bluebayou Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Have come to know the board a bit better and realize I should have introduced myself here before posting elsewhere... Oops My name is Blue Bayou and I was diagnosed with NSCLC Stage IIA in February 2003. I was abroad at the time and was medivaced to South Africa for the surgery. They performed a lobectomy (right upper lobe) and after post surgery consult with oncologist, observation only was the preferred choice. Have had CT scans of brain, chest and abdomen in June 2003..All clear. Returned to Canada in August and went for first visit to oncologist shortly thereafter. He was concerned with pain I had been having in back for sometime so ordered a bone scan. Assistant called back with news that I had no cancer. Yahoo!! Next day, doctor calls and says that info should not have been handed out and that he was concerned about a "hot spot" and ordered immediate CT Scan. Came back from hospital short while ago and now await with trepidation the NEWS. Scary time Thanks for being here. Quote
Jenny G. Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 I'm sorry you are having to go through this. It's good to know that your doctor is being thorough in ruling everything out. Remember that no matter what, there are treatments and we can only take this battle one step at a time. The waiting is the absolute worst and I am praying for good news for you. Jenny Quote
Debi Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Hey Blue... Ugh...I am fairly new to this disease but I already know that waiting for test results is probably one of the worse parts of this whole process! Try not to worry (yeah, WAY easier said than done)... I have seen countless posts where a doctor saw a "hot spot" and at closer exam, it turned out to be nothing. I hope that this is the case in your situation also! As Jenny posted..good thing your doctor is being thorough! Please let us know the results of your CT and welcome to the board (officially). As everyone always says..sorry that you have to be here but glad that you found it! Debi 47 years old Stage 1A-nsclc Surgery June 16, 2003 - upper & mid lobe removed Quote
norme Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Hi Blue Bayou, I sure hope the hot spot is nothing too. will be saying a prayer for it to be nothing. I always thought that with Stage II they gave chemo? Was this decided in the US, Canada or South Africa? I think i would have a second opinion on that call..... Quote
Don Wood Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 Hi, Blue Bayou! Glad most of the news was good and hope the last bit is also. Don Quote
bluebayou Posted September 7, 2003 Author Posted September 7, 2003 Norme.. In answer to your question, first oncologist said no to chemo. Second opinion was in Kenya some 2 months later and he said yes. Unfortunately I was relocating to Canada and couldn't start treatment. Came back to Canada and when I saw third oncologist, he said he would have given me chemo as new study came out in May suggesting it can be helpful. However, too late for me. So, all I can do for now is hope and pray that first opinion turns out to be the best one. Its in God's hands. Thank you for your concern. And thx to Jenny, Debi and Don for your kind wishes. Will keep you all posted under Early Stage LC Quote
Jenny G. Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 I'm sure this is a stupid question, but I've seen many others in the same situation, where follow up chemo or radiation was not done after surgery, probably because it just wasn't the standard at the time. At what point does it become too late? What has changed since the original surgery? I guess no one would do these treatments on anyone with no evidence of disease? There are many here who did not have this and are here years later and doing fine. Hope I don't offend, just curious if anyone else wondered or asked about this. Jenny Quote
bluebayou Posted September 7, 2003 Author Posted September 7, 2003 Hi Jenny, In my case, the oncologist said that possible effectiveness of chemo is assured only if given between 6-8 weeks AFTER surgery. Quote
Donna G Posted September 7, 2003 Posted September 7, 2003 I have come in late on this conversation. But did I read correctly that a Dr said that you only benefit from chemo if you get it right after surgery? If you have cancer you nearly always benefit from chemo. Is he saying to kill "micrometastasis" early ? benefit from preventing it growing? Because you still would certainly benefit from chemo if you have cancer whether it is micro mets or larger. Bluebayou welcome. Must have been scary to be diagnosed overseas away from home! Your name sounds like you are from Louisiana more than from Canada! I hope now that you have introduced yourself, joined the family, that you keep us posted on how you are doing, how your tests come out. Again, welcome Donna G Quote
bluebayou Posted September 7, 2003 Author Posted September 7, 2003 Hi Donna.. Thx for the welcome. All good questions no doubt but he did not elaborate and I (being in a quasi state of shock) did not press. Will ask at next visit end of this month Quote
Snowflake Posted September 8, 2003 Posted September 8, 2003 I don't think there really is a "standard" for chemo/radiation after surgery that is based on staging. My surgery was in February and my first appointment with an oncologist was in March. He gave his opinion and suggested MD Anderson for a second. He felt there was no evidence of disease and that he didn't recommend chemo, but radiation was okay. His suggestion was to get a clinical trial due to my age and health. The radiation oncologist agreed on the radiation. MD Anderson's opinion was to do nothing, just monitor. (This could be why mention of the place gives me a bad taste.) My cancer was staged as IIIa after surgery, not sure what would have happened had it been staged IIIa prior to surgery (the thoracic surgeon thought it was Stage I or II going in). To date, I've had radiation and Iressa as suppressive therapy. Iressa has been discontinued (was supposed to be on it for a year for the trial) due to horrible side effects. Seems that cancer is a pretty "personal" disease since it is the cells of an individual's body that are mutated, not a known bacteria that can be cured the same in anyone. Also reaffirms the "practice" of medicine. I can tell you that MY profession isn't a "practice", it's the real thing! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.