16 tx's vs 25? What do you think?

Options
cookiegal
cookiegal Member Posts: 3,296
edited June 2014 in Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After

 I had my consultation with the radiation oncologist today. I have a choice of 16 higher dose treatments or 25 lower dose treatments.

I read a few studies on this, and to be honest they were a little bit over my level of techical comprehension.

The doctor says the results and se's are about the same. I am not working and live walking distance from the hospital so the convenience is not a big factor, and I am going to be doing this right through the holidays either way.

I have larger breasts and sensitive skin, as well as one positive node.

Opinions?

· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Titan
    Titan Member Posts: 2,956
    edited November 2009

    Sounds like you could go either way...Rads DO effect the skin..especialy later on..so if it doesn't matter to you as far as convenience or time go with the low dose..if you just want to get it over with..maybe deal with more skin irrations go with with high dose...sounds like you have a choice to get it done earlier...or go a few more doses....remember..if your skin does "break through"..they will hold you off a day or two any way...not really a tough decision...am I rambling?  Am I any help..if it were me...I would go with the 16 days...just to get it over and done with...

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lexislove
    lexislove Member Posts: 2,645
    edited November 2009

    I wish I was given the choice!!!

    I did 28 rads, it would be nice to get it over and done with faster. Good luck!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cookiegal
    cookiegal Member Posts: 3,296
    edited November 2009

    those numbers don't include the boost btw...so I guess it is really 21 or 30.

    Fraction-something they called it.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hlya
    hlya Member Posts: 484
    edited November 2009

    One of my friend was given 16 x RADs instead of 28 after mastectomy,  but she heard 28 x low dose would be good to breast skin for reconstruction, so she asked for 28.  But her radiologist said 16 high dose is the best treatment to her based on her situation....Sounds like 16 is more harsh,  'cause she had grade 3 HER2+ tumor.

    Also she got her breast area swollen after starting RAd for a while, the doctor told her that was probably caused by RAD

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cookiegal
    cookiegal Member Posts: 3,296
    edited November 2009

    So far what I have discovered is the medical benefit seems ever so slightly favor 16, the se benefit seems slightly favor the traditional course.

    Still have no idea what to do!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • knowledgeforpower
    knowledgeforpower Member Posts: 184
    edited November 2009

    I did 18 sessions, 15 regular and 3 boosts.  I have been extremely happy with my decision.  I had no major side effects, just a slight itchy rash towards the end.  I was very happy to not have to adjust my work schedule for a longer treatment plan.  If you search this board under the word shortened you should find additional posts.  Studies have shown the shortened plan is as effective as the longer version. If offered the shorter plan again, I would take it.

    Good luck with your decision.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hlya
    hlya Member Posts: 484
    edited November 2009

    cookiegal:  If your doctor didn't say you definitely 16 x RADs,  I assume your BC is not as aggressive as my friend's.  then you have to balance what's more important to you?  You want to get the treatment done quickly?  Worry about 28 would not be harsh enough? Worry about SEs ?  Or Worry about your breast tissue (not sure whether you got mastectomy).....Then decide which one is better to you.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cookiegal
    cookiegal Member Posts: 3,296
    edited November 2009

    I I think that is very interesting that for the worst cases they suggest the 16's.

    I asked my medical onc, he said if I did not want the convenience of the 16's he would suggest the 25's since I am younger. His thinking is that they only know the se's 12 years out at this point.

    Unfortunately this question is no longer as urgent as I thought it would be, they now want me to consider chemo.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories