Has anyone had this diagnosis?

It sounds to me like you've got one of those doctors who considers DCIS to be a pre-cancer rather than a cancer. There's definitely some controversy over that, though the majority of doctors seem to consider it to be cancer. 

I think I would first find out if the doctor considers DCIS to be cancer or not. If not, then you need to decide for yourself what *you* think.

What were the suggested follow up therapies? 

Wish I had a "like" button for you LadyGrey!!!!

I'm on the other side of the fence. I believe that DCIS is often overtreated.

I think you should absolutely find out more about your diagnosis and seek second opinions.  I saw 6 doctors before I settled on my "team."  However, the fact that a medical oncologist calls DCIS pre-cancer rather than cancer doesn't, in my view, automatically make him a bad doctor.  My medical oncologist is in a very serious oncology practice, he is affiliated faculty at the med schoolm, he does research.  He calls DCIS pre-cancer; he also tells me I am one of his least sick patients. (I actually like hearing that).  However, he treats my DCIS diagnosis as aggressively as DCIS can be. (I also like that.)  I had an MRI, lumpectomy, radiation, and am now on tamoxifen.  I see him every six months. He insists I have a medical breast exam every three months (because I just can't self-exam), but agreed my PCP could do that in the between visits to the med onc.  He made me change the anti-depressant I was on for one that doesn't interfere with tamoxifen.  My point is that if someone should see a doctor who uses the term "pre-cancer" for DCIS, that doesn't necessarily mean that doctor's treatment is different from a doctor who calls it cancer.  What's important is how seriously they take it.

"Yes my surgeon does consider DCIS to be cancer but he was very clear to tell me that they found no cancer cells in my pathology. The surgeon and the pathologist are considering it DCIS because of certain conditions present even though no malignancy was found."

Ok, so what were those "certain conditions" that were present? 

Olivia, like cycle-path, now that you have included that extra information from your pathology report, I too understand what your diagnosis is and why you are getting the recommendations and treatment that you are getting. And if you have Dr. McCready as your BS, you really are in the best possible hands.  I had him too and when I compare the information that he provided me with to what others here say that they hear from their surgeons, I am always grateful that I lucked into requesting him.

Good luck with your next set of appointments and let us know how it goes. 

Olivia, I'm glad to see that Dr. McCready is your doc as well. I don't know him (I'm in the US) but from his web page he seems extremely well qualified.

If you're interested in IORT, you might want to read what's on this web site: http://www.breastcanceriort.org/ 

This refers to a study in which Dr. McCready apparently participated.

For some reason, some very fair women don't burn a lot during radiation and some darker skinned women DO. 

The 5 day treatment you've heard about is not the boost. The 5 day treatment, called Partial Breast Irradiation (PBI) is sometimes referred to as Mammosite or Savi or Contura, which are the names of the device manufacturers. The Mammosite et al are balloon-like catheters that are inserted in the lumpectomy cavity, sometimes right at the end of the lumpectomy surgery, and radiation is delivered through the catheter for 5 days. 

In nearly all cases, this 5 day radiation treatment is in lieu of the several week course, which is referred to as Whole Breast Irradiation (WBI). 

I'm glad that you had a good discussion with the Radiation Oncologist at PMH.  PMH tend to be very balanced in their approach to treatment - they will recommend throwing everything at something when that's necessary, but they also are careful to not overtreat.  

It appears that with your diagnosis, which is right on the edge between ADH and DCIS, they have determined that complete removal of the area of concern, with clear margins, is sufficient.  That seems reasonable, since for ADH alone usually surgical removal isn't considered necessary - ADH normally is removed only so that it can be ensured that no DCIS (or anything more serious) is present. 

I would recommend that you still see a Medical Oncologist.  He/she can review and confirm (or disagree) with the recommendation of the RO and also discuss the benefits of Tamoxifen, as a preventative.  That's not to say that Tamox will be recommended or that you will decide to take it, but the MO will be able to review the pros and cons relative to your risk level.  When I saw the MO at PMH, we had a really good discussion about this.  He actually recommended against Tamox for me but he gave me all the data about my risk levels and the risk of side effects from Tamox, and let me decide.  I went home, did my research and came to the conclusion that I agree with the recommendation.  

"I was told by Dr. McCready's office that they don't normally test for ER/PR with DCIS"

I was told that about my initial pathology results. However, my final pathology (after surgery) contained ER/PR results. I'm guessing that might be the same with you - you'll get your details after surgery.

 "Since there is no other bc in my family I don't qualify for the BRAC testing."

I had only my mother as well (post-menopause diagnosis for her), but I qualified. I think my young age at diagnosis factored in. However, I was negative. It's possible there are genetic factors that have yet to be discovered.

"I was told by Dr. McCready's office that they don't normally test for ER/PR with DCIS. Yet everyone on this forum seems to have their values so I suppose you have all asked for them. I have asked them to run mine so I know them."

No. They're provided as a matter of course. Not testing for ER/PR might be a Canadian thing, but it sounds to me like it's a McCready thing. I've never ever heard of not testing for ER/PR status, even from the other Canadians here.

"For Tomox you need to be ER+ and in my case I went through menopause young, did HRT but was off it by the age of 50, had 3 kids by 30, etc. RO and I discussed that our adrenal glands and body fat store estrogen so the body can be absorbing it that way but I doubt that my body is actually producing much."

None of that apparently matters as to prescribing Tamoxifen or an AI. Even women who've had their ovaries removed are often put on an anti-estrogen. I can't say I completely understand the logic of it, but it seems to be the way of BC treatment at the present time.