update on ex and new questions

vmd

update on ex and new questions

vmd

I wanted to update the results of the skin biopsy for my ex.  If you recall, I posted a couple of weeks ago about a possible melanoma and how breast cancer and melanoma seemed to be related.  I received good advice from all of you who responded. The good news is that the biopsy came back negative, although they will also need to remove another suspicious mole.

In the latest check-up she  had a mammogram (thankfully, clean), but the MRI showed something suspicious on her breast and her doctor wants to explore further with an ultrasound.  I guess my questions are: what will the ultrasound show that the MRI does not?  Is the ultrasound more sensitive?  How likely is it that the MRI found something non-existent?  I suppose I'm looking for reassurance that the MRI may not be as reliable as the ultrasound test and it turns out to be a false negative.  Any thoughts and words of advice?  Also,it has been about 9 months since the end of her chemo, and about 5 months since radiation, I believe, but the doctor has not done a full body MRI.  Is this common or should she press her doctor for a full MRI?

CalGal

vmd -

Glad the possible melanoma wasn't.  Hopefully the same for the new suspicious mole.

My understanding is that a MRI is more sensitive than US and mamm's (and more expensive, which is why mamm's are still primarily used).  However, MRI's are more sensitive and can also have "false positives".  Maybe that's why they're following up with an US ...  So if the US doesn't show anything, then what?  Not to freak you out, but my guess is that post-US, maybe a biopsy ...  Whichever doc is the lead (onc, rad or surg), I would ask them for the follow-up scenarios ... that way, you can be prepared as well as research it to see if you think it's the best option.

I don't know what the standard is re:  full body MRI's ...

I do know that I think my HMO was woefully inadequate in treating my bc - on many aspects - including denials of my requests for an MRI and a CT scan.  Even when I found a lump (later determined to be recurr bc), I still had to ASK (again) for a CT scan - and finally got it.  

Another consideration is - Has there been any correlation between your ex's CA27.29 and her bc?  If so, how does her current score compare?

CalGal 

AnnNYC

Hi vmd,

MRIs are more sensitive and have more "false alarms" --

Based on my own experience, the reasons they follow an MRI with an ultrasound(US) are:

Once the spot has been seen on MRI, it's like a "map" to guide the US, so maybe now it can be seen on US.

If it can be seen on ultrasound, then it is much easier to biopsy.

If it can't, then you have to go back and have another expensive MRI, with another injection of contrast agent, for an MRI-guided biopsy -- if someone can see the spot by another imaging method and biopsy in any other, it's a lot nicer than having to have MRI-guided biopsy.

vmd

CalGal and Ann;

Thank you.  it looks as though a biopsy is inevitable, then.

I am not certain what you mean by CA27.29.  Could you explain?  Thank you.

I guess I am not certain why do the US since MRI is more sensitive anyway and they will want to do a biopsy, why not assume the MRI picked something up and do the biopsy from the start?