look at a treatment path that seems appropriate for you, rather than relying more on the standard industry-wide protocol. Just a thought.nof course, I'm hoping none are found because none escaped the surgery the first time.
That's a great idea. I've created some simple spreadsheet for lipid panel data and charted the numbers. Every new doctor wants to put me on statins for chronically elevated cholesterol. Then I show my Agosten calcium scores, Endopat and echocardiograms charted over time (all really great results) so they drop the subject. I cannot tolerate even microdoses of statins without crippling leg cramps so I can only hope my body can function just fine with the mildly higher cholesterol.
I've found that doctors grasp the data faster if they can see the chart. That eliminates some errors from Inattention or too-quick scanning reports on a computer monitor. Also the computer data could is vulnerable to keystroke errors and corrupted files. I trust hard copies of original test results.
It's a lot of work taking a strong proactive team approach to our own healthcare, lol. The good doctors actually value patients who do though.