mum's breast cancer chemotherapy- is this normal?

[Iwantthistobemyyear]

My mum got diagnoses with triple negative breast cancer in the late spring, after finding a lump.

Within six weeks of chemo and immunotherapy it had gone completely. Four to five months later, she's STILL having chemo and they want her to do three more rounds. The doctor said it was because there could still be stuff lurking around in there, but surely it would have only needed a couple more treatments to kill any cells. They told her they wouldn't know until they opened her up, but refuse to open her up until she finishes the six months cycle.

She didn't really have any side affects from the chemo, until the type of chemo changed AFTER the cancer had actually gone- so it's having a negative impact on her, despite being cancer free.

Just wondering what's normal, from anyone who has been through it.

I had 2 breast cancers and the mastectomy which was first and node clearance took out all visible cancer but they still recommended chemo (lobular, stage 3 equivalent, grade 2) which I did Pax for 12 weeks. It is fairly normal to have chemo even though there's nothing visible there incase there are cells they can't see. Triple negative is one they are extra cautious with as can't give hormone tablets etc.

But there's a balance between quality and quantity of life plus they cannot say for certain if there's any benefit so if your Mum is getting very ill go back and explain and / or get a second opinion. My oncologist was of the view that there wasn't much difference between shorter and longer courses of chemo but she said her view was controversial and others disagree.

Thank you and I'm sorry that you went through that.
She hasn't had any mastectomy yet, they said they would do a lumpectomy after the chemo, but there's no lumps now!
I would definitely say there's a difference, as now she's getting poorly, whereas when she had the cancer, and it was being treated she wasn't. My feeling is that if it took six rounds to get rid of the actual cancer, it wouldn't take the 10 or so rounds she's had since to just get rid of a few cells lurking around. But I'm not a doctor. She wants to stop, but the doctors keep telling her she has to keep going.

Could you go to an appointment with her?

I would also definitely want to be stopping but its obviously better if oncologist agrees. The data they used for mine was the 10 year Predict Breast predictions https://breast.predict.nhs.uk/tool. I would try and see if they will discuss with you or get a second opinion, you are entitled to second opinion on NHS. Some people do just stop but its a balance between longevity of life and quality of life, the oncologists do tend just to consider longevity and not that the side effects may leave you in pain.

I have triple negative breast cancer, diagnosed this year, and have just finished the chemotherapy regime you describe. I agree it is brutal.

The problem is, triple negative doesn't have any hormone receptive element, so there is no hormone treatment that is effective but less brutal. She may have been a candidate for immunotherapy, I hope that's been part of her treatment, but it also comes with a risk of some side effects.

Consider the tumour as a wasp nest found in a shed. You definitely want to get rid of the wasp nest from the shed. But you also want to fumigate the shed in case there are any other tiny little wasps that you can't see, hiding out in the shed somewhere. That's what chemo does.

By the sound of things she's had an excellent response to the chemo which bodes really well. Hopefully once the chemo course is completed she will start to feel better (as I am beginning to) and her long term prognosis will be excellent.

You can ask the oncologist for a link to the guidance they are using to make the decision (or use Google or Google Scholar to find it yourself if you know what you're doing). I'm not sure it's that unusual though, I had a different type of cancer which hopefully was completely removed with surgery, but I had four months of chemo afterwards just in case there were any cells left. That's the problem with it, I found it a really difficult decision to make because possibly the chemo was damaging my body when there was nothing there any more for it to remove and often it doesn't make as much of a difference as people might think, but the consequences of not having the chemo and the cancer coming back seemed worse than the consequences of having it pointlessly and having ongoing unwanted effects.