[Gerri]

Hi Debbie,

After posting my quick response I realized that it seemed as if I were looking for an argument to use in support of running tumor markers and scans as follow up. Actually, what I found was more support for my onc's method of monitoring me (the national guidelines) and it reinforced my level of comfort. I have full confidence in my onc and always felt that constant testing was not for me. I am treated at a major cancer center in California (City of Hope) and have nothing but praise for the wonderful care I have received. The timing of this was perfect because I was going to ask my onc if there was anything new on the use of tumor markers - this answered my question before I could ask.

The bigger question for me all along has been the use of Tamoxifen vs. an AI. Each time I go for a check up we discuss my still (I'm 54) premenopausal status and the use of Tamoxifen. She has consistently told me that the current data does not overwhelming promote suppressing my ovaries and switching to an AI - again, these updated guidelines support her position. I am having my levels checked again before seeing her but will be perfectly comfortable with letting nature take its course.

I can see both sides when it comes to running markers and tests for early bc, but feel that the course my onc is taking is the right one for me. I have read with great interest the posts on this and know how strongly those who are tested feel about this form of follow-up. Passions run high on both sides of the fence.

Thank you for your input. I appreciate your views on this and always enjoy reading your posts.

Best regards,