Cancer missed by mammogram?

I was lucky that I felt my tumor and had a surgeon who also felt it because my mammogram and ultra sound then a diagnostic mammogram all missed missed a 2.5 cm tumor. It only showed on a MRI that my surgeon order after i was dx with breast cancer. Sorry to hear you have to go through all of this,
Elizabeth

Hi Joanne Elizabeth -

Yes, to me, the yearly mamm's aren't all that we think they are ... Due to a strong family history of pre-menopausal bc, I started getting mamm's at 25. I thought I was getting them every year and somehow two years went by w/o ... and w/o a reminder from my HMO ...

I thought I was getting back on track with a mamm around my b'day .... but after that next mamm, for the first time, got called back for more tests ... That was the start of this whole ordeal. I also have dense breasts ... and had asked about a MRI a couple years ago, but was told no (even after my first bc) ...

There's at least 2 chances of errors with mamm's ...

1. The mamm misses the bc; and
2. The radiologist misses the bc that is evident on the mamm.

You had the first problem, I had the second one ... on my recurrence no less! You'd think they'd look real close on a mamm for a woman who already had bc ... but my HMO missed a 2 cm lump ... as I was told my mamm's were fine ... but being the type that wants to see for myself, I asked to see them, but my breast surgeon hadn't seen them and said he would ...

2 mos later, I found a lump and it was confirmed to be the same type of bc ... When I asked for the mamm films to take to outside 2nd opinions, they were "lost". (Three months later, when I had more 2nd opinions, they had found their way back into my file). Also at this time, I felt I had to ASK FOR A CT SCAN (I'd previously asked and had been denied - I never had them on my initial dx) and got a CT Scan and more than I feared - the devastating news of liver mets and unrelated kidney cancer.

Until I escaped from my HMO (effective 1/1/07), I had two fights .. the bc and them!

At least breast MRI's are getting a lot of press about being more effective for women with dense breasts, so hopefully the medical community will start using them more despite them being much more expensive.

CalGal

The radiologist saw a suspicious area in July 2004 and noted it in the report but that was the end of it. My requesting physician failed to contact me and inform me of a need for a six-month follow up mammogram and the Radiology Department did not send the reminder.

In Dec of 2006 had clinical breast exam. Nothing suspicious was noted by this physician. I had gained 40 lb. (quit smoking) and did not recognize my breasts and the strange ridge-like thickened area in the upper outer quadrant I related to a prior biopsy done ten years prior.

I did not go in for my mammogram until March as I thought there was no real hurry. I had a death in the family and was profoundly depressed.

Much to my chagrin, I was told there was a spiculated 2.0 cm mass.

Oversights and negligence could have been the death of me...However, thank God it was a nonaggressive tumor. I plan on getting an MRI every Christmas as a present to myself for the rest of my life even if I have to pay cash.

I thought mammos were better tools before this happened to me. But it says right on the report that they miss some things. That's why self exam and clincial exams are the other part of the trio, and additional tests for those who need them. Mammos are still a great tool, just not perfect. They do catch the majority of things (but not in my case either). My medical team all went back over mine to see it the tumor was missed but it didn't show. And they did this to check for errors, mainly because they don't want this to happen to the next woman. It took me a while to come to terms with the fact that this can happen, and that my idea of medicine had to be adjusted to accept the reality.

Take care,
--Hattie

I was just as shocked as everyone else when my mammogram came back clean but the ultra-sound found a "suspicous" shaded area which most thought was just dense breast tissue. WRONG! My radiologist told me that only 7 to 8% of cancers are not detected by mammogram. Welcome to the 8%! I just had a lumpectomy with sentinal node dissection and the tumor they thought was 2.5 centimeters is actually 4.5 centimeters and now I am facing a mastectomy. With every turn there seems to be something else that is a surprise. Good luck to all and God bless.

On the other hand, in my case a mammo saw something no one could feel...I had a CBE by my ob-gyn (normal), and was sent for a routine, baseline mammo having no symptoms. When the radiologist wanted a biopsy b/c of "indeterminate calcifications" - he truly believed it was a benign situation. The surgeon I consulted with, examined me, felt nothing and also believed the biopsy had a 90% chance of being benign.

Well, knock us all over with a feather! I had cancer! In any case, the mammogram saved my life, as I was asymptomatic. They don't find everything, but it's better than nothing. I also am tellling all my friends that a clean mammo is no guarantee - it is a flawed screening tool, at best!

Mary

Guess what gals? They now have a vastly improved new "spiral" mammogram that shows the breast in 3D.

But don't hold your breath for your local facility to have it available for you any time soon.

How fast will they throw away that million dollar mammogram machine to buy us a 3 million dollar one?

No very soon.

Hugs, Shirlann

I am 42 and have faithfully gone for my annual mammograms. I had a mastectomy on Thursday because of a 4cm ILC tumor that had never shown on any of them. I also have dense breasts, and too late I learned that ILC often doesn't show on mammograms. My husband found my lump and my gyn agreed, so he ordered an ultrasound along with the mammogram. Mammogram showed nothing, but 10 minutes later we were looking at the lump on the ultrasound. I now tell everyone who will listen - don't be lulled into a false sense of security because you have an annual mammogram and they tell you it's clear.
My sister also has dense breasts and since my diagnosis, she will now receive MRIs.

I do feel that I wasn't informed enough about the possible shortcomings of the mammogram.
Donna

Joanne_E
I had lobular ca which was not caught on my annual mammo - I noted another post which identified ILC as unlikely to show on mammogram. I found the lump myself, while putting on a bra, and the mass showed on ultrasound. Core biopsy/mastecomy, prophylatic contralateral mastecomy/chemo/TRAM reconstruction later, I'm STILL MAD that I faithfully did BSE and annual mammogram and when diagnosed had a 4 cm tumour and 1 positive node. So that tumour had been there quite a while.

I just had no idea that my tumour would not show on mammo, and yet at a recent BC conference I attended, the possibility was not mentioned.

Alice

I certainly understand your anger, but I thought everyone knew that mammo's, while great, only find about 70 to 80% of tumors. Especially in younger gals with dense breasts.

Mammo's are not perfect, but, they are all we have unless we are lucky enough to be in a clinic with the "newest" device, which for me is like never.

It is very frustrating. My bunch of bozos fooled around with every test in the book before doing a biopsy, 3 months of tests, end to end. Then, they told me they thought it was Lymphoma. I was seething. This is the 7th largest city in the country. So they sent my slides to White Plains, NY, and got the answer, I have a rare sub-type that affects only 5% of the BC gals. I was so shaken I got all my stuff and took it to UCLA, to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Clinic set up by Dr. Susan Love. They agreed with my diagnosis so I was comfortable.

Medicine is not infallible. Not by any means. Thousands of people die every year from bad diagnostics, wrong medicines or wrong doses, hospital borne germs and just plain mistakes.

You just have to be as vigilant as you can, limit your time in any hospital (horrible, untreatable germs) and look and ask questions about any drugs. If you do go to the hospital, have someone who can be with you if you are going to be "out". An advocate. This is essential.

About all we can do and then thank our lucky starts we don't live in Bangladesh.

Gentle hugs, Shirlann

In most regions the acquisition of new equipment has to be approved by a regional board. It really is overly cynical to impute a mercenary reason. Departments revel in having the newest. They may petioned and be denied. Every department in that area will want one to be competative and the cost goes up.

I just confirmed the insurance companies are dictating exams. My doctors office is trying to get authorization from the insurance company and is getting the run around. The Radiology center will NOT take direct payment from me if I do not have this insurance authorization. They have a contract with the insurance companies and will not take direct payment from patients in case we try to get re-imbursed afterwards. So the insurance companies are all about saving money and are controlling how doctors screen patients or pursue treatment palns. Basically if you find a good doctor their hands are still tied by the insurance companies dictating what they will insure. Your money is no good (if you have any) and attempt to make direct payment for an exam or treatment.

So it appears the insurance companies will not support MRI screening procedures even on previous BC patients. They want you to already have symptoms or later stage BC so your life is threatened. I don't know how others feel but this is wrong to have insurance dictate how doctors screen and treat patients. Is there some place where we can make our concerns heard? I'm looking into my state policy and trying to see what I can find out for now. Maybe Susan Komen Society can make our voices hear too??