[Jean]

Women have been receiving adjuvent treatment since the 1970's and one study was done from 1970 to 1986 with over 3,000 women from France. The percentage of women who advanced with AML was a small percentage.
Yes, it is accurate that this last decade newer drugs were introduced. Very rarely, certain chemotherapy drugs can permanently damage the bone marrow, leading to acute myeloid leukemia, a life-threatening cancer of white blood cells. When this happens it is usually within 10 years after treatment. In most women, chemotherapy's benefits in preventing breast cancer from coming back or in extending life are likely to far exceed the risk of this serious but rare complication.
I think it sound to say that there will always been a percentage of patients who have serious side effects.
Her2 stats have changed and what once was a bad prognosis has made a huge turn. I believe on this board while we will always practice due diligence in our information it is true to say the benefits out weigh the risks. The risk of the Her2 spreading and destroying our life is far greater than the risk and the odds of AML and that is just a fact. There will always be patients who will experience other side effects from chemo treatment in all types of cancer. It is to be noted that the small percentage that did advance with AML did so in the first five years...and that after 10 yrs. the risk has dropped.
While we must weigh the choices in treatment along with risk, the risk of AML is low - and for the most part I think most women are more concerned with the HER2 spreading. As always it is an individual choice each women must decide for herself. I just don't believe that AML is more frightening than the HER2...while certainly no one wants to open the door to yet another cancer...the percentage against us in the HER2 spreading is far greater than getting AML.