- #1
sameeralord
- 662
- 3
Hello everyone,
Let's take a woman with a breast lump for example and it is malignant. I know that stage 3 and 4 disease, eg advanced/metastatic disease treatment is chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Then after it is downgraded they surgically resect the lump (stage 1 and 2). While this makes sense my question is why don't they still remove the lump in advanced disease and then give chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Reason been if the tumour is not resected and you give chemotherapy, since the primary tumour is still there it would keep producing metastasis. Is the reason that surgical resection is too dangerous when metastasis present. Why is that? Thanks
Let's take a woman with a breast lump for example and it is malignant. I know that stage 3 and 4 disease, eg advanced/metastatic disease treatment is chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Then after it is downgraded they surgically resect the lump (stage 1 and 2). While this makes sense my question is why don't they still remove the lump in advanced disease and then give chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Reason been if the tumour is not resected and you give chemotherapy, since the primary tumour is still there it would keep producing metastasis. Is the reason that surgical resection is too dangerous when metastasis present. Why is that? Thanks