A new study states that even small breast cancer tumors can be aggressive. Well duh. If all tumors start small, of course aggressive ones and indolent (slow growing) ones are included. I don't call this news. I just call this an exposure of logic.
When I was diagnosed with breast cancer I was happy to learn more about my tumor. Its hormone status (ER/PR) was important, Her2 status was important, and tumor grade was import. The grade is a scale of one to three on how aggressive a tumor is. (This is my non medical training kicks in.) If there are lots of dead tumor cells, that shows growth because tumor cells which are aggressive are growing fast and dying off fast. The presence of lots dead cells is an indication of this. An aggressive tumor warrants more aggressive treatment.
I was lucky. My breast cancer was average in many ways. It was ER+/PR+ - meaning I was a good candidate for hormonal therapy, Her2- - meaning I didn't require additional treatment of Herceptin, and grade 2 - meaning it was average on the scale of indolent to aggressive.
I had a friend who was diagnosed about the same time as me. She was gone in three years. Her cancer was about the same as mine except hers was very aggressive. That's the difference with an aggressive cancer.
""This study shows that it's not only tumor size that is important for breast cancer patients but also tumor biology. All tumors in the study were small - less than 1 cm - and the lymph nodes were free of cancer (node negative), which in principle should be a signal of good prognosis. But nearly one in four patients - those identified as genomic high risk - derived benefit from chemotherapy.""
""Small node negative tumors can be very aggressive, even if they are classified as clinical low risk," said de Azambuja. "Tumor biology needs to be taken into account when deciding adjuvant treatments in this patient population. One cannot forget the patient's age, performance status, comorbidities and preferences during the discussion.""