The way my wifes onocologist explained it was if discovered within 10 years it is typically considered the same cancer independent of where it is located and treated as though it has metastized. He said of course there are exceptions (ie every male will eventually get prostate cancer it’s just a matter of when so that is treated different even if there was a prior cancer)
After that time frame (he said it has changed over time) it is considered a new cancer and will be treated dependent on the new location.
The way my wifes onocologist explained it was if discovered within 10 years it is typically considered the same cancer independent of where it is located and treated as though it has metastized. He said of course there are exceptions (ie every male will eventually get prostate cancer it’s just a matter of when so that is treated different even if there was a prior cancer)
After that time frame (he said it has changed over time) it is considered a new cancer and will be treated dependent on the new location.
````````````````````````
Ok. So, if she had colon cancer in 1999, but not until 2009 did they discover the pancreatic cancer, then that would explain why they said she had pancreatic cancer vs. a “return” (???) of her colon cancer. (Think I got it.)
Whew. ThankQ.