![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I'm feeling more optimistic this morning. I am early stage, which does give me an advantage despite some crap prognostic indicators. I still have a good shot of beating this, and I'm going to call it a win that although triple negative has a higher short term risk, my long term risks kick all sorts of ass. After three years it starts to drop rapidly, after 5 is reduced to nearly nothing, and at 8 becomes nonexistent. I've also done some more research on chemo protocols, and while the particular drugs my oncologist has chosen are good, there is some question of whether a dose dense schedule would be better for my profile than the every three week schedule. So I've made another consultation appointment to go over the options and at least discuss the possibility of doing dose dense. Yes, I am that annoying patient who read it on the internet.
And there's another thing. An infuriating thing. Triple negative breast cancer has the least amount of research, clinical trials, and attention paid to it. It is the only type of breast cancer that hasn't had massive breakthroughs in targeted therapies. Part of that is that it isn't as common. That isn't the whole story though. Take a guess who triple negative breast cancer affects the most? Women of color. Do a google internet search for it and what you'll find are article after article talking about the higher rates of mortality for women of color with breast cancer. The factors that make this so make me want to bash someone's head in. Women of color do not have the same risk profile for breast cancer, not in age, type, or envionmental factors, that white women do. And yet 'breast cancer education' and screening and research is geared entirely towards the assumption that your risk and your cancer is that of a typical white woman. And so, not only is triple negative more aggressive and with less treatment options, it's often found at a much later stage because no one is looking for it, and because the populations most at risk are the least likely to have access to good medical care. Think it's coincidental that even within this subtype, the gene which would make it more likely in younger white woman like me (BRCA-1) has been identified, but the genetic factors for women of color have not? Yeah, right. Think institutionalized racism is over? That 'default to white' isn't really a problem? Fuck you, it's killing people. Thus endeth my rant for today.
And there's another thing. An infuriating thing. Triple negative breast cancer has the least amount of research, clinical trials, and attention paid to it. It is the only type of breast cancer that hasn't had massive breakthroughs in targeted therapies. Part of that is that it isn't as common. That isn't the whole story though. Take a guess who triple negative breast cancer affects the most? Women of color. Do a google internet search for it and what you'll find are article after article talking about the higher rates of mortality for women of color with breast cancer. The factors that make this so make me want to bash someone's head in. Women of color do not have the same risk profile for breast cancer, not in age, type, or envionmental factors, that white women do. And yet 'breast cancer education' and screening and research is geared entirely towards the assumption that your risk and your cancer is that of a typical white woman. And so, not only is triple negative more aggressive and with less treatment options, it's often found at a much later stage because no one is looking for it, and because the populations most at risk are the least likely to have access to good medical care. Think it's coincidental that even within this subtype, the gene which would make it more likely in younger white woman like me (BRCA-1) has been identified, but the genetic factors for women of color have not? Yeah, right. Think institutionalized racism is over? That 'default to white' isn't really a problem? Fuck you, it's killing people. Thus endeth my rant for today.