Olivia-Newton John's breast cancer returns after 25 years

wallycat

It is in her spine. She is 68; dx in 1992.

Anonymous

Was just coming to look here for any info about her. We were both the same age upon initial diagnosis. That's why I hesitate when people say.. "Oh you're five years out! You're cured!" Sometimes I tell them the risk is never gone..there is no cure. Other times I don't bother. Sneaky stupid breast cancer.

changes

I just recently celebrated 7 years since my diagnosis, and was noticing that I no longer worried about recurrence. This news kind of threw me for a loop. Feeling a little tearful.

farmerlucy

Really terrible news.

KathyL624

So terrible.  Do we know anything about her initial diagnosis?  Was it early?

Beesie

It's unclear from what I've read as to whether this is a recurrence of her earlier diagnosis, or an unrelated new primary breast cancer. It certainly could be either, although after 25 years, it is more likely to be a new primary, which is something we are all at risk for, no matter how successful our treatment when first diagnosed.

All we know about this diagnosis is that unfortunately, the cancer is metastatic. Hopefully treatment will be able to halt the progression of her cancer and keep it at bay for many many years.

wallycat

Stories out there are not forthcoming on more than "breast cancer returned"...and only those of us in the wrath of breast cancer know the nuances that mean things and don't mean a thing.

To nudge the alcohol/cancer issue, I had an extra 1/2 glass of red wine tonight to mourn that any one of us has to deal with this shit.

cp418

The risk is never gone with this ******* disease. Sending hope that she can control the beast again.

pupmom

With zero information about her initial diagnosis and treatment, I am not alarmed, or surprised.

wallycat

Here is a partial interview with her in 2015:

Another lesson she learned from the diagnosis is that "You have to trust yourself and trust your body."

The only reason Newton-John was able to get the diagnosis early enough was she found a lump by her own hand. Then, when she went to the doctors, they didn't find anything.

"Which is why I'm so conscious of telling girls to do their own exams, not to wait till the doctors tell you," she said. "You need to be in touch with your own body."

She even went for a mammogram, but that came back negative. It wasn't until she had a biopsy that the cancer was confirmed.

"You can't just rely on another person or a test," she added.

Anonymous

I wonder what kind of treatment she had way back in 1992. I'm trying to tell myself that the treatments we are are getting now are making a positive difference in our futures. Did we even have tamoxifen or AIs back then? Was it ER/PR+ or HER2+?

Claire in AZ

wallycat

She had a modified radical mastectomy w/ recon.

Tamoxifen would have been available but I don't think AI's would...she would have been early 40s and not menopausal then either. I also think I read, but not sure if the reporting was accurate, that she didn't do chemo till 2007....but that may be my bad interpretation.

pupmom

Thanks wallycat! If she were Stage III, wouldn't chemo be automatically indicated?

solfeo

This kind of news always devastates me. Then my mind goes through the routine of comparing my stats to the person who recurred, trying to find the differences that make me safer, but knowing that I'm never really safe. A form of grasping at straws. I hate cancer.

stephilosphy00

I read she refused chemo first because she was scared about the SEs then she had chemo and thought it was not too bad at all... but there was no mention about radiation and hormonal.

proudtospin

gee dealing with mets to spine after 8.5 years andnmine was dcis. My onc always thoughtmi,did not need chemo

Guess i have famous person in,partner with me

Me starting rads tomorrow with plans for chemo after

Anonymous

According to this interview, she had a mastectomy and chemotherapy upon diagnosis.

And just edited to add... 25 years "cancer free" isn't anything to sneeze at. Also, as others have said, with today's medical options/treatment, she could very well live many, many years with this metastasis to her bones. It still sucks, but doesn't mean hope is lost.

FireKracker

once u hear the word cancer and ur name in the same sentence YOU LIFE JUST CHANGED

Days,weeks,months and years don't mean anthing

Make u think real hard how unsafe we all r....

I'm very sad for her

kirstensmum

Hi, just saw this topic so thought I would add that Olivia has a wellness centre for cancer here in Australia, her website is onjcancercentre.org I live in West Australia and on the news tonight they said that she would be combining radiation along with natural wellness therapies (I think from her cancer centre). Her cancer metastised to her sacrum.

tangandchris

I told dh about this, told him about the original dx being in 1992 and he about fell over. I think he didn't quite grasp the fear of recurrence and why.

I really felt so sad reading about this. It just never lets up, does it?

Racy

I am also in Australia and the news reports here say that Olivia did have chemo after her first diagnosis. I am assuming she has had a recurrence. There has been no mention of a new primary.

I was very sad to hear this news. She is a lovely lady. Wishing her well.

Anonymous

Susansgarden, you're thinking similarly to my thoughts. We don't know enough of her stats as I mentioned above to know anything further than she probably had a recurrence (we aren't sure about that either--it could be a new primary). I can't compare my situation to hers because I don't know enough about her dx.

I think we all pay attention to these stories for various reasons, but the theme for us all is (cue scary music) "we are never out of the woods." So that requires us to make our "woods" a really comfy place to live in, building a nice protective place for us to dwell however we do that--AIs/tamox, checkups, lifestyle changes if necessary, etc....and try to see the woods as a lovely place.

I am betting on Ms. Newton-John. I bet she'll get great treatment now that it's 25 years later, move on, and live to die of something else.

Claire

Lily55

She is going to use cannabis oil as part of her own personal cocktail as well as radiotherapy to the sacrum..........but its depresing news, after so long it would be the last thing you would think about........I have back problems and had never linked posible cáncer to them but now...................I suppose any symptom we get now is possible cáncer........

I am in the process of creating better Woods but no one really appreciates that life is much harder work post cáncer diagnosis, it really takes a lot more emotional energy, well it does with me but then I feel stuck as still waiting for reconstruction 5 years on.............................

wallycat

I found it scary that after 25 years, it did come back because we all hope that after some imagined number in our heads, our risks get lower. I try not to compare myself because I still think genetics makes a difference. Her sister died from a brain tumor, sadly, so she has had cancer dealings before. And even if someone gets diagnosed at the same age, with the same cancer, and got the same treatment, there is NO way to know that both people will respond identically. That is the frustrating part because if they found a "good pattern" we could all use it. Just not the case.

Molly50

I think 25 years cancer free is something quite remarkable! If it's any comfort, my sister had BC in her mid twenties. She had a modified radical mastectomy with recon. She died about 31 years later from something totally unrelated. No recurrence.

wallycat

Molly, so sorry to hear you lost your sister so young. No one is denying that 25 or more years out from cancer is not remarkable, it is the fear that one will have to deal with all of the cancer-ick again...remarkable or not, after the fact.

Beesie

"... it is the fear that one will have to deal with all of the cancer-ick again..."

I understand and share that fear, but I look at it differently.

Cancer is prevalent in society, and tends to affect people more as they get older. There is a fair bit of cancer in my family. I was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 49; should I live to my natural life expectancy, I could expect about another 40 years of life after that first diagnosis. With all those years ahead of me, I've always expected that I most likely will have to deal with cancer again. Maybe it will be a recurrence of my first breast cancer. Maybe it will be new breast cancer. Maybe it will be a different type of cancer. As I wrote recently in another thread, there is unfortunately no card that gets stamped that says that we've had cancer once, we've served our time and we can't be called up again. The unfortunate fact is that we are all just as likely as any other person our age, or possibly even more likely (given that we already have a personal history of cancer), to develop cancer again, whether it be breast cancer or another type of cancer.

So I am never surprised when someone who has been diagnosed with breast cancer in the past is diagnosed with cancer again. Breast cancer recurrences tend to occur within the first 10 years, but there are plenty of exceptions where a recurrence is not discovered until 15 or 20 years (or more) after the initial diagnosis. Anyone at any time can develop a new breast cancer primary or another type of cancer. As I said in my earlier post, we don't know if Olivia Newton-John has been diagnosed with a recurrence or with a new primary that has spread. The media doesn't understand the distinction; when they write that her "cancer has returned" or "recurred", they just mean that she has cancer again - they are not stating a medical diagnosis indicating a recurrence rather than a new primary. I've read quite a few articles since the word came about about her diagnosis; some of the descriptions of her diagnosis seem to suggest that this is a recurrence but there are just as many others that suggest that she may have a new primary that has spread - none of the descriptions are specific enough to know for sure which it is. From the press releases from Olivia's side, it doesn't appear that this is information that's been released, and frankly, it's no one's business.

It's really unfortunate that Olivia Newton-John is dealing with mets. I'm sad whenever I hear about anyone being diagnosed with mets, and in her case, well, she may be rich and famous and she's had a fabulous career, but she's had some really tough luck in her life. It's sad, but to me there is nothing shocking or surprising. It's just what happens in life.

SummerAngel

I just read a People Magazine article about her (http://people.com/celebrity/olivia-newton-john-can...) that had some interesting statements:

"It's a very long time from her primary [diagnosis] and that usually means that it's very treatable, and you can put it into long term remission"

"When it goes to the bone only, she may not need very aggressive treatment"

Are these true?

rozem

my gf (also had BC) texted me this news...it is devastating to those of us who hope and pray that the further out you are the safer you are and at 25 years I would think the chances are very very slim of it coming back -I understand that they are not zero BUT STILL!!!! wow its a shocker for sure. My other friends were dumbfounded that this could happen - really not common knowledge for most of the population that BC can come back after so much time....

I doubt it was a new primary - she had a single mastectomy with her first diagnosis so if she did have a new primary I would think it would be in her one remaining breast - doesn't sound like it but then again I know there is so much misinformation out there who knows how the media interprets

Rosamond

Well said, Beesie. I wish anyone with any form of any cancer the best, and all of you as well.

Beesie

SummerAngel, I believe the quote you provided was speculation from a doctor who does not know the details of Olivia Newton-John's diagnosis any more than we do, from the high level and non-specific press reports. I think the doctor is speculating that if this is a recurrence and it took 25 years to show itself, it must mean that the cancer itself is not very aggressive or fast growing. And if the mets is small and in just one location, then localized treatment might for now be sufficient, possibly in combination with an AI. That all seems reasonable, but it's total speculation.