-
-
-
PJ Hamel is happy to be alive. As always.
Author, breast cancer survivor
Writer, mother, wife, volunteer, and survivor: PJ Hamel joins the...
-
Sunday, March 22, 2009
View All of PJ Hamel's Posts
The Halo system, a procedure whose results can be used to assess risk for breast cancer, was approved by the FDA in 2005. It was introduced to a wide national audience on Sept. 2 of last year, when Dr. Lisa Masterson, a California ob/gyn, spoke about it on Rachael Ray’s daytime talk show.Yes, T...
-
Risk assessment
Phyllis Johnson
Thursday, March 26, 2009 at 05:20 AM
PJ, I've been mulling over your question about how far we want to go to assess risk. Assuming the problems with Halo can be worked out and it can get a sample from more women, etc., I still have some questions about the whole concept. If I find out that I'm at risk, what would I do differently? Most of the controllable risk factors for breast cancer are things that everyone should be doing for overall health. If finding out that I'm at risk for breast cancer would push me into healthier habits, that would be a good thing. But breast cancer is a complicated set of diseases, so I'm sure there would always be people who would score low on the risk scale who would later develop breast cancer. Would hearing they were at low risk encourage some women to avoid mammograms? Because I was considered at low risk for breast cancer, my doctor was considering putting me on HRT at menopause to reduce heart risks (back in the day when they thought HRT was good for cardiovascular problems). But before I hit menopause, I was diagnosed with breast cancer.
I think I would rather see the money involved in research and clinical practice directed towards actual screening tools for early stage cancer rather than risk assessment.
re: Risk assessment
PJ Hamel
Thursday, March 26, 2009 at 05:42 AM
So right, Phyllis. That's a key question: what do you do if you find out you're at increased risk? For those with one of the BRCA genes, this risk is SO increased that it's clear there need to be extra mammograms, perhaps a preventive course of tamoxifen or even prophylactic mastectomy. But if your risk isn't the nearly 70% it can be with BRCA, but maybe, say, 18%—what do you do? I like your conclusion: live the lifestyle you should have been living anyway. But, as you say, for those with no hyperplasia, who believe their risk is no greater than average—does it make them complacent, even more complacent than they'd ordinarily be, without having had Halo? Food for thought indeed. Thanks for your input here, Phyllis. PJH
PJ, I've been mulling over your question about how far we want to go to assess risk. Assuming the problems with Halo can be worked out and it can get a sample from more women, etc., I still have some questions about the whole concept. If I find out that I'm at risk, what would I do differently? Most of the controllable risk factors for breast cancer are things that everyone should be doing for overall health. If finding out that I'm at risk for breast cancer would push me into healthier habits, that would be a good thing. But breast cancer is a complicated set of diseases, so I'm sure there would always be people who would score low on the risk scale who would later develop breast cancer. Would hearing they were at low risk encourage some women to avoid mammograms? Because I was considered at low risk for breast cancer, my doctor was considering putting me on HRT at menopause to reduce heart risks (back in the day when they thought HRT was good for cardiovascular problems). But before I hit menopause, I was diagnosed with breast cancer.
I think I would rather see the money involved in research and clinical practice directed towards actual screening tools for early stage cancer rather than risk assessment.