Does Metastatic mean Terminal?

My mum has suffered with bowel cancer for around 7 years now. It went first to her bowel, then adrenal gland, then both lungs. Each time it was treated with everything from chemo to radiotherapy and appeared to retreat. This time however it has reappeared in the abdomen and is classified as metastatic. They've also said that at this point Chemo will just be to improve quality of life. Does this mean she'll now start to slowly deteriorate? I'm really struggling here but would really really appreciate if someone could help me with a near enough straight answer (while appreciating each situation is different)

  • i am so sorry to hear about your mother. I can only tell you about if my own experiences- 8 years ago my husband had a massive stroke- to cut a long story short, it was caused by a brain tumour which we were told was a secondary cancer - metastatic (cancer has spread from a primary source). We never found out what the primary cancer was but what it meant for us was that it was now untreatable. Our decision was to refuse 'life extending' treatment and to just try to give him (& us) as much quality of life and good memories as possible in the time we had left. This was right for us. Sadly another good friend was diagnosed with secondary bowel cancer - had chemo but only as life enhancing - it allowed them to have an extra 6 to 12 months to spend with family and create memories. Two different situations, two different routes but tragically only one outcome. Metastasis means secondary cancer and appears not to be treatable - it shocks me that your family don't seem to have had this explained to you. I hope that what I've said has helped - my heart goes out to you and your family ️
  • Hi JD,

    I'm not sure why the term metastatic was only used recently. It simply means that the cancer has spread to a different part of the body from the primary site. 

    As you rightly say, every case is different. The only way you will be able to get the answers you need would be by asking your Mum's oncologist the questions you have, including why chemo is now only being considered as palliative care. Anyone else would be second guessing based on very limited knowledge of your Mum and her cancer.

    In my case I was advised that my chemo was for palliative purposes only when I was first diagnosed, as my primary cancer was inoperable and radiotherapy wasn't an option due to its close proximity to my aorta. I decided that even long odds were better than the guaranteed outcome of refusing treatment. That was in 2013 and I'm still fit and healthy living a good life with cancer, so that was definitely the right decision for me. 

    I hope this helps

    Dave

  • Help I to am in palliative care because I have secondary bowel cancer spread on pelvis liver and both lungs.only treatment now left is life extending chemo.been there and done chemo once and intense radiotherapy which left me with serious side effects.i now want no treatment or hospital visits.i want to enjoy what time I have left unless a trial is offered.i was given 6mnths last November and apart from living with side effects.i am actually very healthy and still here doing what I do best looking after my family while I can.i tell them everyday why I love them and my hubby who is falling apart bless him.we have been married 35yrs and there my reason for staying positive and keep fighting.good luck and remember one day at a time 

  • Hi Tracy,

    Only you can make that hard decision. My Mum reached a similar decision after years of surgery and chemo - she felt that the benefits of more chemo would be far outweighed by the side effects. It was a hard decision for some family members to deal with but those of us closest to her who knew what she had been through fully supported her. I hope mine will be as understanding if and when I reach that stage.

    One day at a time sums it up :-)

    Best wishes

    Dave