why do they always say dense tissue?

smokymama

Hey y'all,

I am relatively new here and have been reading as much as possible.  I need some feedback.

About 9 years ago, I had my baseline mammo and u/s at age 29 due to "dense tissue" and lumps in right breast.  They said fibrocystic breast was the cause.  However,  I don't recall anyone ever locating or dxing cysts.  Just dense tissue.  I feel so ignorant, because I took them for their word.  Still I continued BSEs, but tried to ignore the area on the top and outside of the right breast.  All I ever felt there was firm lumps and ropy texture.

Last October, I felt a small BB sized lump, very hard, about an inch above my right nipple.  I decided to wait a month, to see if it would change with my period.  Unfortunately, my son had to go into the hospital and I forgot about it.  I remembered about a month ago and felt to see if I could find it.  Instead, I found a soft lump behind my areola.  This concerned me, because I knew this was new. Watched it and it persisted through and after my period.  That is when I scheduled my yearly exam.

My NP did the whole pap and breast exam.  I told her that I had a concern about my right breast.  She asked me not to tell her the area.  I guess she wanted to see if we had the same concern.  As she did the exam, she started on the left.  When she went to the right, she spent a lot of time in the upper outer quadrant.  This is where all the lumps and thickness have persisted for 9 years.  She found an area at the 9:00 position that concerned her and she asked me if this was my concern.  I told her I knew about it, but was concerned about the area behind my areola.  She felt the lump there too.

She sceduled me for diagnostic and bilateral mammo-u/s and other tests next week.  Dx was right breast nodule-9:00.

My question is this: Is it possible for "fibrocystic lumps and thickness" to persist over a 9 year period?

By the way, have not had any breast tests and very few annual exams done since 1999 due to lack of insurance.  Stupid.......I know.

Please help with info if you can. I would appreciate it so much

Missy

rrs

I saw your post in another forum and answered it.  Yes, you can have dense tissue over many years.  I've had it all my adult life and I'm 55.  Your nodule could just be a cyst and they can asperate it - it is a simple procedure done with a needle - not very uncomfortable.  Good that they are going U/S and if you can, get an MRI.  It is a good diagnostic tool for dense tissue.  Younger people have firmer breasts and as we age, it usually becomes less dense.  If you do your self exams often you will probably notice if things change.  But, having the imaging your having is the best thing to do.  Good luck and I hope this answers some of your questions. 

Anonymous

My question is this: Is it possible for "fibrocystic lumps and thickness" to persist over a 9 year period?

I agree with rrs...I had lumps and thickness starting at the age of 19...I was dx'd at the age of 45...I am convinced my so-called "lump" was there for many, many years prior to dx...I don't mean to scare you...definately good that're having diagnostic procedures. This is just one more indication of how girls w/dense tissue MUST BE persistent. Best wishes to you...I hope it's B9!

plainjane

I am new to this site and actually have never participated in a forum before.  After reading through various topics, I found that even after five years I still have questions.  I have been told for as long as i can remember (which is harder after chemo!) that I have dense breast tissue and fibroids.  Because of this it was very difficult to do self exams and I just wrote everything off to fibroids and really never did self exams.  When I felt my lump 5 years ago I didn't give it much thought either.  The radiologists still tell me I have dense tissue.  It appears that most, if not all, of the posts seem to mention having a MRI either before, during or after diagnosis.  I have never had an MRI.  Are there others whose doctors do not recommend one?

Kleenex

I just had a lumpectomy to remove an evil globule of ILC. I have been told that my likely follow-up will be alternating mammograms (to catch IDC and other things like that) and MRI's, both because it's a good tool for catching ILC (if anything can!) and also because my ILC tumor grew OUTSIDE THE FIELD OF MAMMOGRAPHY. A mammogram only images tissue squished between the plates, and there is breast tissue outside that squishable area, as I have now learned. My tumor was found by me stumbling upon it. My gynecologist thought it was rib tissue. It was visible on ultrasound and on MRI. I have read that this is the case with ILC - it is often hard to image using mammography, which is why it's often not found until it is larger than most IDC is at discovery.

plainjane - how did you find your lump?

I fondly remember just a couple of months ago, when I thought that dense breasts meant less unsightly sagging. I also thought it might make mammograms more difficult to read. I totally never understood that dense breasts were a risk factor: that more glandular "stuff" in the breast meant more things to change in a bad way. I also didn't understand that "more difficult to read" means, in layman's terms, "cancer can be hiding in the blizzard imaged on the film, invisible."

Coleen 

Kleenex

By the way - my mom, who is 66, still has dense breast tissue. She has never had anything suspicious suspected or discovered. That would be reassuring (and it was), if I had not been diagnosed with bc.

Gitane

Hi plainjane,  Welcome to the ILC group.  It seems to me MRIs are the best screening/monitoring device for dense breast tissue.  There are just too many times ILC tumors, and probably others, are missed by mammograms and ultrasound.  I no longer have my breasts, but if I had I would have insisted on MRIs.  My daughter is getting them, too, even though she's not, they say, at increased risk.

Alexis111

Gitane,

 I am not part of the ILC group, however wanted to make a quick comment. 

I was diagnosed with Stage II IDC, with minor lymph node involvement, in September of 2006.....

Definitely agree that mammograms and ultrasound are often NOT reliable for certain types (and positions) of cancer.  I had multiple screenings with ultrasound and digital mammography....all of which came back negative for cancer (or any suspicious findings at all.)

 In the affected breast, I had pain, swelling, itching & burning.  Also, had a low grade fever for a number of months, and extreme fatigue for years prior.  (In addition, had fibrocystic breasts for approx. ten years before the problems began.)

 Because of the negative imaging, a male gynecologisit insisted there was nothing wrong with me.  He also said that breast cancer rarely has pain as a symptom. After three visits to his office, I asked for a referral to a surgeon.  The surgeon did a biopsy based on my suspicions...and thank god he did. By the time of my mastectomy, which was only a few months after the "there is nothing wrong with you" diagnosis...pathology determined that I had Stage II IDC. 

My rambling point is this: A bilateral breast MRI was done right before my surgery.  The result was abnormal and highly suspicious for carcinoma.  It was visible using MRI. 

Hope this is helpful!      

Alexis111

Laura,

Yes, girls and women must be persistent!

And if a doctor isn't listening to you, or doesn't believe in your personal symptoms, take copies of your records and go elsewhere.  Obtain the best oncologist and surgeon that you can possibly find. 

plainjane

Thank you for replying about the MRI.  I found my lump accidentially, but if it had been a snake it would have bit me!  it was in the left breast a l0:00 o'clock.  It came within less than 1 mm from the skin, so it was very easy to see.  I am not sure why or when I first noticed it.  I had been having annual mamograms for quite some time (I was 50 when I was diagnosed).  In the back of my mind I think it was there at my previous mamo the year previous, but no one has ever said they saw it.  It seems strange that it would not show up since it was in such an obvious place.  I live in a larger town, but continued to go to my GP in a smaller town who sent me to the local hospital for mamo.  The surgeons and onco told me they were poor quality films.  How would I have ever known that! 

I, too, thought dense breast tissue just meant they had to look a little harder, but I did not realize that it sometimes makes detection impossible with mamo or even ultrasound.  I also just trusted the doctors to know what was fibroids and what was a tumor.  I was not one that did self exams.  Because they took so much tissue, and the fact that I tend to develop granulomas at the incision site, it is still difficult for me or the doctor to know when a lump or bump is a normal thing or a rib. 

I am very glad I found this site!  Thanks for your support. 

plainjane

Boy, once I get started, I do tend to ramble...I just posted a reply about two seconds ago!  I still worry about recurrence and I almost think I do more now that I have reached my five year mark and the onc has scheduled my appts a yr apart now.  I try not to notice every ache and pain, but several things AlexisIII wrote hit home.  My doctors told me that there are no pre-symptoms to breast cancer when I told them that I had been feeling tired.  I would also come home in the evenings after work and feel like I had a fever and "coming down with something."  I would take advil or tylenol and feel better.  What concerns me now, is that I am noticing that I am doing the same thing, but I just had my appointment in July with onc. and everything appears to be fine.  I did not mention these symptoms because of what they said in the beginning.  Now I wonder, since you seemed to have the same experiences.

I have seen the onc every six months for a couple of years and now will go annually.  Am now annually on my mammograms (due in Feb 09).  How long did you continue to see your surgeon?

I do not want to turn into an obsessive person and I don't know if I am just feeling a little withdrawal since I am not to return for a year.

I appreciate your support and understanding!  

nash

Plainjane, I'm in the exact same boat as you. I felt like crap years before my bc diagnosis, and in fact felt so bad that I knew I had cancer--I just didn't know where. So when I found the lump, it wasn't a big surprise. Of course, the docs all poo-pooed the notion that my fatigue/malaise/low-grade fevers were cancer related. After chemo and rads, I actually started to feel better, but now that I'm 7 months out from rads and 9 months out from chemo, I'm starting to feel sick again. I don't think it's the tamoxifen, b/c those side effects have been different for me. I had a CT and mammo in July, and a breast MRI last January, and everything was fine, as was my blood work in July. But since the mammo missed my ILC the first time around, and ILC is so hard to see on CT, I'm not 100% convinced there's nothing there. Like you, I don't want to obsess, but one doesn't want to miss something either.

Anonymous

I had the same flu-like symptoms...mine started about 4 years prior to being dx'd with bc...still can't help but wonder.

But...as for dense tissue...I strongly suggest any of you who still have breast/s who have dense tissue...request a diagnostic mammo instead of the regular one. My huge tumor didn't show up on regular ones for 5 years! Then, when I found a smaller tumor (same breast) during a bse, my Dr ordered the diagnostic version...and BINGO...bc for me! Had I known about diagnostic mammos...I would have insisted on them when I first started getting mammos. I am convinced that had I had the diagn version, my second tumor could have been prevented from developing and I my initial tumor wouldn't have been able to grow to the size of a golf ball AND the cancer wouldn't have had a chance to spread to my Sent Node! Arghhhhhh...I get really piss** when I think about it...so I try not to! lol

Kleenex

LauraGTO - What is the actual difference between a diagnostic mammogram and a standard screening one? When I had my diagnostic one, the ONLY difference I could discern was that they made a big effort to scrape the area of concern off my chest and into the field the mammogram could look at (they were unsuccessful). Otherwise, they did the SAME angles, for the SAME length of time, that they always seem to do (I've been in three states, and they all do the same thing). The equipment was the same, as well. It almost felt to me that the difference, other than the aforementioned attempt to capture the problem area, was that someone was really going to pay attention in reading my films this time, since my breasts had been categorized as possibly harboring suspicious activity. Do they really do something different?

Coleen

Anonymous

Good question...I should have been more specific.

During a regular one they only do - I think - 2 views of each breast. During a Diagnostic one, they do many different views (for mine, they did 8) and they can magnify and zoom in on specific areas. Also, they read the film while you're there in case something suspicious shows up. If it does, they take even more magnified views of the suspicious area.

I wish they would have done magnified views every time I had the mammos done. My tumors would have showed up years earlier.

One more thing...if any of you are wondering why I didn't feel the golf ball sized tumor...actually I did, years before my dx...but was told it was dense tissue...and not to worry about it!

Check this out (new, more accurate mammo for dense tissue):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26529277/from/ET/

Alexis111

PlainJane.....

It is sometimes difficult to Not be an obsessive personality after having cancer.  Hang in there!

I try to think in a positive manner, and keep my mind occupied by reading two or three hours per day.  Also,  I exercise often, and do yoga on a regular basis. Yet, like you, I find myself thinking about a recurrence too much of the time.  Am not sure how to cure that (unhealthy) habit.

About your symptoms prior to your breast cancer diagnosis....it isn't your imagination. I had seen a number of doctors (years prior) to my diagnosis.  Extreme fatigue, nausea, flu-like symptoms, fever. (was sick with colds, strep, you name it....five and six times per year.)  Also, I had horrific body odor, under my right arm pit, for approx. four months prior to diagnosis with right-sided breast cancer.

And just as Nash stated....the first obg just "poo-pooed" all of these symptoms as Completely Unrelated.  However, once I recovered from surgery, the body odor completely disappeared.  And after recovering from chemotherapy, I have never been affected with fever, fatigue, or nausea.

If a person is harboring defective (cancerous) cells in their body (that have the ability to eliminate your existence) why would it not be possible for these same cells to alert your immune system with symptoms of ill health?  Of course they are related....nobody in the world could convince me otherwise. 

Am still seeing my medical oncologist every six months for blood-work.  Am not taking Tamoxifen though it was recommended. Recently had an appointment with my surgeon to discuss a possible left mastectomy.  I have not had a recurrence, but as we have been discussing...live in fear of it.  My left breast is often sore and painful, but nothing "definitive" has been found wrong.  Will go for a yearly MRI, since mammography & ultrasound were not useful in finding my particualr cancer.  

I hope this is helpful

Anonymous

Kleenex--the way my breast center explained it to me was this: a diagnostic mammo is read by the radiologist right away while you wait (and you get immediate feedback results); a  screening mammo isn't--results are sent to you in the mail. Also: more views are taken with a diagnostic--I have 6 instead of the usual 4. They said once you have a bc diagnosis, you have diagnostic mammos.

nash

Well, I just had a diagnostic mammo a couple of months ago as part of my ILC followup, and I did not get my results immediately--I got them several days later at my onc appointment, then got a letter in the mail a week later. So it apprears to vary by imaging center.