Menopause Matters Forum
Menopause Discussion => All things menopause => Topic started by: babyjane on December 02, 2014, 04:10:35 PM
-
Just found out a friend has been diagnosed with breast cancer. She is my age. She chose HRT to maintain her energy and wellbeing as she has a responsible job, family and likes to travel. Now this.
Could it be related? I think I am glad that I decided against going down the HRT route :(
-
Sorry to hear about your friend BJ. I hope she makes a full recovery.
The increased risk of breast cancer from using HRT is absolutely tiny. Of course there is the increased risk but I feel for me it is quality over quantity.
Honeyb
x
-
Only a Consultant can tell her if there is a link. In the meantime has she felt well? because she could have got knocked over by a bus …… it's a shock. What type of tumour and treatment is she being offered?
-
Some info
Is there a link between HRT and breast cancer risk?
Taking HRT (hormone replacement therapy) after the age of 50 is associated with a small increased risk of developing breast cancer. The type you take and how long you take it for may affect the risk, and the risk also reduces over time once you stop taking HRT.
Combined HRT (oestrogen and progestogen) accounts for six extra cases of breast cancer in every 1,000 women who take it for five years between the ages of 50 and 59. There appears to be no increased risk if it's taken for less than three years. Oestrogen-only HRT has a lower risk than combined HRT.
Having a risk factor doesn't mean that a woman will develop breast cancer. And even if a risk factor is identified in a woman with breast cancer, there's no way of proving that this was the cause.
Return to frequently asked questions.
Content last reviewed August 2014; next planned review 2016
Last edited:
27 August 2014
From https://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/breast-cancer-information/breast-awareness/frequently-asked-questions/there-link-between-hrt-breast-cancer-risk
-
:thankyou:
I had HRT for 3 months several years before a lump was removed which was oestrogen receptive. Connection? Too busy getting treatment to be concerned if there was a connection, I had made the decision at the time.
Shock was the main problem initially then worrying if panic attacks would stop me going for treatment sessions :-\
-
Breast cancer starts about 6 years before it can be detected and possibly earlier than that. If you are genetically susceptible then HRT could aggravate it earlier than it may have appeared if no HRT was taken. 2 glasses of wine a day gives same risk and am sure there are many other contributers, I often wonder what hidden problems we got from taken the contraceptive pill.
-
I have read its 10 years, even though I posted the above, I still have niggling thought about is as I have read such different opinions, and many cancer specialists have opposing views.
Estrogen cause cells to divide, progesterone inhibits cell growth and limiting cell stimulation, yet it says in the report that estrogen only reduces risk.
I don't think the risks are really known.
-
Wonder who works out these stats? which Company funds such rub….. :-X
My Surgeon told me that clinically the lump was 'non-sinster'. After surgery he told me "I had in my hand what I expected to find" ….. 'lucky you' thought I, didn't know him well enough to say it out loud ;D. At histology there were changes at the margins of the lump - he told me that he didn't know, had I not opted for surgery, where I 'would be in 18 months time'. In other words, there was no way of knowing how long the lump - found on palpation and not film - had been there, and no way of knowing how fast it was likely to have grown.
My Mum had cancer - found at 65 on mammogram. Mastectomy followed by 1 follow-up appt., then nowt. :-\ ???
-
Fortunately she is a doctor so was on the ball straight away and knew where to go for help. Stage one I believe whatever that is. Will know more after talking to her more.
-
Hopefully she will get support from those working around her! What has she opted for?
-
radiation and a lumpectomy I think.
-
Hopefully in the other order ;)
I had lumpectomy, 5 days later the Surgeon went in again to take more cells and lymph glands followed by precautionary radiation for 4 weeks. I didn't begin radiation until the area had healed, about 7 weeks after surgery. Took the whole of that hot Summer of 1995 the coolest place was in the X-ray dept. ::)
I needed to rest. I carried on working. I couldn't do any ironing so if she asks, you could offer ;)
-
Yes I could couldn't I :)
-
I don't think the risks are really known.
Well said. No-one can say for certain what causal factors contribute to anyone's case of breast cancer or how long a cancer has been present. Some factors that have been suggested by some as contributory may be totally beyond our control anyway e.g. age of menarche, genetic variations.
Could it be related?
Nobody knows. Believe me, if one tries to pin one's individual case of breast cancer down to specific causal factors one will go round and round in circles and it makes no difference to the fact that one has been diagnosed. Best to use one's energy and resources to concentrate on getting oneself through treatment.
-
I know two ladies who had very early stage breast cancer - one had a mastectomy with no further treatment and the other has just had the lumpectomy and radiation. A third lady, a close friend, had aggressive breast cancer which resulted in mastectomy, chemo and radiation and she was then diagnosed with advance stage osteoporosis (she is only 55). They all sailed through their menopause with barely a flush so didn't use HRT. None had a family history of breast cancer, they are all slim and fit, don't smoke and drink alcohol in moderation. The only risk factor I could link to all of them is considerable stress in their lives for various reasons.
When looking at potential triggers for cancer I personally think stress could be one of the top causes. Lack of sleep, feeling hot, flustered and out of control, palpitations, anxiety, aching joints and all the other meno symptoms are highly stressful.
I believe HRT actually reduces our risk of getting certain other cancers e.g. bowl cancer and it is well known that it can protect our bones and osteoporosis is a crippling long term problem for many.
At the moment Statins are being pushed by many doctors yet the side effects can be really nasty.
There will always be debate about pros and cons of many drugs and treatments and as time goes by there might be a way found to help us through the nasty side effects of the menopause without risks. Many GPs are quick to put menopausal women on SRRIs but if you read the information leaflet the warnings about feeling suicidal, drowsy, sedated, nauseas etc. are really alarming and yet there doesn't seem to be any concern about prescribing these. How many suicides are there as result of people taking these and how many car accidents happen because someone doesn't realise they shouldn't be driving because the SSRIs are effecting them?
DG x
-
I don't think they can actualy put breast cancer down to hrt my sister who died of breast cancer at the age of 35 once told me it took 10 years for the cancer to come out it was 10 years to when she started taking the pill the homones in the pill are a lot higher dose to prevent a pregnancy than the hrt ,my friends mum died of breast cancer at the age of 52 she was not on the hrt I was 14 at the time she died ,my aunty died of breast cancer she was in her early 50s not on hrt .you can go on for ever .don't think it realy matters if you are on it or not I suppose its one of those things it will happen no matter what I once read an article .saying if you get breast cancer while on the hrt there is a more chance of survival rate x
-
Sorry Cancer is not causes by stress it is cause by mutation of a single cell and damaged genes, most cancers are destroyed by the body.
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancers-in-general/what-is-cancer/cells/how-cancer-starts#how_starts
The reason hormones have been implicated is for example estrogen is because it cause cells to multiply more quickly.
The reason they say if you take HRT and get breast cancer there is more chance of survival is because it is more likely to be detected earlier. As women visit their doctors more regularly when on it and are or should be monitored.
-
Hi babyjane
so so sorry to hear about your friend. :(
Can you give us a little more background to your friend.
You'd mentioned she's around same age as you (57?).
Was it picked up by screening.
How long had she taken HRT before being diagnosed.
What sort of HRT did she take.
Did she smoke or drink alcohol etc.
Not trying to pry here but perhaps we should be careful to give a more balanced update.
We seem to forget that even if we don't take HRT the chances of having breast cancer above 50 increases.
So its very difficult to allude to any cause on its own.
http://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/upload/pdf/80over50_1.pdf
Please keep in mind what others have said and even though 80% of cases happen in over 50's its still a very very small number that do occur.
So we all need to be keep aware, go for a checkup if we feel something wrong and keep up with screening - however we decide how to keep our "energy and wellbeing".
:-*
ps. I think the jury is out on the stress aspect to cancer also. ???
-
I agree about the 'stress' aspect - any worry can lower the immune system which can have huge impacts on how our bodies react. Injury can also cause cancer too ……..
How are you Babyjane? Such a shock!
-
Sorry but there is no evidence that cancer is caused by stress and it is worrying to implicate it and only serves to cause people to think that its something in their lives that has caused it, only to cause more distress.
Sorry if this does not go down well but I feel strongly about this.
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/cancercontroversies/stress/stress-and-cancer2
-
Not sure why its would cause more distress Silverlady.
I'd rather know whether my job or situation or lifestyle was the basis or cause of a problem, so others could learn and avoid that same cause.
Not sure where your seeing things "not go down well" as I've only said the "jury is out".
I welcome your strong views wholeheartedly :)
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ATF3.htm
-
I believe stress plays a part in the emergence of cancer precisely because it impacts our immune system and wellbeing so much. The ability of our body to destroy any cancer cells that are produced must be impaired. Maybe research has ruled this out and of course there are many other factors such as genetics, environment & lifestyle choices that play their part in the development of cancer in our bodies but I don't see how anyone can dispute that stress is a significant factor.
I have heard that it isn't necessarily HRT that causes cancer but if you do develop breast cancer then the extra oestrogen from HRT may increase the severity. This doesn't however answer the contradiction in the studies that shows that women who have had a hysterectomy are more likely to develop breast cancer if they don't use oestrogen. It seems that it's the combined HRT, which includes oestrogen and progesterone, that brings the small additional risk.
I would also like to know whether the women included the World study on HRT have their general health and lifestyle choices looked at - for example alcohol intake, diet, weight and life stresses.
I think I also read that the new findings actually concluded that women who took 5 years of HRT in their 50s actually lived bit longer - in other words some HRT at the right time will bring a protective element in the long term.
When I had my private appointment with a gynae recently ( oh the joy of having an informed professional giving some proper time to discussing my options) he even mentioned that the risk of womb cancer by using oestrogen alone (when the uterus is still in place) is actually quite small but it is the excessive bleeding that often results from not having opposing progesterone that is the real problem.
The debate rages on.
I think it is natural to blame HRT for breast cancer but we mustn't loose sight of the other factors such as, genetics, being overweight, smoking, excessive alcohol and possibly life stresses.
As I mentioned in my previous post on this thread, I know 3 ladies who have had breast cancer, to various degrees of severity, and none of them had genetic or lifestyle issues that could have been blamed and they hadn't used HRT - they all had prolonged stress in their lives.
I am 58 and after a one year break from HRT I have decided to give HRT another go. I will be using Oestrogel with Utrogestan (which Dr. Currie describes as more breast friendly). I have coped without HRT but the last year has been the least stressful time I have had in over 20 years. I have really looked after myself over this 12 month break from HRT and my general health has improved to a degree (the lack of stress has been wonderful), however, it will be interesting to see if the oestrogen will improve my sleep, give me more energy again and help my bladder and VA issues.
My mother had Vulva Cancer - was this due to VA because she had a premature menopause with no HRT treatment? I don't think anyone can answer that question.
I don't have any genetic links to breast cancer, I am physically active, I try to eat sensibly, drink only a very small amount of alcohol 2-3 times a week - so I should be low risk. If I do develop breast cancer then I will blame the, often, excessive stress I have experienced over last 10-20 years. Stress is usually unavoidable(I pride myself in very proactive in dealing with stressful situations) and I would far rather blame stress than anything I had or had not done.
DG x
-
I had a stressful upbringing; I also was anorexic-type; all of which can lower the immune system. Someone asked me if I regretted not eating properly when I was diagnosed; another asked whether I would alter my dietary habits and life-style ……… well, nope. What ever had happened had been lain down probably years before. I concentrated on the diagnosis, surgery, treatment and follow up. Still here <wave> ……. I had good care throughout which made a huge difference too.
Surprisingly, throughout my treatment, I had no anxiety. Probably because adrenaline was carrying me through ??? ……..
I would rather have a good quality of Life with medication available …….
-
My lovely FIL died in his early seventies of an unusual form of cancer. His parents had lived until their nineties, he lived a healthy life with plenty of outdoor activity, exercise sensible food and neither drank nor smoked. It was very unexpected. The next year my lovely Mil was diagnosed with cancer at 70 and died. Everyone at the funeral thought ::) so much for all the health advice!
The only answer is to live well and enjoy it while you have it :D
-
Agree! Make every moment last ;) except those anxious ones :kick: …….. I thought I would be the sort of person who, every time I saw my tattoos where the laser was aimed during radiation treatment, would think 'oh, I've had cancer and maybe it will return' - surprisingly, nope ……..
-
I can only speak from my own personal experiences ,,my sister was so fit and healthy she used to eat well was a size 10 did yoga had 2 lovely children lovely husband she never stressed about things she found a lump had it diagnosed was cancer she had her breast off went to see her when she came home within 2 weeks she was dead that was the last time I saw her .my mother was always stressed she had 8 children had a very hard life bad husband she fetched us all up mainly on her own she smoked 10 to 15 park drive a day ate loads of fatty stuff as well as good stuff aswell she did not like going to doctors if ever she felt ill she died at 78 of a burst hernia .when I look back on this I always think its luck of the draw x
-
all these differing posts make such interesting reading, really, I am not being patronising. They have made me think a lot about life and my attitude to it :)
-
Please keep in mind what others have said and even though 80% of cases happen in over 50's its still a very very small number that do occur.
Whilst accepting that all figures and statistics are relative and not wanting to sound alarmist.... however, the lifetime risk is 1 in 8 (or, looking at it a different way, 7 in 8 chance of not developing breast cancer). I always thought I was well-informed health-wise but was quite shocked to learn of the 1 in 8 statistic when I was diagnosed with grade 3 IDC age 47. The following is a statement from the Breast Cancer Care website:
"After gender, age is the most significant risk factor for developing breast cancer – the older the person, the higher the risk. Most breast cancers (80%) occur in women over the age of 50. Most men who get breast cancer are over 60.
The table below gives the estimated risk of women developing breast cancer according to age, showing how risk goes up as we get older.
Risk up to and including age 29 1 in 2,000
Risk up to and including age 39 1 in 215
Risk up to and including age 49 1 in 50
Risk up to and including age 59 1 in 22
Risk up to and including age 69 1 in 13
Lifetime risk 1 in 8
So the lifetime risk of developing breast cancer is 1 in 8 (absolute risk) for a woman who lives to be around 84. This also means that 7 out 8 women will not develop breast cancer in their lifetime, and the risk for younger women is much lower."
http://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/breast-cancer-information/breast-awareness/am-i-risk.
Sorry to have hi-jacked your thread babyjane - I hope you're doing OK and that your friend receives all the care and support she needs.
-
don't apologise tiger74, the thread seems to have developed an interesting discussion and I am learning about something I was quite ignorant of so thanks to everyone for their posts :)
-
There is an awful lot of stress in the world its part of life, war and atrocities , natural disasters, personal disasters, if cancer was caused by stress we all would all develop it.
There is constant research all around the world trying to find out the cause and eradication of cancer, maybe one day it will be conquered.
-
Totally agree with you Silverlady. The sooner the better for us all.
Tiger74 that 1 in 8 is indeed a scary figure but over a lifetime there are so many other factors that feed into the cause of cancer. This sort of statistic is almost meaningless over an 80 year plus period.
:-*
-
I often wondered to myself ..if only she never felt the lump in her breast and just carried on with her life not knowing any different would she had gone on for a lot longer because she was so healthy but when in hospital they took off her breast then put inplants in did so much with her I think it was that what killed her in that short time sorry to be going on but it makes me wonder sometimes x
-
I don't think you need to apologise daisie, it clearly matters to you so it matters.
digressing a bit, I have thought that if mum's cancer had been diagnosed earlier then she might have been strong enough to withstand the treatment and would have lived longer. But it would have got her in the end and it doesn't bring her back.
-
yes you are right babyjane..its probly creeping up on me again when I start thinking of her ..we cremated her on Christmas eve ..was back in 1982 but it still seems like yesterday x
-
An anaesthetist told me in 1977 that shock kills 85% of patients. Either via accident or sudden un-expected news. Invasive surgery causes stress and if carried out before a patient is psychologically un-prepared, patients can die 'suddenly'. Invasive surgery can cause cells to be carried around the body which again, can cause 'sudden' death.
People tolerate stressors differently. Certain cancers are age related. However, pre-disposition ? I had breast disease at age: [pause to do some calculations] : 41 - but no one else in my family had the 'same' type of cancer, my Mum's lump was totally different to mine [at age 65]. Paternal Grandmother had a tubercle tumour removed in her mid-40s.
We don't know either whether those affected in War Zones might have had cancer due to living under intense pressure ……… because many have not survived ::). Statistics can prove anything!
I am trying to be as healthy as possible …….
-
CLKD animals get cancer too.
People in war zones are more likely to have high cholesterol soldiers in Vietnam even teenagers, were found to have very high cholesterol due to the stress of war.
-
It is so hard not to think what if daisy, my mum had lung cancer in her early 50s (non smoker) they removed lung took some lymph nodes 13 of which 10 were clear 3 weren't, she was given all clear but few months later had aggressive brain tumour which took her within weeks. I just keep thinking well 3 lymph nodes were not clear so why no treatment? But at the time you don't think at all we were just glad she got all clear.
My aunt had breast cancer in her early 40s got treatment but 10 yrs later brain tumour, her GP told her at time could have been all the stress she had been through who knows.
As for the stats I'm going to look on positive side 7 in 8 don't. Don't want to look on negative life is bad enough
Ye my dog had lung cancer she had a great life, no stress (I think lol)
X
-
lets hope I can leave the doctors surgery feeling positive tonight appointment at 6 50 going to menstion hrt again see what hes got to say x
-
I just had a look at the info from the links given (on cancer research site) on stress and the cancer research site says this:
Mutations can happen by chance when a cell is reproducing. It is not easy for a normal cell to turn into a cancer cell. There have to be about half a dozen different mutations before this happens. Cells often destroy themselves if they have a mutation. Or the immune system might recognise them as abnormal and kill them. This means most precancerous cells die before they can cause cancer. Only a small number of the changes turn into a cancer.
and also this:
Stress, the immune system and cancer
Many people with cancer believe that they should strengthen their immune systems to help beat the disease. There is a commonly held belief that reducing stress can help to strengthen our immune systems. This is the thinking behind some complementary therapies, using relaxation techniques for instance.
There is some scientific evidence that stress weakens our immunity. Two studies looking at whether stress affected cancer recurrence had conflicting results. While no one knows whether strengthening immunity can help to cure cancer, most doctors and nurses agree that reducing stress is a good thing to do.
Whilst there is no direct evdience of a causal link as far as I can see from this, it has to be sensible to reduce stress to maintain our immune system in the best possilbe condition, so that it can help to destroy some of the mutations that can lead to cancer as stated above.
Hurdity x
-
More men die with prostate cancer than from it ;) It really does depend on which type of cancer one might suffer from. Some are slow growing, others almost instant …….
When I think back: we have longevity on the female side/s but both Grandads died young. Clive's family are long lived too. That generation had less sugar in their diet but ate more stodge: meat and 2/3 veg., steamed puds with custard: thick slices with dripping, lots of cheese, full milk or cream - no skimmed then; eggs, bacon ……. but they did more exercise by necessity and in their work. I have a baker, painter and decorator, females that were 'in service' …….. in my recent genetic history. I keep telling myself that I need to do more exercise ::)
After all, something's going to get us!
-
Tiger74 that 1 in 8 is indeed a scary figure but over a lifetime there are so many other factors that feed into the cause of cancer. This sort of statistic is almost meaningless over an 80 year plus period.
Why is this statistic "meaningless? It simply "means" that (according to the Breast Cancer Care website) the lifetime risk of developing breast cancer is 1 in 8 (absolute risk) for a woman who lives to be around 84.
I wasn't claiming this statistic means any more than this.
As I said, on a different thread, we all have a 1 in 1 lifetime risk of dying!
-
Silverlady - all my pets had cancer :'(
One little cat had a tumour under her chin which grew up into her palate. The other had a liver tumour. The dog had lymphoma. They can get diabetes, heart disease, bone cancers. Sometimes due to 'bad' breeding. My rabbit had a huge cancer under his chin ……. chickens can get tumours.
Anything that animals can get, humans can get most of too :-[ …… and my dog didn't lack for exercise nor good grub! ::) in fact, as an aside: if she didn't want to go home from our walk, she would be 'at heel' for a while then I would sense I was alone - turn round and she was chasing back as she wanted '5 more minutes' ;D …….
-
The way I see it, society has been brainwashed so much about the supposed “dangers†of HRT that any time a woman gets breast cancer, who has been using HRT, the naysayers will automatically blame the HRT.
However, what about all the post-meno women who get breast cancer who have never used HRT? What about all the younger pre-meno women who also get breast cancer? What gets the blame then?
I have 3 friends, who have never used HRT, who have all had breast cancer with the associated surgery and treatments (and recovered thank goodness), yet no friends using HRT have developed it. Go figure.
Even if there was a substantial increase in the breast cancer risk, I would still choose to use HRT because, for me, the benefits far outweigh the risks. Without HRT I'm suicidal, so my life would possibly be fairly short without it anyway.
At the end of the day, something's going to eventually get all of us. Of course we all just hope that it takes us out at the age of 90, while asleep in a nice comfy bed..lol....
-
hi dana.. I do agree with every word you have said .iv felt ill for 14 years with the menopause not taking hrt thinking ill go on without it its bound to lift well nothing as .I said in another post I was fit and healthy before all this kicked in so to me I feel we still need these homones if you have bad symptoms ..went to the doctors last night with a mind full of information to tell him hoping to come out with hrt I got there and the appointment is for next week I just hope im in the same frame of mind next week ..but yes I agree don't think taking the hrt is a main cause for breast cancer but that's my opinion the homones are such a low dose to cause any severe symptoms. I suppose theres quit a lot of female doctors and female gynacoligist on it a friend of mine as been on it for well over 20 years and I can say shes a lot fitter than what I am x