Did your tumor(s) end up being bigger or small?

MRI showed a 7cm tumor with additional sites throughout and around the local site. I had a MX vs. Lumpectomy based on these findings. It was 2 cm. However, due to a single strand extending down toward the chest wall I would never have obtained clean margins... So the MX was best in the end.

My tumor was estimated at 6mm. It was 1.4cm, twice as big. I had 5 nodes taken at lumpectomy. I had unusual nodal anatomy. Go figure...

My 2 tumors were smaller on pathology than on US or MRI. The radiologist explained to me that the reason the measurements vary is that when you have a Mamogram you are standing up & the breast tissue lays(& is squished) one way. When you have an US you are laying on your back & the breast lays differently. During a MRI, you're laying on you stomach & this cause the breast to hang down. So I guess our tumors are pliable. I don't remember exactly but both my tumors were believed to be 2-3cm & my largest came back at 1.6cm. As far as how many nodes, the current thinking seems to be the fewer the better.

I had a PET prior to my BMX. The PET showed one lesion 2.3cm and no positive nodes. The actual tumor was 2.6cm and the first 2 nodes were positive. I've driven myself crazy worrying that the BC grew that quickly in the 3 weeks from my PET to the actual surgery. My onc assures me that this is not the case, but rather that surgical pathology is just more accurate than even the most complex imaging. As it's been said already on this thread, try not to worry about the size of the mass. The outcome of the nodes, grade, and presence of LVIV will direct your treatment plan.

My U/S showed the tumour to be 3 cm but the final path report was only 1.6 cm. The tumour was attached to some non-cancerous tissue which made it appear larger than it really was.

posy, as you can see from the replies here, there's a lot of variability in the accuracy of size measurements from imaging.

My tumor was never seen on mammograms, because my breast tissue was too dense.  It was estimated to be 1.6 cm in diameter on the ultrasound image.  I had a contrast breast MRI a few days later, and the tumor was clearly visible -- it was measured at 2.0 cm in diameter.  When they report those sizes, the number is the diameter "in greatest dimension," which means the lump itself won't be quite as big overall as you might think from the number they quote you.

I had a mastectomy 3 weeks after my biopsy, and the pathologist reported that the whole tumor was 1.8 cm x 1.6 cm x 1.7 cm.  So, in my case, the estimates turned out to be pretty close.  My surgeon said the tumor was bigger than she thought it would be; but it was smaller than I had feared it would be.

Before my surgery, she told me the average number of sentinel nodes she found and removed was 2 or 3.  My cancer center used a SNB method that involved injection of a radioactive material (technitium-99) prior to surgery, and injection of a blue dye in the operating room; and then removal of any nodes that were radioactive, blue, or both. I found out after surgery that she had taken out 3 nodes, all of which were negative for cancer cells.  I'm confident that if there had only been one node labeled with radioactive tracer and/or blue dye, she'd have removed just that one.

Different surgeons have different protocols, though, as you can tell from these replies.  The best thing to do is just keep yourself distracted until you get the phone call.

otter

My tumour ended up only being half the estimated size, although it did have some DCIS attached, not sure if that played a role.

In any case, from 3.5 cm estimated, it turned out to be 1.6 cm.

Posy, mine was estimated as 9 mm on the ultrasound, 1.3 cm on the biopsy and, after surgery, turned out to be 1.1 cm. So pretty close. 

They told it was small, the oncologist recommended only lumpectomy and no further treatment.

I called my surgeon and told her I wanted a very aggressive treatment, I wanted a mastectomy and chemo, reluctantly she agreed.

During my mastectomy they found a larger tumor, invasive that was different from the one on the excisio for my  biopsy.

No tests showed it. I am a long term survivor.