Thousands of rectal cancer patients might be spared the brutal effects of radiation, study says

Tens of thousands of patients annually might be able to rely not on radiation but only surgery and chemotherapy to treat their rectal cancer. 

According to a recent story by Gina Kolata in The New York Times that cites a large clinical trial initially reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, more than 10,000 people each year may therefore avoid potentially serious side effects.

Dr. Eric Winer

Dr. Eric Winer, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the organization to which the results of the test were revealed, was quoted as indicating that the study is part of a new direction for cancer researchers.

"Now that cancer treatments have  improved," Kolata reports him saying, "researchers are starting to ask different questions. Instead of asking how cancer therapy can be intensified, they are asking if there are elements of successful treatments that can be eliminated to provide patients with a better quality of life." 

Winer, who wasn't directly involved in the study, was asked to comment because of his expertise.

Rectal cancer annual affects 47,500 U.S. residents.

The study determined that radiation treatment didn't improve outcomes, despite the fact that, the Times piece indicates, for decades "it was typical to use pelvic radiation, [which] puts women into immediate menopause and damages sexual function in men and women. It also can  injure the bowel, causing issues like chronic diarrhea. Patients risk pelvic fractures, and the radiation can cause additional cancers." 

More information about less being better can be found in Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer, a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Saving sperm can overcome infertility in men who get testicular cancer, Mayo Clinic doc says

Should men diagnosed with testicular cancer worry about having children in the future? Yes, says a doctor at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

Dr. Bradley C. Leibovich

Bradley C. Leibovich, MD, a urologic oncologist there and the medical director of the Center for Digital Health, notes that "the first thing we do with men that are interested in preserving fertility is talk about sperm banking."

One side effect of chemotherapy, radiation and other cancer treatments can definitely be infertility, Leibovich told Jason Howland of the Mayo Clinic News Network online a while back, so saving the sperm should be a priority before starting treatment.

Another concern is "lower levels of testosterone, a hormone produced primarily in the testicles," the News Network story says.

The article also quotes Leibovich as saying, "Most men have normal testosterone levels with just one testicle. For men that do wind up with a lower level of testosterone, it's really easy to replace." 

The piece then says that under the "guidance of a healthcare professional, testosterone replacement therapy, in the form of injections, pills, patches or gels, can restore normal testosterone levels in men."

In an earlier story in the News Network also written by Howland, it's noted that "the disease is not common. Just 1 in 250 men will develop testicular cancer at some point in their lifetime, according to the American Caner Society. Most of those cases are in young and middle-aged men."

Leibovich explains that "we like men to do monthly testicular self-examinations. Because if you find that testicular cancer early, the amount of treatment people need to get that cure is significantly less." 

More information about dealing with side effects of treatments can be found in Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer, a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Actively monitoring prostate cancer can be safe alternative to surgery or radiation, study says

Good news has been released for men seeking to avoid prostate cancer treatment-related sexual and incontinence problems.

According to an Associated Press story by Carla K. Johnson a while back, it appears that most men can hold off on treatments because actively monitoring the disease is a safe alternative to surgery or radiation.

Dr. Stacy Loeb

Long-term evidence supporting that conclusion was confirmed, the piece notes, by Dr. Stacy Loeb, prostate cancer specialist at NYU Langone Health who was not involved in the research. 

It has long been known that most prostate cancer grows very slowly.

The story quotes Loeb as saying that a recent study's findings indicate that "there was no difference in prostate mortality at 15 years" between those who had surgery to remove tumors, those who had radiation treatment, and those who monitored.

The survival rate for all three groups was 97% — "also very good news," Loeb says.

Results of the study, funded by Britain's National Institute for Health and Care Research, were published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The lead author of the study, Dr. Freddie Hamdy of the University of Oxford, was quoted to the effect that men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer should "consider carefully the possible benefits and harms caused by the treatment options" — and not rush their decisions or panic, despite the fact that a small number of men with high-risk or more advanced disease do need urgent treatments.

Dr. Freddie Hamdy

Researchers, Johnson's story says, "followed more than 1,600 U.K. men who agreed to be randomly assigned to get surgery, radiation, or active monitoring."

The study began on 1999, a time when monitoring practices were not as good as now (when MRI imaging and gene tests can be employed before informed decisions are made). 

"We have more ways now to help catch that the disease is progressing before it spreads," the AP story quoted Loeb as saying.

More information about the multiple facets of research can be found in Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer, a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

New artificial intelligence technique may be able to predict breast cancer cases, research shows

Will AI be able to transform the mammogram and "allow patients to avoid aggressive treatments and even save the lives of countless people who get breast cancer"?

Professor Regina Barzilay

According to a recent story by Steven Zeitchik in The Washington Post, Regina Barzilay, an MIT professor and artificial-intelligence expert who endured chemotherapy, two lumpectomies and radiation for that cancer, as well as "all the brutal side effects that come along with those treatments," may have found "a marriage of tech and health care that could alter millions of lives without a single drop of medicine."

The Post article reports that Barzilay and Adam Yala, a student protege, "have built an AI that seems able to predict with unprecedented accuracy whether a healthy person will get breast cancer, in an innovation that could seriously disrupt how we think about the disease."

How it works was laid out in an piece in the Journal of Clinical Oncology: "By analyzing a mammogram's set of byzantine pixels and then cross-referencing them with thousands of older mammograms, the AI — known as Mirai — can product nearly half of all incidences of breast cancer up to five years before they happen."

"If the data is validated, I think this is very exciting," Zeitchik's story quotes Janine T. Katzen, radiologist at Weill Cornell Medicine who specializes in breast imaging. It also quotes Dorraya El-Ashry, chief scientific officer for the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, as saying, "This is the next, very positive step forward. There is a lot of work to do. But this is very encouraging."

Meanwhile, breast cancer statistics are discouraging. "While many cancers, such as lung cancer, have been declining in the United States," the Post story says, "breast cancer rates have been going up — an annual average of half a percentage point between 2008 and 2017, according to the American Cancer Society."

More information on out-of-the-ordinary treatments can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at caregivers.

Lumpectomy and radiation treatments fix Minnesota senator's early-detected breast cancer

Sen. Amy Klobuchar admits she underwent treatment for early-stage breast cancer in January.

According to a story by Felicia Sonmez in The Washington Post today, the former 2020 Democrat presidential candidate said in a post on Medium, a platform for professionals, that she'd had a lumpectomy and radiation.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar

The 61-year-old Minnesota politician said she was told by her doctors last month that the treatments had gone well and that her "chances of developing cancer again are no greater than the average person."

Sonmez's article says Klobuchar "urged Americans not to put off routine health screenings, noting that 'doctors are seeing patients who are being treated for more serious conditions that could have been caught earlier.'" 

She also noted that it is "easy to put off health screenings, just like I did. But I hope my experience is a reminder for everyone of the value of routine health checkups, exams, and follow-through. I am so fortunate to have caught the cancer at an early enough stage and to not need chemotherapy or other extensive treatments, which unfortunately is not the case for so many others."

The senator thanked her physicians, family and friends for their support during her surgery and radiation treatment, which she observed had coincided with the illness and death of her father, a Minneapolis journalist.

"Their support allowed me to continue my work with my colleagues on major pandemic and economic legislation," the story quotes her as saying, "as well as chairing the joint Senate Jan. 6 investigation and the For the People hearings while undergoing cancer treatment."

According to a story by Quint Forgey on today's Politico website, the three-term senior senator also admitted that "this has been scary at times, since cancer is the word all of us fear." Each day, she said, "is a gift."

Further information on early detection can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Actor Stanley Tucci says he overcame tongue cancer, after long treatments, 3 years ago

Screen and television star Stanley Tucci has disclosed —- three years after the fact —— that he beat cancer following long, difficult treatments. 

The tumor was at the base of his tongue and originally "too big to operate" on.

Stanley Tucci

An online story by Cole Delbyck in yesterday's Huffpost maintains that the 60-year-old Tucci had undergone intensive treatments for approximately half a year — including chemotherapy and high-dose radiation that apparently killed the malignancy and made it unlikely that it could return.

Delbyck's story indicates that Tucci feels "much older than I did before I was sick. But you still want to get ahead and get things done.”

The actor's disclosure, which appeared in Vera magazine last week, indicates that cancer "makes you more afraid and less afraid at the same time.”

Tucci's now the star of his eponymous CNN food-and-travel series, "Stanley Tucci: Searching for Italy," after having honed his culinary skills and developed a following. The show, which earned multiple Emmy Award nominations, has been renewed for a second season.

Tucci's first wife, Kate Spath-Tucci, died of breast cancer in 2009 at age 47. Afterwards, he vowed that he'd never go through chemo and radiation because watching "her go through those treatments for years was horrible," he told Delbyck.

Clearly, he changed his mind.

The Huffpost article points out that he had also been "particularly concerned with how his diagnosis would affect his five children.” The actor has three children from his first marriage and shares a son and daughter with his current wife, Felicity Blunt, sister of his 'Devil Wears Prada' co-star Emily Blunt.

Delbyck's piece quotes the actor as saying that the "kids were great, but it was hard for them. I had a feeding tube for six months. I could barely make it to the twins' high school graduation."

Earlier this year, the article notes, Tucci spoke in an "CBS Sunday Morning" interview about his late wife and noted that "you never stop grieving. It's still hard. And it will always be hard [but she] would never want any of us to ever wallow intuit grief and let it take over our lives. She would never want that. She wasn't like that."

Tucci in recent years has appeared in three films, including the gay romance, "Supernova," in which he co-starred with Colin Firth as a man battling early onset dementia.

Additional information about diseases and their treatments can be found in “Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner’s breast cancer,” a book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Neither bras nor caffeine cause breast cancer

Article details risk factors for breast cancer while outlining preventive measures and dispelling myths

Are the causes of breast cancer known?

No, according to a feature story by Dr. Lizellen La Follette in the Marin Independent Journal that I've kept around quite a while because it's a good summary.

Both the article and its headline note, however, that although the roots of breast cancer aren't clear, the risk factors are.

Dr. Lizellen La Follette

La Follette details those factors: gender (being a woman); age ("two out of three with invasive cancer are diagnosed after age 55"); family, personal health, menstrual and reproductive histories; dense breast tissue; radiation to the chest; genetic changes; poor diet and alcohol consumption; obesity; lack of physical activity; smoking; and exposure to DES, a medication to prevent miscarriage that was heavily prescribed from the '40s through the '60s. 

Also, looking for dimpling or puckering of the breast, inversion of the nipple, redness or scaliness of the breast skin or nipple/areola area, or discharge of secretions from the nipple.

La Follette also dispels some myths about the disease — including the biggie, that it's contagious. It's not.

Other myths include that the disease can be caused "by wearing underwire bras, implants, deodorants, antiperspirants, mammograms, caffeine, plastic food serving items, microwaves or cellphones."

The article also suggests what women can do as prevention: having monthly breast cancer exams, checking for changes in breast tissue (such as in size), and feeling a palpable lump.

As for the risks, La Follette writes that a woman's "risk of breast cancer nearly doubles if she has a first-degree relative (mother, sister, daughter) who has been diagnosed" with it — "and her risk increases if a relative was diagnosed before the age of 50."

Furthermore, she notes, "studies show about 5 to 10 percent of breast cancers can be linked to one mutations inherited from one's mother or father."

Regarding smoking, the columnist contends that smoking is a danger "particularly when it's long-term, heavy and among those who started before their first pregnancy." Meanwhile, the risk "is about 1.5 times higher in overweight women, and two times higher in obese women than in lean women." 

In addition, La Follette maintains that "numerous studies confirm on average alcohol consumption increases the risk of breast cancer in women by about 7 to 10 percent for each drink consumed," and she writes that "women who have two to three alcoholic drinks a day have a 20 percent higher risk…compared with non-drinkers."

Finally, she postures that "early menstruation (before age 12), mate menopause (after 55), having first child at older age or never having given birth can be risk factors."

La Follette also takes a moment to mention males, citing statistics that while the average man's lifetime risk is about 1 in 1,000, African-American men "are hit harder by breast cancer than their white counterparts and after diagnosis are three times more likely to die" from it than white men.

To learn more about other causes of the disease, get a copy of  "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

FDA approves 31 new therapies in one year

New screenings and treatments are helping to boost the number of cancer survivors in the U.S.

By 2026, some 20.3 million cancer survivors will be living in the United States — up from 15.5 million a decade earlier.

That, according to a recent article in Parade magazine by Sheryl Kraft, is because innovations in screening and treatment are helping patients beat the odds.

"In just one year," the piece reports, "31 new therapies to treat more than 16 types of cancers were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration."

Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical and scientific officer for the American Cancer Society, believes that screening can save lives. "Some estimates say that we can decrease the number of colorectal deaths by 12,000 to 20,000 if screening guidelines were followed."

Dr. Jame Abraham

And Dr. Jame Abraham, director of Cleveland Clinic's Breast Oncology Program, notes that hormone therapy might be all that's necessary to treat 70 percent of women with the most common form of breast cancer. 

"That means a large number of patients can safely avoid chemotherapy," the Parade story quotes her as saying. "We can individualize treatment and make sure we are prescribing the right treatment for the right purpose."

It was tough previously to identify which women with early-stage breast cancer were at risk for recurrence, so many had received unnecessary chemo, radiation and hormonal therapy. But a groundbreaking study known as the TAILORx trial found that many women could be saved from "unnecessary side effects like fatigue, hair loss, nausea, vomiting and anemia," the quote continues.

Another new treatment, immunotherapy, which "works by reprogramming a patient's own immune cells to find and attack those cancer cells through the body," also is being held out as innovative — and the American Society of Clinical Oncology's "advance of the year."

Immunotherapy now is being heralded as "extremely promising for treating triple-negative breast cancer, one of the most difficult-to-treat breast cancers," after having already been shown to have "significant results in young patients with a form of leukemia and adults with multiple myeloma (a type of blood cancer) and lymphoma (a type of cancer involving cells of the immune system)."

Yet another new testing method, CancerSEEK — according to the Parade piece, "a simple blood test, which in its research phase was performed on people already diagnosed with cancer," can identify markers for for tumors containing mutated DNA in the bloodstream. 

These markers are associated with eight common cancer types: breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian, liver, stomach, pancreatic and esophageal.

Lastly, the story cites a less invasive and faster lung-cancer technique called microcoil localization, "which can pinpoint and remove small bits of affected tissue using a needle inserted through the chest wall to remove the cancer at its earliest stage."

Minimally invasive surgery — instead of the currently popular "lobectomy, which removes a portion of the lung by opening up the chest, followed by radiation and chemotherapy."

More details on new techniques and treatments can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Problems can pop up years after treatments

Warning: Breast cancer therapy such as chemo, radiation can hike risk of heart disease

Can lifesaving breast-cancer treatments raise your chances of dying from a heart disease?

Possibly.

A recent story in The Washington Post by Laurie McKinley cites an American Heart Association warning to women with breast cancer that "lifesaving therapies like chemotherapy and radiation can cause heart failure and other serious cardiac problems, sometimes years after treatment."

The AHA suggests, however, that rather than avoid the treatments patients should "take steps to prevent or minimize the cardiac risks" by exercising regularly and sticking to a healthy diet.

According to McKinley's dispatch, the caution, published in the journal Circulation, includes the conclusion that "breast cancer survivors who are 65 and older and were treated for their cancer are more likely to die of cardiovascular problems than breast cancer."

Nearly "48 million women in the United States have some kind of heart disease, compared to 3.3 million women with breast cancer," the Post piece asserts, adding that the AHA "said an unprecedented number of women are surviving the disease yet face a risk of developing heart problems, in part because of their cancer treatments."

Dr. Laxmi Mehta

Dr. Laxmi Mehta, who led the writing of the report and is a cardiologist at Ohio State University, is quoted as saying that "it's important for people to know that the heart needs to be taken care of before, during and after treatment."

And Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, is paraphrased as noting "it isn't unusual for a breast-cancer patient who underwent chemo years earlier to wake up one day with swollen ankles and shortness of breath, symptoms of congestive heart failure," but when such a patient ends up hospitalized, "doctors tend to look for signs of a heart attack or pulmonary embolism while overlooking breast cancer treatment as a possible culprit."

That's a problem, he indicates, "because heart failure caused by a chemo drug like doxorubicin [which once was called adriamycin] is treated differently than heart failure from a heart attack."

The report says some studies have shown that "dexrazoxane can reduce the risk of heart damage in patients getting high doses of doxorubicin for advanced breast cancer" and that some heart damage, including the kind cased by Herceptin, can sometimes be reversed.

The Post article also reveals that some doctors worry that the AHA report might discourage women with high-risk cancer — especially those with HER2-positve and triple negative breast cancer — from getting aggressive treatment.   

More details about the risks of radiation and chemotherapy can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at caregivers.

Earpieces, texting can quash disease fears

Anxieties about cellphones causing brain cancer are still unfounded, new studies show

Worried about getting cancer from cellphones?

New studies indicate there's no need to hang up — still.

According to a recent Associated Press story by Seth Borenstein and Lauren Neergaard, although "two government studies that bombarded rats and mice with cellphone radiation found a weak link to some heart tumors," federal regulars and some scientists continue to say it's safe to use your device.

Previous studies had shown little reason for anxiety.

"In particular, scientists could not find hard evidence for concern about brain tumors," the story says.

Dr. John Bucher

It goes on to assert that Dr. John Bucher of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the lead author of the research, isn't changing his cellphone use "or advising his family to," and that Dr. Otis Brawley, the American Cancer Society's chief medical officer, noted in an interview after reading the studies, "I am actually holding my cellphone up to my ear."

Even though the new studies that involved super-high doses of radiation showed a rare connection to some nerve-tissue tumors in male rats, Brawley's quoted as saying, "the evidence for an association between cellphones and cancer is weak. And so far we have not seen a higher chance risk in people."

If, however, you're still concerned, "wear an earpiece," he urges.

Bucher suggests, moreover, that the rat tumors "do not translate directly into  concern for humans."

According to the AP piece, Bucher's agency "conducted the $25 million study at the behest of the Food and Drug Administration, which quickly said cellphones are safe."

Dr. Jeffrey Shuren

The article also quoted a statement by FDA radiation health chief Dr. Jeffrey Shuren to the effect that the "current safety limits for cellphones are acceptable for protecting the public health."

Bucher, in a news conference, had insisted that the experiment with rats and mice, in which they were bombarded for one hours a day for up to two years, incorporated "a radiation level so high that humans would only experience it briefly, such as when a phone with a weak signal expends more energy searching for as stronger one."

A 2010 analysis in 13 countries had "found little or no risk of brain tumors," and an earlier Danish study that linked phone bills to a cancer registry had found no risk even from more than 13 years of cellphone use.

In December 2017, the state of California issued guidelines saying that if people were still worried, they should reduce exposure by using earphones or texting.

More information about potential links of technological devices to the disease can be extracted from "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

2,014 women with mastectomies studied

Radiation after some breast reconstructions can cause extra complications, report says 

Radiation might dramatically affect the results of breast reconstruction.

According to a recent report on Breastcancer.org, new research "suggests that radiation after implant reconstruction seems to cause more complications than radiation given after autologous reconstruction [rebuilding the breast with tissue from your own body]."

The study, presented at the annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, "looked at medical data and collected patient reports on reconstruction outcomes from 2,014 women who had mastectomy and breast reconstruction."

Two years after radiation was completed, 39% of women who'd undergone implant reconstruction had at least one complication — compared to 26% for those who'd had autologous reconstruction.

Worse yet, the study showed radiation was "linked to more than doubling the risk of complications" after the implants but was "not associated with a higher risk of complications" in women who'd undergone the other treatment.

Complications included "infection at the surgery site, hematoma (collection of blood outside blood vessels), capsular contraction, and other problems."

Those with implants who'd been treated with radiation also were less satisfied with their results than those who didn't get radiation, the study indicated.

Dr. Reshma Jagsi

Dr. Reshma Jagsi, lead author of the study and deputy chair of radiation oncology at the University of Michigan, contended that women who planned to receive post-mastectomy radiation therapy needed to be informed of the "significant impact" the study found regarding radiation and implant reconstruction. 

And conversely, she said, "those who plan to pursue autologous reconstruction…may derive some reassurance" from the statistics.

Dr. Marisa Weiss, Breastcancer.org founder, added that "one thing I recommend as a breast radiation oncologist who deals with this issue all the time is to make sure the implant you get is fairly close to your original size." The problem with a bigger size, she noted, is that the skin has already "lost a lot of its blood supply with mastectomy, it's been stretched, it's maybe been subjected to chemo, it's not the happiest camper on the block."

After mastectomies, radiation normally is recommended if the cancer is about two inches long, if it's spread to four or more lymph nodes, if it's spread to the skin, or if cancer cells are found in the rim of tissue around the disease (the margins).

Post-surgery feelings of patients are addressed in detail in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Risk factors: aging, estrogen, excess weight

2,600 men are facing diagnosis of breast cancer this year, nonprofit says

Politically, the phrase "top 1 percent" has become important — and again was cited recently by Hillary Clinton regarding the imbalance of wealth in our country.

A different 1 percent is equally important.

That's the amount of breast cancers occurring  in men — with about 2,600 expected to be diagnosed with the disease this year, according to the Pennsylvania-based nonprofit, breastcancer.org.

That figure puts the lifetime risk at 1 in 1,000 — small, indeed, but not insignificant.

And life-threatening, perhaps, if you happen to be in that 1 percent.

Because, unlike their female counterparts, men tend not to be screened regularly, the disease is likely to be more advanced when first detected.

Risk factors, according to the breastcancer.org website, can include aging itself (the average diagnosis for men is 68), high estrogen levels resulting from taking hormone meds, being overweight or being a heavy alcohol user.

Or having a strong family history of the disease or a genetic mutation (such as BRCA1 or BRCA2).

Treatments may include surgery, radiation, chemo or hormonal therapy.

Dr. Marisa Weiss 

Experts cited by breastcancer.org include a radiation oncologist, Marisa Weiss of Lankenau Hospital; a surgeon, M. Lisa Attebery of Paoli Hospital; and a Ph.D., Jennifer Harned Adams of the University of Texas.

Another expert, Gerry Bourguignon of Mill Valley, California, one of the regulars in my weekly drop-in breast support group, Marin Man to Man, has also been trying to spread the word about male breast cancer for years.

He, himself, is a survivor.

Want more information about the disease? Consider reading "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," the VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Shannen Doherty's breast cancer metastasizes

TV actress' post-mastectomy treatments: chemotherapy, radiation, strong marriage

Shannen Doherty

.

Shannen Doherty's breast cancer has metastasized.

To her lymph notes and perhaps elsewhere.

Exactly what that means regarding treatments is still unclear, however.

US magazine this week reported that Doherty gave an interview to "Entertainment Tonight" in which she finally admitted having had a mastectomy in May, and that she's using an expander.

The 45-year-old actress, who's already undergoing chemotherapy (eight sessions have been planned), has now added radiation to her regimen.

Doherty, who during a four-year stint on "Beverly Hills 90210" gained fame as someone difficult to work with, told "ET" that "living without a breast is manageable. It's the worry of your future and how your future is going to affect the people that you love."

She also said that "the unknown is always the scariest part. Is the chemo going to work? Is the radiation going to work? You know, am I going to have to go through this again, or am I going to get secondary cancer?"

Last month she posted six black-and-white photos on Instagram showing her lopping off her hair, preceded by another picture with this caption: #cancersucks.

She said at the time that she'd probably be unable to have children because of the cancer treatments.

During this week's interview, she reported that "it was traumatic and horrible" being fitted for a new bra. "I broke down crying in the dressing room and ran out, and then sat in the car crying."

Her breast cancer diagnosis originally was made in February 2015.

On Tuesday, her photographer husband, Kurt Iswarienko, shared an Instagram shot of the couple flipping the bird to cancer. Doherty was wearing a bright pink wig.

She commented that he's been with her through all the chemo treatments so far, and that her cancer has "made my marriage a thousand times stronger."

Insights into mastectomies and other treatments can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Study's data splits docs over one-dose treatment

Risk of recurrence is debated because of less costly radiation therapy that's easier to take

Should a breast cancer patient opt for radiation that costs less and is more convenient when it might double or triple the small risk of recurrence?

That's what's currently being debated in the medical community regarding those in the early stages of the disease.

According to a story last week in the Wall Street Journal by Melinda Beck, a single dose of intra-operative radiation therapy, usually shortened to IORT, normally is given while lumpectomy surgery is happening.

The procedure reportedly has fewer side effects than conventional radiation with treatments that last five days a week for five to seven weeks.

Critics, the story says, claim a study shows the risk of recurrence in women treated with IORT is 3.3% rather than 1.3% over a five-year period.

But critics of the critics say the risk is small and worth it — and some point to a potential conflict of interest because many radiation centers take in huge amounts of revenue through the extended treatments.

Dr, Anthony Zietman

According to the article, Dr. Anthony Zietman, radiation oncologist at Boston's Massachusetts General and a Harvard professor, wrote an editorial in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology this month that said a single treatment, "depending on your perspective…is either a significant threat or a quantum leap forward."

The cancer industry debate has intensified because of the release of data stemming from the Cleveland Clinic study of 1,000 patients who've undergone IORT at 19 U.S. centers. 

Radiation has allowed lumpectomies to surpass mastectomies in popularity, with 60 percent of new patients now choosing the former. But its side effects include fatigue, skin blistering and, although infrequently, damage to hearts, legs and rib cages.

Because elongated radiation "can be disruptive for women who work, care for children or live far from radiation," Beck's article says, "about one-third of women who begin radiation don't finish their prescribed courses, studies show."

IORT started in Europe in the late 1990s but has grown in acceptance, with 260 medical centers worldwide now offering the treatment.

Want to know more about lumpectomy versus mastectomy, or about radiation treatments? Check out "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," the VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at husbands, boyfriends, fathers, sons and brothers who are caregivers.

Caregiving for cancer patients: parallel feelings?

Tom Hanks, 'Rollercoaster' author share need to give care to breast cancer patient wives

Hollywood superstar Tom Hanks has become an instant male caregiver.

Why?

Because his 58-year-old actress wife, Rita Wilson, recently choose to undergo a double mastectomy.

And reconstructive breast surgery.

She'd been diagnosed with breast cancer after a first test, a biopsy, had mistakenly come back negative.

Rita Wilson and Tom Hanks

The disease and operations — according to the Daily Dish site of the San Francisco Chronicle — caused her to temporarily absent herself from "Fish in the Dark," a Broadway play she'd been appearing in.

She was quoted as telling People magazine she's "getting better every day" and expects "to make a full recovery."

Hanks now must deal with feelings similar to those I experienced when my wife underwent "slash, poison and burn" treatments for breast cancer 20 years ago — feelings detailed in my new VitalityPress book, "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer."

My book — aimed at husbands, boyfriends, fathers, sons and brothers of breast cancer patients — is a memoir-chronicle, a love story, and an up-to-the-minute guide to research, meds and where to get help.

It illustrates that, despite surgery, chemotherapy and radiation, there can be light at the end of the tunnel. 

According to the American Cancer Society, 13 percent of American women (one in every eight) will get breast cancer at some point, with three-quarters of them having no risk factors except that they’re female.

Wilson — who married Hanks in 1988 and subsequently appeared with him in "Sleepless in Seattle," "That Thing You Do!" and Larry Crowne" — took action after getting a second medical opinion, something she recommends to others as being "critical to your health."

Trust your instincts, she advised, adding that "early diagnosis is key."