Expert: Claes-Gustaf Nordquist, M.D. - 7/11/2007

Question
I was diagnosed with breast cancer almost 3 yrs ago and I have recently been diagnosed with a new primary breast cancer in the other breast.  I am 36 yrs old and the first cancer came back almost 2 yrs ago with metastasis to the bones.  My doctor has said this new primary is inoperable and they say they are not sure if I would benefit from radiation.  Why would I not be a candidate for radiation?  I don't understand why I would not be.  I have never had radiation in that area before and if surgery is not an option and I also just finished 6 months of Taxotere about 9 weeks ago so they are also ruling out chemotherapy so radiation it seems is my only hope of shrinking this so it can be surgically removed.  I should add that this is inflammatory cancer and is pretty much the size of my whole breast.  I didn't realize that there is a certain criteria that has to be met for radiation, so my question is:  What would the reasons be for NOT having radiation therapy?
Thank you

Answer
In principle there is no reason why your cancer could not be treated with radiation in order to shrink it (just as you can be treated with chemo therapy to get the same result). But you state that this is a very big inflammatory breast cancer more or less present in your whole breast on that side. I have not examined you, nor can I (I'm in Stockholm, Sweden). With such a big cancer there may be technical reasons why it is not possible to treat you that way. But you should direct this question to your drs. and ask them to explain your situation to you, that is their obligation and duty! Or you can ask for a second opinion! Please do keep me posted!