› Forums › Cutaneous Melanoma Community › Worried about follow up treatment
- This topic has 6 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
Janner.
- Post
-
- April 4, 2013 at 11:19 am
Hi everyone,
In August 2006 I went to a skin cancer clinic concerned about an abnormal lesion on my right forearm. After being told it was nothing to worry about I did just that…. I left it for over 6 years! I have recently had both my husband and his mother battle cancer, fortunately my husband is now in remission, unfortunatley my mother in law is terminal and at 45 only has a year to live.
Hi everyone,
In August 2006 I went to a skin cancer clinic concerned about an abnormal lesion on my right forearm. After being told it was nothing to worry about I did just that…. I left it for over 6 years! I have recently had both my husband and his mother battle cancer, fortunately my husband is now in remission, unfortunatley my mother in law is terminal and at 45 only has a year to live.
I am now quite cancer paranoid and it consumes my thoughts daily…. as a result I went to my GP feeling quite stupid…. he too siad it didnt look like much but was willing to biopsy it to give me peace of mind. A few days later, a saturday morning I received a phone call from the medical centre asking me to come in urgently…. It was pretty obvious what the results were but I went anyway.
My path results were Superficial Spreading type, Breslows 0.3mm (great I know!) Clark Level II. It DOS NOT MENTION ULCERATION AT ALL! The reason why I was worried about the lesion and decided to get it checked out is because it had been scabbing up and weeping for the last year.
I have since seen a plastic surgeon and have has a wider reexcision, path results came back with no further evidence of disease
Plan going forward is to see the plastic surgeon 4 monthly.
My concern is that no lymph nodes have been looked at, no bloods taken, no scans taken. Just the surgeons belief that it could not have spread.
I know my original path results were quite good, I was lucky…. however when my husband had cancer just over a year ago he too was told that his surgery would be all that was needed, that the cancer was contained and that he could go on surveillance for a year. Luckily for him the did a blood test before they sent him home. They called first thing the nect morning and his ldh was through the roof, started 3 months of chemo the next week.
I need some sort of assurance that this is gone, not just the surgeons word because quite frankly I have had enough of being let down by doctors.
I am only 26, have two little girls and dont want to continually have melanoma on my mind.
Any advice?
- Replies
-
-
- April 4, 2013 at 12:21 pm
Yes, your path report is favorable. It's likely not to cause future problems. But there are no guarantees. And, there really aren't any tests that will show if any microscopic disease might still exist or if any rogue cells got away somewhere, etc. . . Based on your pathology, it's lower risk, and probably won't be a problem. There is no 100% guarantee, but maybe it's 95% or 96% or 97%. Might be good to also get 2nd opinion on the pathology. Lymph node biopsy, scans, etc. . would not be indicated for a 0.3mm level II.
-
- April 4, 2013 at 12:21 pm
Yes, your path report is favorable. It's likely not to cause future problems. But there are no guarantees. And, there really aren't any tests that will show if any microscopic disease might still exist or if any rogue cells got away somewhere, etc. . . Based on your pathology, it's lower risk, and probably won't be a problem. There is no 100% guarantee, but maybe it's 95% or 96% or 97%. Might be good to also get 2nd opinion on the pathology. Lymph node biopsy, scans, etc. . would not be indicated for a 0.3mm level II.
-
- April 4, 2013 at 12:21 pm
Yes, your path report is favorable. It's likely not to cause future problems. But there are no guarantees. And, there really aren't any tests that will show if any microscopic disease might still exist or if any rogue cells got away somewhere, etc. . . Based on your pathology, it's lower risk, and probably won't be a problem. There is no 100% guarantee, but maybe it's 95% or 96% or 97%. Might be good to also get 2nd opinion on the pathology. Lymph node biopsy, scans, etc. . would not be indicated for a 0.3mm level II.
-
- April 4, 2013 at 1:29 pm
As the other poster stated, you risk is small. The reason you only had a WLE and nothing else is that is the standard of care for all stage I lesions. There are no blood tests specific for microscopic melanoma. Scans don't pick up tumors or melanoma cells at this level either. You've had the same care any other stage I patient typically gets. For example, I was originally diagnosed at age 29 with a lesion .58mm deep – basically twice as deep as yours. That was 21 years ago. All I had was the WLE surgery. It was all that was needed. Oh, I forgot to mention ulceration. Ulceration is something that has to be viewed at the microscopic level. They determine if the epidermis is intact. So just because a lesion bleeds does not mean it is ulcerated. And if a report doesn't mention it, it means it wasn't seen.
You have a very low risk lesion. It's not easy getting over the idea of "cancer" when you basically have a very good prognosis. The two are contradictory. There are never any guarantees but the best thing you can do is pay attention to your body. Watch for things that change. Most likely you will never deal with melanoma again, but it always pays to be vigilant.
Best wishes,
Janner
-
- April 4, 2013 at 1:29 pm
As the other poster stated, you risk is small. The reason you only had a WLE and nothing else is that is the standard of care for all stage I lesions. There are no blood tests specific for microscopic melanoma. Scans don't pick up tumors or melanoma cells at this level either. You've had the same care any other stage I patient typically gets. For example, I was originally diagnosed at age 29 with a lesion .58mm deep – basically twice as deep as yours. That was 21 years ago. All I had was the WLE surgery. It was all that was needed. Oh, I forgot to mention ulceration. Ulceration is something that has to be viewed at the microscopic level. They determine if the epidermis is intact. So just because a lesion bleeds does not mean it is ulcerated. And if a report doesn't mention it, it means it wasn't seen.
You have a very low risk lesion. It's not easy getting over the idea of "cancer" when you basically have a very good prognosis. The two are contradictory. There are never any guarantees but the best thing you can do is pay attention to your body. Watch for things that change. Most likely you will never deal with melanoma again, but it always pays to be vigilant.
Best wishes,
Janner
-
- April 4, 2013 at 1:29 pm
As the other poster stated, you risk is small. The reason you only had a WLE and nothing else is that is the standard of care for all stage I lesions. There are no blood tests specific for microscopic melanoma. Scans don't pick up tumors or melanoma cells at this level either. You've had the same care any other stage I patient typically gets. For example, I was originally diagnosed at age 29 with a lesion .58mm deep – basically twice as deep as yours. That was 21 years ago. All I had was the WLE surgery. It was all that was needed. Oh, I forgot to mention ulceration. Ulceration is something that has to be viewed at the microscopic level. They determine if the epidermis is intact. So just because a lesion bleeds does not mean it is ulcerated. And if a report doesn't mention it, it means it wasn't seen.
You have a very low risk lesion. It's not easy getting over the idea of "cancer" when you basically have a very good prognosis. The two are contradictory. There are never any guarantees but the best thing you can do is pay attention to your body. Watch for things that change. Most likely you will never deal with melanoma again, but it always pays to be vigilant.
Best wishes,
Janner
-
Tagged: cutaneous melanoma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.