You might have heard about the latest cancer findings, which were published in the medical journal JAMA Oncology and expertly explained by The New York Times. In short: A massive 20-year-long study found that hoards of women who got lumpectomies or mastectomies to remove abnormal breast cells (which are generally considered a precursor to breast cancer) were just as likely as the average woman to die of breast cancer within two decades.
The new research completely conflicts with the common sense that removing abnormal breast cells (i.e., ductal carcinoma in situ or D.C.I.S.) which are found by mammograms in some 60,000 women each year, will significantly reduce your risk of developing (and dying from) breast cancer.
The data, which is based on 100,000 women in a national cancer registry, seems to suggest that these abnormal cells might not significantly increase breast cancer risk after all, which could be why having them surgically removed (like the majority of patients in the study) doesn't significantly affect your risk of getting and dying from cancer. As it is, doctors know the cells are unpredictable: They can either spread or go away on their own. Another theory is that surgery can leave some of these abnormal cells behind. It's how a women with full-breast removal can still end up dying of breast cancer, although this is extremely rare.
MORE FROM COSMOPOLITAN
The study hints that abnormal breast cells might just be like any other breast cancer risk — having just one of them doesn't mean you'll definitely get breast cancer, and knocking off a single risk factor via surgery won't necessarily grant you immunity. (That said, your age, ethnicity, and medical history on top of abnormal cells can increase your overall risk of developing a terminal cancer. It's why black women, women who are younger than 40 when they're diagnosed, and those with a history of invasive cancers were more likely to die from breast cancer in the study.)
This news that invasive surgery might not protect you is heartbreaking for any woman who's already undergone surgery, radiation, and the emotional effects of losing one or both breasts. It would be understated to say that any of that is easy. But note that the new research isn't some conspiracy theory suggesting that doctors hacking off breasts to make a buck. If anything, doctors have just been overly enthusiastic about nipping breast cancer in the bud — and that trickles down to hopeful women with abnormal breast cells who understandably opt into the aggressive treatments their doctors offer. It's no wonder why women with even greater risk factors — like Angelina Jolie, who had an 87 percent chance of getting breast cancer thanks to a rare gene and family history of cancer — opt into double mastectomies.
The data surfaced in this study doesn't prove that all mastectomies are for naught. This study only looked at "stage 0" cancer — a precursor to cancer that may potentially turn into something life-threatening. There are plenty of vital surgeries performed to remove later stage cancers, and the new study isn't questioning whether these surgeries can prolong a patient's life. (They can — particularly when paired with radiation, according to the latest research.)
More research is needed before experts alter their recommendations on what to do when abnormal breast cells are detected. The new findings come from medical records, death rates, and a whole lot of math without any actual experiments to compare and monitor survival rates among those who seek treatment and those who let their abnormal cells be.
Until that research is conducted, there's no saying how patients who opt out of surgery will fare. So for now: Surgical removal is still considered the best way to proceed when abnormal cells are detected. And there's little reason to resent the surgeons who continue to protect women the best way they know how.
You might have heard about the latest cancer findings, which were published in the medical journal JAMA Oncology and expertly explained by The New York Times. In short: A massive 20-year-long study found that hoards of women who got lumpectomies or mastectomies to remove abnormal breast cells (which are generally considered a precursor to breast cancer) were just as likely as the average woman to die of breast cancer within two decades.
The new research completely conflicts with the common sense that removing abnormal breast cells (i.e., ductal carcinoma in situ or D.C.I.S.) which are found by mammograms in some 60,000 women each year, will significantly reduce your risk of developing (and dying from) breast cancer.
The data, which is based on 100,000 women in a national cancer registry, seems to suggest that these abnormal cells might not significantly increase breast cancer risk after all, which could be why having them surgically removed (like the majority of patients in the study) doesn't significantly affect your risk of getting and dying from cancer. As it is, doctors know the cells are unpredictable: They can either spread or go away on their own. Another theory is that surgery can leave some of these abnormal cells behind. It's how a women with full-breast removal can still end up dying of breast cancer, although this is extremely rare.
MORE FROM COSMOPOLITAN
The study hints that abnormal breast cells might just be like any other breast cancer risk — having just one of them doesn't mean you'll definitely get breast cancer, and knocking off a single risk factor via surgery won't necessarily grant you immunity. (That said, your age, ethnicity, and medical history on top of abnormal cells can increase your overall risk of developing a terminal cancer. It's why black women, women who are younger than 40 when they're diagnosed, and those with a history of invasive cancers were more likely to die from breast cancer in the study.)
This news that invasive surgery might not protect you is heartbreaking for any woman who's already undergone surgery, radiation, and the emotional effects of losing one or both breasts. It would be understated to say that any of that is easy. But note that the new research isn't some conspiracy theory suggesting that doctors hacking off breasts to make a buck. If anything, doctors have just been overly enthusiastic about nipping breast cancer in the bud — and that trickles down to hopeful women with abnormal breast cells who understandably opt into the aggressive treatments their doctors offer. It's no wonder why women with even greater risk factors — like Angelina Jolie, who had an 87 percent chance of getting breast cancer thanks to a rare gene and family history of cancer — opt into double mastectomies.
The data surfaced in this study doesn't prove that all mastectomies are for naught. This study only looked at "stage 0" cancer — a precursor to cancer that may potentially turn into something life-threatening. There are plenty of vital surgeries performed to remove later stage cancers, and the new study isn't questioning whether these surgeries can prolong a patient's life. (They can — particularly when paired with radiation, according to the latest research.)
More research is needed before experts alter their recommendations on what to do when abnormal breast cells are detected. The new findings come from medical records, death rates, and a whole lot of math without any actual experiments to compare and monitor survival rates among those who seek treatment and those who let their abnormal cells be.
Until that research is conducted, there's no saying how patients who opt out of surgery will fare. So for now: Surgical removal is still considered the best way to proceed when abnormal cells are detected. And there's little reason to resent the surgeons who continue to protect women the best way they know how.
0 comments:
Post a Comment