Overies removed ???

[cocquk2]

I had surgery Feb 7/2007 the tumor was 1 cm ER+90 PR +90 and her 2 + I went for my first oncology appt this week .I'm borderline Her2 and have a strong family history. Mother BC at 29 Aunt 35 Grandmother at 60yrs yrs ago tested for the gene and it was neg.First they want my overies removed ASAP.(i'm 42 yrs)They are not sure about chemo yet and want to consult with other experts and i'll know next week.In reading this site i not finding other people talking about removal of overies.Any info would be wonderful/ Thanks Kathy

[Melinda]

HI Kathy


There are many women on this support site that have had to either radiate or remove their ovaries. If you click on the HER2group in the forum section you can post the same question. There are many more people that view posting there. Especially concerning HER2.
I was post menopausal when diagnosed, however ovary removal is a very effective way to lower estrogen levels so that they may treat (effectively I might add) women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer. This allows you to possibly be treated without chemo by using hormonal therpy. Talk to your DR! The more questions you ask the more informed you will be to make the choices only you can make. There are MANY MANY women here that will support you. Remember there are no two diagnosis and treatments that are the same and each of us have had to make our own decisions.
There is a great book called YOUR BREAST CANCER TRREATMENT HANDBOOK by Judith Kneece and published by Educare, that I found very informative, but its the support and love that you receive here on the HER 2 support group that tryly makes the difference.
Please continue to post on your journey. Its like a family here.
Melinda

[tricia keegan]

Hhi Kathy
I'm triple positive and chose to have my ovaries removed as a preventative measure last August and also to enable me to take Arimidex.
I've no regrets and the op itself was fine with a quick recovery.
I do have some joint pain with Arimidex but feel it's worth it for the protection it gives me.
I was 47 when I had the ooph and my onc was concerned my periods may return after chemo,good luck with your decision.
Tricia

[Becky]

I had my ovaries removed Aug 2005 at age 46. I am only ER+ but that tends to make Tamoxifen relatively ineffective, especially if you are Her 2 + as well. I was 46 and my periods did return (at 6 months after my last chemo). I really wanted to be on the Herceptin/Arimidex combo as it proved so good in the metastatic setting that I felt it would also do well in early bc.


The operation and recovery were a breeze. I did (later) get the side effect of urovaginal atrophy. This can happen to any postmenopausal woman but tends to be worse when menopause comes on abruptly (as in an oophorectomy) and the arimidex also brought my estrogen levels to undetectable levels. Therefore, I experience bladder infections that ping pong to vaginal infections. This does not happen to everyone but it did happen to me. Make sure you explore all possible side effects with your gyne. I did not know about this (but even if I did, I would have done it any way
and I have no regrets).

[saleboat]

There was a recent Wall Street Journal article that summarized large observational studies that measured the health consequences of removing woman's ovaries. This is data from the general population, not a population of early-stage breast cancer patients.


Two recent papers published in two major medical journals examined the long-term risks and benefits of removing a woman's ovaries. A report last fall in the Lancet by Mayo Clinic researchers found that removing ovaries before the age of 45 raises a woman's risk of dying during the next 30 years by 70% if she doesn't use hormone-replacement drugs. An earlier study in Obstetrics & Gynecology showed that removing a woman's ovaries later in life, which is the more common practice, still increases her risk of premature death. In that study, ovarian removal before the age of 65 increased a woman's overall risk of death before the age of 80 by 8.5%.
What's surprising about the data is that it directly contradicts the widely held belief in the medical community that removing a woman's ovaries typically will prolong her life. "We were all shocked when we saw the [data] showing that there was such an advantage to leaving her ovaries in for long-term health," says William H. Parker, clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at University of California-Los Angeles School of Medicine and the lead author of the Obstetrics study.

To be sure, the data aren't conclusive. Both reports are based on observational studies, which means the women weren't randomized to different treatment groups and other factors may be influencing the results. In the Mayo Clinic study, young women who had ovaries removed but then took estrogen drugs were just as healthy as women who kept their ovaries. But doctors say many women are frightened about the risk of hormone drugs and often don't take them after losing their ovaries.

Most doctors practicing today were taught that the ovaries don't serve any real purpose after menopause. If a woman is going to undergo a hysterectomy (surgical removal of her uterus) anyway, doctors typically advise women to go ahead and have their ovaries removed as well.

While there is no question that the procedure eliminates ovarian-cancer risk, the fact is most women are at extremely low risk for the disease. Ovarian cancer accounts for 6% of female cancer deaths. But the issue of ovarian cancer is emotionally charged because there is no way to screen for it, and it's usually fatal because it is often detected at its late stages.

The problem is that removing a woman's ovaries to prevent ovarian cancer appears to take a toll on other parts of her body. The ovaries after menopause still produce androgens that the body converts to estrogen. The continuing hormone production of post-menopausal ovaries not only affects a woman's sex drive and mood, but it also appears to offer added protection to her bones and heart.

Based on the Obstetrics & Gynecology report, the benefit of keeping the ovaries far exceeds the risk. The researchers calculated the risks and benefits among 10,000 women between the ages of 50 and 54 who kept their ovaries compared with a similar group of women who opted to have their ovaries removed. By the time they reach 80, an additional 838 women in the no-ovary group will have died of heart attacks and another 158 will have died from hip fracture compared with women who keep their ovaries. However, only 47 women in the no-ovary group would be saved from ovarian cancer.

Women with a strong family history of ovarian cancer obviously have more to gain from ovary removal than women with a strong family history of heart disease or osteoporosis. Dr. Parker says the study isn't perfect, but it should at least prompt doctors to have a more meaningful discussion with patients about the full risks and benefits involved in removing healthy ovaries from a woman's body. "This is at least a subject for conversation between patient and doctor," says Dr. Parker. "But that conversation often does not happen."

[caya]

Saleboat,

Thansk so much for posting this article. I have an appointment in 2 weeks with a gyn. onc. to discuss the option of taking my ovaries out. I had a hysterectomy in May 2004, at the age of 45, and my gyn. and I discussed whether or not to take my ovaries out then. For these very reasons, she and I decided to leave them in. She checked my ovaires when doing the hyst. and said they were "pink and healthy." ( So naturally 2 !/2 years later I get diagnosed with highly ER (90%)+ BC... )
I will take this article wth me to discuss it with this new gyn, who is an onc. too. I do have heart disease in my family, and I have already been diagnosed with osteopania ( pre-osteoporosis), but I am still scared about ovarian cancer. I had a CA 125 level of 56 in Nov. 2006, which both my onc. and gyn. brushed off as being a false result, as breast cancer can raise the CA 125 level. I have had regular pelvic exams ( twice yearly) as well as transvaginal and pelvic ultrasounds showing nothing of interest ( cysts, which I have had on and off for 20 years).
Boy, it's always something, as the late Gilda Radner would say,
Caya

[saleboat]

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/PJ-AJ614_HEALTH_20070205205553.gif
This was also in the WSJ article.

[caya]

Thanks saleboat, I printed this as well to take along to my appointment with the gyn. con.

hugs
caya