<p>Thank you Threekids. I know what you mean about breast cancer being so common now. And I have tried to tell myself that ignorance is bliss but I think I am just like this with anything… even pregnancy. When I was pregnant for the first time I had soooo many books about it. I laugh now that I read up on the pregnancy but forgot to read about what the heck I had to do to take care of the baby! There I was trying to soothe a crying baby while frantically trying to find an answer in a book! Must be nice for new Moms now… they can quickly find support online. A couple of my nieces gave birth last week and were posting on Facebook while in labor!</p>
<p>So I actually did like the breastcancer.org site as I saw some discussion threads that were helpful. Thank you to Debruns and others who recommended it.</p>
<p>By the way Threekids, am I reading your post correctly? Did you get a mastectomy but no chemo? The reason I ask is that my mother had a mastectomy in the 80s but the pathology report later states that there was no cancer found in the breast that was removed. She did not have a radiation or chemo. So for all these years I have been unsure about saying that my family has a history of breast cancer. Before any of you panic… this was done in New Zealand… not the U.S.</p>
<p>Oh my! No, because the results of the Oncotest Dx (it’s a test, if I understand it correctly, done on several of the cancer genes and it’s done in California) were under 18, chemo “is not beneficial”. If the results had been 18-31, the choice is made to have or not have chemo by the oncologist and patient, over 31 and chemo is strongly recommended. But this test is done on ER positive (estrogen receptor positive) HER2 negative tumors. This sounds really confusing, and cryptic…but it was all explained and drawn (I saved the drawings) by my oncologist. So I am unbelievably lucky, no chemo. Although, I would have had chemo if there was any indication that it would be beneficial. I’m not a grandmother yet and I want to be one! My kids aren’t even married yet, although I’m 59. Yes, a mastectomy. A lumpectomy was not an option considering where the tumor was.</p>
<p>As for your mom, oh my goodness. Sounds like no history of breast cancer, but the 80s, wow. I worked on the American College of Surgeons Breast Cancer study in the 70s (the collecting of information part, and I’m surprised that a mastectomy was done without a positive pathology report, but as you said, New Zealand, but still!</p>
<p>I hope all of you are fine, and remember there are TONS of women like the above posters and me who are many years out, me being 7 years this year! It is what it is and you will be fine no matter what. There are so many tumor types and oncotypes, so it is hard to generalize from one person’s experience, but you will be fine. I found with breast mri’s it helps to have them tell you how long each segment will be, and take some deep breaths in between. Mentally, it just seems to help to have them count you down too if they will do it for you… it is awkward, but necessary. Please feel free to message me for support.</p>
<p>I just wanted to thank everyone who took the time to post here. I ended up with biopsies on two lumps on the right breast via ultrasound and biopsies on three lumps on the left breast via MRI. The ultrasound one was fine but I suffered through the MRI… not from the pain of the biopsy but from the pain on my back from having to hold the same awkward position for an entire hour! Anyway, I just received good news that there was no cancer found. Thank you for all your understanding!</p>
<p>Has anyone heard about MBI- molecular breast imaging- recently approved by FDA- hopewell nj just installed machine - FYI</p>
<p>My 32 year old niece has had some experiences with fibroadenomas.
I discovered this last night, and want to share it with anyone who has dense breasts.
Watch this Ted women presentation by dr Rhodes, who helped discover
/ develop MBI- molecular breast imaging- specificlly designed to detect small growths in dense breasts.
It’s new, it has issues but I promise you,that you won’t forget this presentation</p>
<p>Thank you SouthJerseyChessMom for the very interesting link. Watching it made me realize how extremely dense my breasts are. None of the 5 lumps the MRI found were palpable and none of them were found on my mammogram. And, yes, the MRI was expensive… my copay was about $300. I hope this new technology does become available for our daughters.</p>
<p>Continued health and recovery to all of you that have posted of your experiences. The support of other women that have endured this and then posted is so valuable and appreciated. I hope it is okay if I share my story. I don’t want to take over the thread.</p>
<p>My sister is going to have a double mastectomy on Thurs, with total reconstruction on the same day, as she has been diagnosed with DCIS stage 0 with calcifications. MRI tests indicated a very aggressive cancer would result if she did not have the mastectomy. She has elected to have a double. We went from no family history to this and now, all of the sudden another, sister just had a biopsy for a mass 2 weeks ago (non cancerous at moment) is being watched every six months, and yet another has had several ultrasounds for “suspicious lumps.” I was just told in January that I have very dense and cystic breasts and my doctor (not radiologist) wants me to have an MRI because the mammograms are too hard to read but there was nothing suspicious as far as they could tell. It it was suggested by others that I have an ultrasound instead. It is all so confusing and a bit scary. </p>
<p>Again, I don’t mean to take over the thread, but I know myself…I probably won’t do anything about it.</p>
<p>I don’t know where you live,age, etc. but I would have an ultrasound, they have some designed to help with dense breasts. </p>
<p>I wasn’t told I had dense breasts until the law came out saying they had to tell you. Looking back on my records, I could see the radiologist did mention it.doctor just didn’t. When my Mom got cancer 19 years ago, they started looking closer.
You shouldn’t be scared, it’s just that dense breasts are more “cloudy” for lack of a better word, harder to see through, and other images help. It isn’t that they are just looking for masses, they just want to see what other less dense breasts show already. I try to tell myself that when I have to go more often and have more procedures.</p>
<p>I go every 6 months and it’s a long half hour or so on the table (ultrasound) and waiting, but it’s important to do what you can.
If the MRI scares you, ask about an ultrasound first.</p>
<p>When I was getting my biopsy aided by ultrasound, I asked the technician why I just couldn’t get screened via ultrasound and she said that ultrasound was not a good screening tool and will not find calcifications. It is just good as a “second look” technology in conjunction with a mammogram or MRI.</p>
<p>cormom15, I would urge you to get the MRI. Watch the video on the link provided in post #28 and you’ll see why mammograms do nothing for our dense breasts. The MRI on the other hand, found three lumps I had that were undetected by mammogram or ultrasound. I think you need to look at it this way… the earlier you find the lumps, the greater your chance of survival. So while your sister may have had the mastectomies, the MRI saved her life. You are not only at a higher risk due to the density of your breasts but because you have a sister with breast cancer. On the other hand, not all abnormalities turn out to be cancer as my case and your other sister’s case shows. Let us know how you do!</p>
<p>Debruns- I didn’t even know that Conn has mandatory notification of dense breasts, until I watched Dr Rhodes Ted Women 20 minute presentation - ( link post 28)</p>
<p>regarding MBI technology - developed at MAYO CLINIC
Breast cancer detection is sometimes difficult, as breast density in varying degrees can overlap with lesions, making them harder to find with traditional x-ray mammography; and interpretation can vary among physicians, which can often lead to recommendations for additional tests.</p>
<p>Molecular Breast Imaging, or MBI, is less susceptible to breast density, since the method involves a radioactive tracer that has a high affinity for metabolically active tumors, and two specialized detectors imaging the breast from opposing angles. MBI has been shown in clinical studies to outperform mammography for early detection, and in finding more cancers.(1)</p>
<p>AlohaTM - thank you for your advice. My doctor thinks the exact same thing that you do, but a close relative that works for the radiologist disagrees and says I don’t even need an ultrasound for my dense breasts because they are common. Now with 2 sisters with “problems” and one having surgery on Thursday, I am getting more concerned. At the first of the year, we were all fine. </p>
<p>Debruns, I live in NYS and am 50. I had my mammogram the day that the notification law took effect for dense breasts. I was told the other time(s) that I had the mammogram that I had dense breasts and they wanted to do a study one me but I declined.</p>
<p>Cormom- my niece is 33, a lawyer who researches everything, it’s her nature.
About 4 months ago she had a biopsy for fibroadenoma, thankfully, the news was let’s watch it.
Two weeks ago she detected another lump- went for tests.
She argued that since the mammogram missed the first growths, she wanted an ultrasound, and they agreed, and determined the old growth didn’t enlarge, and the new was also a fibroadenoma.</p>
<p>After watching that Ted link, I understand much more about dense breast tissue. I hope you watch it.</p>
<p>SouthJerseyChessMom - thank you. I just watched the link and it really is scary to think that a mammogram is basically worthless for me until it is too late. I am heavily considering the MRI that my doctor recommends but it is very expensive and then the question remains - do I have an MRI every year? Best of health to your niece.</p>
<p>I go to Yale and they had 3D mammogram and different ultrasounds but no one even with my history mentioned an MRI. I think it might be because of the false positives, expense, I’m not sure. But I am at Yale’s breast center and will ask in May when I go back. They’ve been watching a tiny fibroidanoma but for now, it’s stayed the same and has smooth borders. They sent me here 2 years ago instead of my radiologist because of their more advanced machines. (Not the one in video though)
It’s very hard knowing though for years I went and they really saw nothing much of anything.</p>
<p>cormom15, personally, I think the expense of the MRI is worth it considering your higher risk. Your should take your doctor’s advice over the advice of a relative who I assume is not a doctor. I consider myself lucky that all the five lumps that were missed by my annual mammograms were benign. I think the expense is worth it even if you take the MRI only once.</p>
<p>Thank you SouthJerseyChessMom for that really informative link to the video. I always wondered how they could detect lumps from my mammograms when it looked like a big mess of white. I sure hope the MBI technology makes it to my area.</p>
<p>AlohaTM - thank you for your advice. I guess what I am worried about/confused about is whether I would have to do this every year. My sister just had a double mastectomy yesterday. She was so incredibly brave. I am in awe of her. She is now cancer free!</p>
who are many years out, me being 7 years this year! It is what it is and you will be fine no matter what. There are so many tumor types and oncotypes, so it is hard to generalize from one person’s experience, but you will be fine. I found with breast mri’s it helps to have them tell you how long each segment will be, and take some deep breaths in between. Mentally, it just seems to help to have them count you down too if they will do it for you… it is awkward, but necessary. Please feel free to message me for support.</p>