› Forums › Cutaneous Melanoma Community › A “difficult case” – differential diagnosis includes melanoma
- This topic has 6 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 7 months ago by
Wiggles.
- Post
-
- November 18, 2018 at 2:31 am
Hello. I'm new to this forum. I'm not sure exactly what my questions are but I'm looking for some insight. I'm a 36 year old mother of 2 young children, ages 3 and 18 months, living in the very smoky bay area. A few weeks ago I had a biopsy of an atypical mole that I noticed a few years ago. I didn't point it out at my previous body scans (I have a few aypical moles), but I assumed that my doctor had seen it then and thought it was okay. I continued to be uncomfortable with it, so I brought it up this time and requested and received a biopsy. After 2.5 weeks, I got a call that the pathology report came back as a "difficult case" with differential diagnosis incuding melanoma. My dermatologist ordered additional FISH testing and a thickness measurement before my re-excision surgery can be scheduled. He says it might be melanoma but won't tell me a type or stage but he says that these findings "people with these findings usually do just fine going forward" and that the pathologist thinks it was caught "fairly early". A family friend who is a physician looked at the pathology report and told me that he's not sure why my dermatologist is so reluctant to call this melanoma and had a few recommendations about how to pursue treatment. I see the dermatologist again in a few weeks to have my other moles reevaluated in light of this finding.
I have some concerns with my doctor and have scheduled a second opinion with a doctor outside of Kaiser. We are switching to Anthem Blue Cross at the beginning of next year but it seems likely I'll receive some treatment inside of the Kaiser system.
My questions:
Has anyone here had findings like these, where melanoma is suspected? What sort of treatment did you receive?
Has anyone experienced switching insurance providers while receiving treatment?
Can anyone recommend a dermatologist or oncologist in or near the east SF Bay Area?
Thank you for reading,
Michelle
—–
Here are excerpts from the pathology report, issued from a doctor at UCSF:
Final pathologic diagnosis:
Skin, left upper posterior lateral popliteal fossa area, shave biopsy. Compound proliferation of lare melanocytes with loss of p16 expression (see comment) Complete re-excision advised
Comment: This is a difficult case. The differential diagnosis includes melanoma given the lack of expression in the dermal component. Additional fluorescent in situ hybridization studies is recommended. Re-excision with appropriate clinical margins is recommended.
Microscopic Description:
Sections show an apparently small and circumscribed compound proliferation of large Spitzoid melanocytes with pale pigmented cytoplasm but with large irregular nuclei that have lost expression of p16 in the dermal component. No mitosis is identified, however pleomorphic nuclei are present.
- Replies
-
-
- November 18, 2018 at 6:02 am
Hi Michelle, I also live in the Bay Area, hope you and your family are doing ok with this awful air quality. I also had Kaiser when I was diagnosed almost exactly 3 years ago. I was misdiagnosed which led to my melanoma growing and spreading, not the best scenario. I got a second opinion from the melanoma center at UCSF and switched to Blue Shield (on a positive note, this time of year is the best time to be diagnosed if you need to switch to better insurance). Thankfully Kaiser uses UCSF pathologists as second opinions for most cases and UCSF pathologists are some of the best in the country when it comes to melanoma and "difficult cases" such as yours. I don't know that much about Spitz, but I have read on here many times how they cause a lot of question about whether it's a Spitz or a melanoma.
Absolutely go to UCSF melanoma center. Dr. Ortiz is the dermatologist I first saw and she referred me to Dr. Tsai there at the same center who is my oncologist. You may not need on oncologist, they are really only needed for those with melanoma that is stage 3 and up as those are the stages where treatment outside of just surgery is an option. All the doctors I have seen there have been nothing but amazing and full of knowledge. It was night and day from my experience with Kaiser. I had to start treatment at Kaiser since I had to finish the year with my then current insurance plan. I consulted with my UCSF oncologist first, had her talk with the Kaiser oncologist, and had to do 2 infusions with Kaiser before January came and I was free and clear to go to UCSF. It is 3 years later and I have been off treatment for 1 year and doing great! I have scans at UCSF coming up in December and I am sure they'll be very boring as the last 2 sets of scans have been 🙂
Please feel free to email me directly, you can do so by going to my profile on here and click the Contact tab. I am available to chat, meet up with, vent to, whatever you need. I know this is not the easiest of things to think about, especially during the holidays.
-
- November 19, 2018 at 6:05 am
I’m not sure if this will answer any of your questions…but we also have Kaiser , East Bay Area. When my son was diagnosed, he had a path report from Kaiser, then UCSF..both came back melanoma. His doctor then sent it to a third pathologist at U Mass on the east coast, mostly because of his age (21) and unusual location of the melanoma (oral, tongue). The third path report basically said…unusual, severely atypical, melanoma can’t be ruled out. So his Kaiser doctor chose to treat as melanoma, plus they found atypical cells in his lymph nodes. We asked for, and Kaiser gave us, a second opinion at Stanford. They didn’t have anything else to suggest other than what Kaiser did…interferon. Granted this was 9 years ago when there were very limited options. He got his treatment at Kaiser as well as all the surgeries and follow up scans.
im not sure what my point it..I guess I feel like Kaiser did a good job and allowed outside expertise which we appreciated. I know not everyone has the same experiences with them
good luck to you ..hang in there!
-
- November 19, 2018 at 1:25 pm
Good morning,
I also had an intial diagnosis of indeterminate. I went to Emory initally and then to Sloan Kettering. After checking the pathology and noting there were cells in my lymph nodes, they finally made the call that it was melanoma. In speaking with Dr. Coit, my surgical oncologist, he shared with me that a good number of diagnoses fall under that gray area. In further weighing our options, we agreed to treat my particular situatin as melanoma as the downside risk of undertreatment made me uncomfortable (plus the number of clinical factors pointing in that direction anyway).
As for changing plans, I'm not sure there's a downside (out of pocket?) as this usually means mre choices as to who provides your care.
Good luck – keep us posted!
-
- November 20, 2018 at 4:30 am
Hi Anon, i really hope you land a good Oncologist team at Anthem, like yourself, I currently have Kaiser {since 2003, but was diagnosed with Melanoma in 2008} i "may" move to Anthem, not because of lack of care {im still alive since 2008"s primary of stage 3b!!} i may switch once my employer takes me off their Ins plan, but i may qualify to go back with Kaiser through our Calif "LA Care", i dont wanna lose my team, im actually nervous about this but i digress lol..Im also here in Calif, SoCal {Van Nuys} keep that breathing aparatus on!!..i pray yer newer team tackles the question of "what direction" should you go with, just remember, were here for you, i recomend "re-naming" yourself from Anonymous to a Ficticious name, that way we all know who you are "Ficticioslly" from the rest of everyone…stay diligent!
-
- November 20, 2018 at 6:58 pm
Hello to you! I was diagnosed in August 2018, similar situation. Atypical spitzoid most consistent with melanoma. Due to my age (44) it was determined that treating it as melanoma was most prudent, as it most certainly is melanoma when in my age bracket. Mine was considered "thin" so I had the wide excision and now I watch and wait. I am in Baltimore and am treated at Johns Hopkins, but I reached out to UCSF upon diagnosis because they are said to have the most information about spitzoid. So….you are in the right place!
-
- November 21, 2018 at 9:18 am
This is OP updating:(I posted anonymously at first because the website collected my address when I created a login…I was concerned that that might somehow be accessible when I posted.)
Thanks to everyone who reached out to me! I wish that this forum didn’t need to exist, but since melanoma does exist I am so happy it does. I have been amazed with how tremendously supportive everyone is here. This is hard to find on the internet, in my experience.
The additional testing came back today as consistent with a compound Atypical Spitz Nevus and my doctor intends to cut .5 cm margins around the biopsy site. So good news, I think. I understand that Dr. McCalmont and his team at UCSF are experts on these things, but now I worry about the possibility of misdiagnosis. The diagnosis isn’t AST, it is “consistent with” AST, which sounds like hedging to me. So I wonder if there is still some question? And I worry about it being benign, but there is still a non-urgent need to go back and take margins? And yes, I am a natural worrier, as you might have guessed by now.
I still plan to switch insurance because I’ve had such a hard time getting my doctor to communicate with me through this time. I see an out-of-network doctor on 12/12 and expect to be able to ask questions then. I will ask him to do the excision in January. I’ll also ask him to look at my other spots that violate the ABCD rules, one of which looks like many of the pictures I see of melanoma in situ.
And importantly, I will take sun protection far more seriously, for myself and my children.
This warm and welcoming community has my gratitude.
Here is my the update to my pathology report:
Surgical Pathology Report
Addendum and/or Procedure PresentAddendum Reported: 11/20/2018
Addendum Diagnosis
SKIN, LEFT UPPER POSTERIOR LATERAL POPLITEAL FOSSA AREA, SHAVE
BIOPSY:
– COMPOUND PROLIFERATION OF LARGE MELANOCYTES, CONSISTENT WITH
AN ATYPICAL COMPOUND SPITZ’S NEVUS (SEE COMMENT)Addendum Comment
This difficult case was sent to UCSF for second opinion. Dr.
McCalmont rendered the above diagnosis. A FISH assessment was
recommended to clarify the copy number status of CDKN2A and has
been completed. No homozygous loss was documented. Based upon the
other histopathologic findings apparent in the sections, including
partial maturation, good lateral demarcation, and a mostly nested
configuration, an unconventional or atypical melanocytic nevus is
favored as the best overall diagnosis.Ref: J Cutan Pathol. 2012 Jan;39(1):25-8
-
Tagged: cutaneous melanoma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.