Hi,
I was disturbed to read an article the other day that talked about the ‘late effects’ of breast cancer treatment. This is referring to effects that can take place many years after treatment has finished from the chemotherapy/radiotherapy or hormone treatment (whereas side effects happen during treatment)…for example heart problems.
Has anyone else come across these ‘late effects’?
Sheana
Hi Sheana
Not experienced them (chemo/rads last year), but knew about the risks. There’s a list of side effects and late effects as long as your arm. The oncs don’t tend to want to discuss that, because they want you to do chemo etc and hopefully not die very soon. I regarded it as “save me now, I’ll deal with anything else later.” And it’s not like the late effects happen as a matter of course. It’s all about weighing up risks. Chemo/rads/hormones seems like a good risk to me when I’m sitting here in my 40s and would like to make it to my 60s at least!
Carole
Periphal neuropathy, menopausal symptoms, infertility, heart, kidney, liver problems, cataracts, fatigue, bone thinning are all classed as late/ long term effects. My onc didn’t really go into it at great lengths at the time and the immediate concerns were more short term like dealing with sickness etc.
Hi, I agree with Carole,my view is “have what it takes now and worry about the future later, because without the now there won’t be a later!” - but yes, I know of at least 2 people who developed heart problems, one within about 3 years of treatement and the other about 12 years after. My onc has never discussed them with me, but it still feels like a very good deal to me!
Mo
I’ve still got peripheral neuropathy 6+ yrs down the line and my breast where I had the radio is still quite tender. It’s never crossed my mind to complain…I’m just happy to be still alive and still ned. I do feel though that all the treatment must affect our general health for an awful long time afterwards. I’m sure I read somewhere that radiotheraphy just keeps on working!! I’ve also noticed that my bc friends who have had chemo seem to have aged faster than those who didn’t need it…just a thought!
Thanks for your thoughts ladies.
Sometimes I think that when a celebrity is dx for example, and the media get hold of the story you can almost guarantee it goes this way…‘whoever’ was dx with early breast cancer ( always early and caught in time ) then they have chemo and radio…there the story ends. There is no talk of the hormonal treatment afterwards, the early instant horrendous menopause, the effects from a drug such as Arimidex on the bones etc…I could go on and on. There are far more ‘extras’ after the main treatment than most people realise. Well, I knew nothing about it.
Of course I understand that at the point of dx, being alive is priority and anything else after that is a bonus. But sometimes…it can be hard when it still goes on, year after year. It certainly is a life changing and life long experience.
Sheana x
Hi SheanaY, that’s one of the reasons why I find the “all back to normal” comment so frustrating as soon as active treatment is finished. I know others mean well, but without going into details it certainly isn’t life as it was before bc!
No it isn’t Tina and I know people mean well but if I start to have a grizzle, all I get is…‘at least you’re here…’
Yea, I know Im here but I would like to be as I was before!!!
I know how you feel. I’ve always been extremely grateful for the treatment I’ve had (the full monty) but I would still prefer not to have needed it in the first place. You’d have to be superhuman not to feel a bit miffed to be unlucky enough to have a cancer diagnosis even if you’re lucky enough to survive it.
Jan xx
Hi Jan,
It’s somehow frowned upon to say ‘it’s not fair’ isn’t it…well is isn’t!!
Sheana x