Do you worry about total radiation exposure?

slv58

I know I needed to have rads as part of my treatment, but I just can't shake the feeling that down the road I may regret the exposure. I was explaining to my daughter that I'm getting thousands more rads (measure of radiation) than a mammogram and came across this,

"To put dose into perspective, a woman who receives radiation as a treatment for breast cancer will receive several thousand rads. If she had yearly mammograms beginning at age 40 and continuing until she was 90, she will have received 20 to 40 rads. As another example, flying from New York to California on a commercial jet exposes a woman to roughly the same amount of radiation as one mammogram."

Just look up radiation and breast cancer and there are so many discussions and studies on the safety of mammograms -what about the thousands of rads we are getting as treatment? Are we doomed to get radiation induced cancers? I know this is part of treatment-but feel I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. There really isn't much choice, if I want to beat cancer, I have to endure poisons and radiation. Scientists really have to come up with a better way to treat this disease, things haven't changed much since my mother died of BC 40 years ago. Sorry for my rant, I guess because I'm coming to the end of my rads, I'm overwhelmed with (guilt) from what I've done to my body.

snorkeler

I also worry about my total radiation exposure--from mammograms, radiation therapy, dental x-rays, and long-haul flights. In my case, I have very dense breast tissue, so mammograms are of "limited diagnostic value" anyway (I got my first mammogram because I found the lump, and it didn't pick up the lump at all). I'm already getting yearly MRIs, so do I need to keep getting mammograms and their radiation? 

Whenever I think about this, I always come back to the same place: (1) I am following the standard of care for my situation, and if I diverged from it and had a recurrence, I would be kicking myself for not doing everything that was recommended. (2) I could have chosen mastectomy instead of lumpectomy + radiation, but I wanted to keep as much of my own body as possible. So given the tradeoffs, I made the right decision for me. I think that's all we can do in any situation, especially in the case of cancer where there are no risk-free choices.

SelenaWolf

No, you are not doomed to get radiation-induced cancer.  It is a possibility.  Radiation-induced cancers do exist and I can't give you any stats for those that occur that are unrelated to breast cancer treatment, but the risk for developing a radiation-induced breast cancer (usually referred to as a radiation-induced breast sarcoma) is, actually, rather small.  Does it happen?  Yes.  But for a majority of patients, it does not.  Heart problems from radiation treatment are, also, rather rare.  Does it happen?  Yes.  But many patients never have a problem.

I agree with you in that treatment for breast cancer hasn't really made huge stridges forward in the last 40-50 years.  Many treatments have been refined as more data is gathered and anti-hormonals/aromatase inhibitors have been added, but the basic components are still surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.  It's disappointing.