On 5/16/2008
loc0322 wrote:
Base on some studies in England as I knew, the second option seems to have a better chance to survive longer. "please do not rush", get more proffesional opions.
I had chemo first, 4 rounds, then the surgery, then 2 more rounds of chemo along with radiation. They told me if I was older, I'm 39, they may not have been as agressive with the radiation, but they thought I could handle it. That was over 6 months ago and I am doing rather well all things considered. I went into remission after two rounds of chemo, Erbitux and Avastin. They gave another two rounds and then I had surgery, I had a lot of scar tissue they were afraid would give the cancer another breeding ground. So they removed my entire stomach and my spleen.
SO in my case the before and after treatment worked very well. This will also give the doctors info on how well the chemo works before they do the surgery so if they can't remove the entire tumor they know they will get the rest with the latter chemo. I hope this helps.