20 years out - Now I'm scheduled for biopsy!

Could be fat necrosis. But your assumption that a hysterectomy (even one that removed the ovaries) “would take care of the estrogen" is a common misconception. We still make estrogen long after our ovaries stop working or even get removed. Our fat cells and adrenal glands make an androgen (putting it simply). Our livers secrete an enzyme called aromatase, that acts on the androgen and turns it into an estrogen. So those of us with estrogen-receptor-positive tumors need endocrine therapy to keep those stray tumor cells from getting the estrogen on which they feed--either by blocking the cells' access to it (SERMs like Tamoxifen) or keeping aromatase from helping our adrenal glands and fat cells make it, by taking aromatase inhibitor (AI) drugs that block the action of aromatase.

But here's the rub--at present, that's just about the only way to starve tumor cells of estrogen. We can't live without our adrenal glands or livers, so removing them's a no-go. And as to fat cells, the unfortunate reality is that while men can only fill or shrink fat cells (hypertrophic obesity), we women can not just fill but also actually make more of them (hyperplastic obesity)! We can lower our body fat percentage by weight or volume, but those fat cells just shrink--they don't disappear. The only way to get rid of fat cells is surgically (excision or liposuction), with all its attendant risks.

This is why our oncologists tell us it would be nice if we overweight women could lose weight (it improves our health overall, which makes us better able to handle the effects of treatment), but tell everyone to try to at least avoid gaining weight after diagnosis. Weight gain, in the case of women, might involve creating new fat cells...which would make more androgen and cause aromatase inhibitors to have to work harder to keep aromatase from turning it into estrogen, or tamoxifen to have to work harder to keep it away from tumor cells.

All of the above assumes, of course, that your tumor was estrogen-positive. If it were ER- (and PR-), then estrogen's not an issue.

Show me someone who didn’t throw themselves a comfort-eating pity-party after diagnosis and I’ll show you an already vegan athlete.

That is a long time.....When you had the mamo and Ultra do you know what your BiRad Score was?  Liz

I'm so sorry you got bad news. Low mitotic rate of 1 is as good as it gets, size is under 2cm and no LVI is good. With ER/PR+ you have many options. I don't know about pleomorphic lobular carcinoma, but I'm sure someone will chime in. Do you have HER2 status yet?

The decision for chemo will depend on a few things. If it is HER2 positive, you'll need herceptin, and that is generally given with chemo initially. If you are HER2 negative, your doctors should order the oncotype or mammaprint test which will help to give you your benefit of chemo. Some tumors are more aggressive nad chemo is beneficial. Some are less aggressive and chemo could do more harm than good. These tests help to determine that so that you and your doctor together can make that decision.

Mine was that way; it's a different and more specific wsynofvyesting. It took about a week to get results. Mine was FISH negative

123abc1611 sorry to hear you are going through this again. HER2- is less aggressive and there is no need for herceptin.

HER2+ is one of aggressive characteristics of breast cancer, but not the only one. BC can be aggressive in many different ways, so not having HER2 overexpression is one less unfavourable factor. Although there are now excellent targeted therapies available for HER2+ with great long-term response for both lower stage and MBC.