Reply To: Chemo question

[Greg]

Eve, the standard course of treatment is the neo adjuvant chemo which is what has been offered to him. It is designed, as I understand it, to kill any possible micro metastacies that may or may not be in the blood stream. If the cancer is fully contained in the bladder (something they really do not fully know till they get it out and have pathology look at it) there may be an argument for not having the chemo. But I can tell you the doctors, especially the medical oncologist, will always want to go with the route they know. They feel, and rightly so, that to take every action against the cancer is the preferred route rather than leaving anything to chance.
My own situation was that my invasive bladder cancer T2b3G was discovered months before the surgery took place and there was no quick action until I got a second opinion at a major cancer centre and the uro wanted to get the bladder out asap. That happened two weeks later so there was no chance for neo adjuvant chemo (prior to surgery). He made me promise I would do chemo AFTER the surgery (called adjuvant chemo). When I was getting better and the week before my scheduled first chemo treatment, he and I met to review the surgical pathology report. He told me the cancer was all contained, no lymph node involvement in the fifteen they took out and no known metastatic disease. He told me I did not need the chemo, in his view. So on that basis, I declined the chemo. The medical oncologist was not happy, but could not offer me any persuasive reason to take it since she could not make any promise of reducing the chance of recurrence with or without the chemo.
I weighed the tions, put my trust in God and took my uro’s counsel and declined the chemo.
I will have my two year post surgery anniversary next Saturday!
Was I right? Only time will tell, I suppose.
Tough decision. Been there, understand the fears and worries and concerns.
Keep us in the loop. Praying for you.
Greg