Size

Hi Mama...do you mean .7 to 1 CM's ? Tumors are measured in mm's or cm's not inches. That is great news to hear that its so small ! To answer your question..when I had my mri in June I was told that my tumor was 5.2 cm's. But when I had my bmx the surgical pathology showed that it was MUCH smaller....   .15 cm's !! It was actually the accompanying LCIS that was 5.2 cm's not the actual tumor. The pathology from surgery, whether its an LX or Bmx is the most accurate because it's your whole tumor not just a piece as is the case in biopsy. It;'s not really a "mis diagnoses"  because nothing is final until they actually have your complete tissue, your tumor tells the story and will dictate your treatment. I hope this helps

Mammogram (when it was finally seen on a mammogram) said mine was 1.8cm, MRI said it was 2.5cms but when it was removed via lumpectomy it was actually 3.5cms. I'm told with Lobular it's hard seeing how big they actually are until they take them out?

Imaging (mammogram/ultrasound/MRI) can give an indication of size, but with the biopsy, it depends what type of biopsy ..... Needle or core (punch) biopsies just take a sample out for the path guys to study. If it is an "excisional biopsy" or lumpectomy, then the whole thing is removed.

Often you don't get an exact idea of the size until after they remove it all and examine the removed tissue microscopically. 

Mine unfortunately did not show up well on imaging, being mostly microscopic infiltration, and ended up being much larger than expected, hence my return for mastectomy. However, sometimes it goes the other way, as mentioned above .... 

ILC has a greater tendency to be multifocal [in more than one place] than IDC. That is why many of us will have an MRI prior to surgery. Not good to have a lumpectomy when mastectomy is required.

MamaDarrling, keep in mind the growth pattern of the abnormal cells. Lobular spreads out single file or in thin sheets which may escape detection on scans and get missed during biopsy unless the target is big enough or the needle's aim is very accurate. Ductal sticks together to form a tighter mass, more likely to be palpated/felt when smaller. That factor makes it a little easier to understand how our type is not found until later and seems to appear larger from initial mammogram (where dense tissue may partially hide it) to ultrasound and beyond.

Nomatterwhat, I also had two separate lesions. That situation may qualify you for genetic testing since it is not common to have multiple primary tumors of different pathology. Even if your family history is not dramatic, it's something to consider because ovarian cancer might be a concern should a BRCA or another mutation be present.

Mamadarling, I know it's hard, but try not to worry about more then you have to right now. Try not to google and find a medical team that you really trust and can rely on.

Re size and ILC, all of my drs told me that size is less of an issue w ILC since it grows in long strands and is measured differently. Larger ILC is not necessarily an indicator of bad things.

Sending you hugs and support.

Better not to depend on the pre surgical numbers.  With ILC, it's simply not accurate, as so many former comments pointed out.  Mine was thought to be just calcifications based upon mammogram and u/s, until I had the MRI that showed a mass +4 cm. After surgery, it was found to be +5 cm.  I'd urge you to settle on your team and take action, in which ever way you feel most comfortable.  Take good care of you.