30% develop metastatic cancer?

cp, thanks for providing that the link to that thread; it's one I've contributed to.

winding, it certainly doesn't mean that 30% of women with stage i bc progress to mbc. The percentages are spread out. Off hand, I don't know the specific breakdowns, tho you may find it on the linked thread if they are even available. But how I think it works out is a smaller percentage of stage i patients will progress, stage two percentages of progression to mets would be higher and most likely, women diagnosed with stage three bc would have the highest percentage of progression to mbc. (This is where I think the "early detection saves lives" slogan comes from). So the 30% is spread out across the stages. I've read that the figure may be 28%. Hope this helps your understanding of the statistic and even tho that other thread on this subject is long, you should be able to browse through the posts for more insight.

This is only an example, there is no scientific backing of this, but to show my train of thought it might look something like this: stage i: 5% progress to mets, stage 2: 10% progress to mets, stage 3: 15% progress to mets, the percentages add up to 30%.

windingshores, I remember reading that 1 out 3 women diagnosed with stage 3 will progress to stage IV. As the other ladies mentioned stage I & II will have lower percentages.

When my BS ran my numbers on adjuvant online after surgery it came with 72% change of survival so the risk/change of progression is 28%, still high in my books.

I like looking at stats and I as I approach my 2 years anniversary I am happy to be here but I know that my type of BC can show up years and years later but I am happy of these milestones.

ScWilly, thanks for your explanation. I know there are people who love and study stats, I read your post several times for comprehension until it made sense. Like you, I also look for ones with a positive slant in my favor!

Statistics are useful in many ways. It's not something I concentrate heavily on, tho I am aware of them. It does make sense to me that more research funding should be funneled into metastatic bc, since the statistics show how it recurs. Statistics show that there isn't yet a cure for bc, tho the early detection slogans surrounding bc fundraising might have the general public believing there is. Once diagnosed, even if treated and no trace of cancer is found, I think many women have that feeling that it might come back one day.

In my case, being diagnosed stage iv from the start, I am currently on the better end of the statistics for longevity, now 5+ years dealing with it. The stat is something like 80% of women live less than four years after being diagnosed metastatic. Being stable on Arimidex for over 3 years classifies me as an "exceptional responder" and livng six years past the diagnosis, one is considered an "outlier". I said that's my New Years resolution, to become an outlier.

Just wanted to add overall stats can be misleading until you break them down. So 1 in 8 is the odd over the lifetime of a woman who lives to 80 yrs old. The % increases the older she gets and that is why

1 in 8 women will have bc. But it is broken down into 20 to 30 yr olds have a 1 in 1800 chance and 30 to 40 have a 1 in .... etc etc.

That stat is over 20 years or more. It's much lower for the first 5-10 years. And most breast cancer still happens to older women, so could have died from other causes. I'm almost 60 and my family's lifespan is in the early 80s. It's only been the last few decades where people live to their 90's, but often with a lousy quality of life.

We need to remember to live in the "now" because we don't know when our numbers up

I haven't read all the above comments, but I can add that when I first saw the 30% stat I asked my UCLA onc about it and she explained that approximately 30% is a very broad average. Stage I recurrence stats are much lower than Stage II, and Stage III will be higher. So if you are Stage I, your overall recurrence risk is considerably lower than 30% -- maybe more like 5 or 10% -- not sure exactly, but you get the idea. Then, even within those stages, there are variances based on hormonal stats, Her2 status and possibly other things. So it's not 30% across the board, but considerably lower or possibly higher depending on your individual stats. Deanna

For those interested in the truth behind all the funds wasted on BC awareness in October, check out the site that the Pinktober Revolution thread gang on BCO have put online: www.pinktobersucks.com.