› Forums › General Melanoma Community › dysplastic mole syndrome
- This topic has 36 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 4 months ago by
parkmk80.
- Post
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:53 am
how many moles/atypical moles do people normally have, when they are diagnosed with atypical mole syndrome? i am reading mixed info online. thx!
how many moles/atypical moles do people normally have, when they are diagnosed with atypical mole syndrome? i am reading mixed info online. thx!
- Replies
-
-
- April 5, 2013 at 2:47 pm
I've never seen "official" stats either. Some say over 50 atypical moles, some say over 100 atypical moles. I think that if you tend to have "a lot" of moles and most of them look dysplastic or atyipcal, you can probably say you have the syndrome. Of course, that's just my layman's conclusion and not anything official. Most of my moles that were biopsied were atypical, but I probably only have max 30 atypical looking moles on my body. I don't qualify.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 2:47 pm
I've never seen "official" stats either. Some say over 50 atypical moles, some say over 100 atypical moles. I think that if you tend to have "a lot" of moles and most of them look dysplastic or atyipcal, you can probably say you have the syndrome. Of course, that's just my layman's conclusion and not anything official. Most of my moles that were biopsied were atypical, but I probably only have max 30 atypical looking moles on my body. I don't qualify.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 2:47 pm
I've never seen "official" stats either. Some say over 50 atypical moles, some say over 100 atypical moles. I think that if you tend to have "a lot" of moles and most of them look dysplastic or atyipcal, you can probably say you have the syndrome. Of course, that's just my layman's conclusion and not anything official. Most of my moles that were biopsied were atypical, but I probably only have max 30 atypical looking moles on my body. I don't qualify.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Thank you Janner for the reply! I have 5 confirmed dysplastic moles that were removed..all mild.On my body now I have a lot of teeny freckles, that look just like some stabbed me with a pen..ink spots. But as far as ‘moles’ that are bigger in size, I have about 10-15….and only about 5-10 are slightly irregular in shape, but I’ve had them for yrs. And are all still pretty small in size….maybe 2mm on average.
So when someone speaks of dysplastic mole syndrome and the amount of atypical moles someone has, is that going by to the eye which ones look dysplastic, or does it mean how many have come back with a path report as dysplastic?
Because if the numbers are as high as 50+ atypical moles to be classified as the syndrome, I’m assuming that doesn’t mean the person has had those 50 moles removed….
I hope this makes sense lol please let me know any other input you have Janner 🙂
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Thank you Janner for the reply! I have 5 confirmed dysplastic moles that were removed..all mild.On my body now I have a lot of teeny freckles, that look just like some stabbed me with a pen..ink spots. But as far as ‘moles’ that are bigger in size, I have about 10-15….and only about 5-10 are slightly irregular in shape, but I’ve had them for yrs. And are all still pretty small in size….maybe 2mm on average.
So when someone speaks of dysplastic mole syndrome and the amount of atypical moles someone has, is that going by to the eye which ones look dysplastic, or does it mean how many have come back with a path report as dysplastic?
Because if the numbers are as high as 50+ atypical moles to be classified as the syndrome, I’m assuming that doesn’t mean the person has had those 50 moles removed….
I hope this makes sense lol please let me know any other input you have Janner 🙂
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Thank you Janner for the reply! I have 5 confirmed dysplastic moles that were removed..all mild.On my body now I have a lot of teeny freckles, that look just like some stabbed me with a pen..ink spots. But as far as ‘moles’ that are bigger in size, I have about 10-15….and only about 5-10 are slightly irregular in shape, but I’ve had them for yrs. And are all still pretty small in size….maybe 2mm on average.
So when someone speaks of dysplastic mole syndrome and the amount of atypical moles someone has, is that going by to the eye which ones look dysplastic, or does it mean how many have come back with a path report as dysplastic?
Because if the numbers are as high as 50+ atypical moles to be classified as the syndrome, I’m assuming that doesn’t mean the person has had those 50 moles removed….
I hope this makes sense lol please let me know any other input you have Janner 🙂
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:34 pm
Given your description, I'd say you don't have DNS. DNS usually means dysplastic looking moles with many dysplastic biopsies. Personally, I don't even consider mildly dystplastic in the group for DNS. It's basically benign. People with DNS have many severely atypical lesions. Many of these people have hundreds of moles all over. I have tons of freckles – large and dark ones on my back (sun areas when younger). I certainly have more than 15-20 moles, some large, some small, but all in all most of them don't qualify for atyipcal looking. I'm thinking larger, oddly shaped and all the rest and it really doesn't sound like you're in that category at all. Officially, you'd have to get your doctor to tell you for sure, but your seem to be worlds apart from the people with confirmed DNS.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:34 pm
Given your description, I'd say you don't have DNS. DNS usually means dysplastic looking moles with many dysplastic biopsies. Personally, I don't even consider mildly dystplastic in the group for DNS. It's basically benign. People with DNS have many severely atypical lesions. Many of these people have hundreds of moles all over. I have tons of freckles – large and dark ones on my back (sun areas when younger). I certainly have more than 15-20 moles, some large, some small, but all in all most of them don't qualify for atyipcal looking. I'm thinking larger, oddly shaped and all the rest and it really doesn't sound like you're in that category at all. Officially, you'd have to get your doctor to tell you for sure, but your seem to be worlds apart from the people with confirmed DNS.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 4:34 pm
Given your description, I'd say you don't have DNS. DNS usually means dysplastic looking moles with many dysplastic biopsies. Personally, I don't even consider mildly dystplastic in the group for DNS. It's basically benign. People with DNS have many severely atypical lesions. Many of these people have hundreds of moles all over. I have tons of freckles – large and dark ones on my back (sun areas when younger). I certainly have more than 15-20 moles, some large, some small, but all in all most of them don't qualify for atyipcal looking. I'm thinking larger, oddly shaped and all the rest and it really doesn't sound like you're in that category at all. Officially, you'd have to get your doctor to tell you for sure, but your seem to be worlds apart from the people with confirmed DNS.
-
- April 5, 2013 at 5:38 pm
Janner are you educated about statistics for melanoma risk? (Percentage or 1 in however many people)What’s the risk for the general population? I read somewhere its about 2%?!?!
And is there guidelines as to depending how many dysplastic you have, the more the risk goes up? I also read somewhere if you have more than 10 dysplastic, your risk is 12 times higher than general population. That seems a bit high to me, but maybe it’s true. And I don’t know how reliable some websites are for information.
Do you know any reliable ones with accurate info?
-
- April 5, 2013 at 7:21 pm
I don't have any reliable numbers for you. Please remember the risks you quote are "relative risks" and not cumulative. So if you have red hair, your relative risk is 7% (or something like that). But again, your mildly atypical lesions really do not qualify as dysplastic in the sense you are quoting. So just because you've had a few mildly atypical lesions really doesn't increase your risk. Severely atypical, certainly. Many docs don't even re-excise mildly atypical lesions because they consider them benign. Severely atypical lesions get 5mm margins. Worlds of difference.
I used to have some stats, but it is hard to keep up on stuff like that. Most of it is pretty pointless. Living in high altitude sunny Utah, I am 80 times more likely than someone in NYC to get melanoma. So what? I also have reddish hair and freckles and burn. Maybe a 8% relative risk. But you can't just add up these relatives risks and get anything useful. The risks aren't "cummulative".
The real key is to just be aware of your body and watch for change. Don't sweat the statistics. You aren't one. Just monitor your body and that will give you a headstart on most everyone!
-
- April 7, 2013 at 6:52 pm
I’m just really confused by all the false info that’s online. I have had 5 confirmed mild atypical, but really nonevof them looked all that suspicious. Even the dr looking at them by eye, didn’t have a worry about them. It was me who insisted they be removed. From what I read, dysplastic moles are sometimes referred to as the way they look. But mine are dysplastic only under microscope. So my questions are:Because mine were ‘mild’, is that why they didn’t look bad? If they were moderate or severe, would they look more suspicious?
And secondly, do moles grow dysplastic from the time they appear on skin? Or do they start normal and have changes to turn them dysplastic?
-
- April 7, 2013 at 6:52 pm
I’m just really confused by all the false info that’s online. I have had 5 confirmed mild atypical, but really nonevof them looked all that suspicious. Even the dr looking at them by eye, didn’t have a worry about them. It was me who insisted they be removed. From what I read, dysplastic moles are sometimes referred to as the way they look. But mine are dysplastic only under microscope. So my questions are:Because mine were ‘mild’, is that why they didn’t look bad? If they were moderate or severe, would they look more suspicious?
And secondly, do moles grow dysplastic from the time they appear on skin? Or do they start normal and have changes to turn them dysplastic?
-
- April 7, 2013 at 6:52 pm
I’m just really confused by all the false info that’s online. I have had 5 confirmed mild atypical, but really nonevof them looked all that suspicious. Even the dr looking at them by eye, didn’t have a worry about them. It was me who insisted they be removed. From what I read, dysplastic moles are sometimes referred to as the way they look. But mine are dysplastic only under microscope. So my questions are:Because mine were ‘mild’, is that why they didn’t look bad? If they were moderate or severe, would they look more suspicious?
And secondly, do moles grow dysplastic from the time they appear on skin? Or do they start normal and have changes to turn them dysplastic?
-
- April 5, 2013 at 7:21 pm
I don't have any reliable numbers for you. Please remember the risks you quote are "relative risks" and not cumulative. So if you have red hair, your relative risk is 7% (or something like that). But again, your mildly atypical lesions really do not qualify as dysplastic in the sense you are quoting. So just because you've had a few mildly atypical lesions really doesn't increase your risk. Severely atypical, certainly. Many docs don't even re-excise mildly atypical lesions because they consider them benign. Severely atypical lesions get 5mm margins. Worlds of difference.
I used to have some stats, but it is hard to keep up on stuff like that. Most of it is pretty pointless. Living in high altitude sunny Utah, I am 80 times more likely than someone in NYC to get melanoma. So what? I also have reddish hair and freckles and burn. Maybe a 8% relative risk. But you can't just add up these relatives risks and get anything useful. The risks aren't "cummulative".
The real key is to just be aware of your body and watch for change. Don't sweat the statistics. You aren't one. Just monitor your body and that will give you a headstart on most everyone!
-
- April 5, 2013 at 7:21 pm
I don't have any reliable numbers for you. Please remember the risks you quote are "relative risks" and not cumulative. So if you have red hair, your relative risk is 7% (or something like that). But again, your mildly atypical lesions really do not qualify as dysplastic in the sense you are quoting. So just because you've had a few mildly atypical lesions really doesn't increase your risk. Severely atypical, certainly. Many docs don't even re-excise mildly atypical lesions because they consider them benign. Severely atypical lesions get 5mm margins. Worlds of difference.
I used to have some stats, but it is hard to keep up on stuff like that. Most of it is pretty pointless. Living in high altitude sunny Utah, I am 80 times more likely than someone in NYC to get melanoma. So what? I also have reddish hair and freckles and burn. Maybe a 8% relative risk. But you can't just add up these relatives risks and get anything useful. The risks aren't "cummulative".
The real key is to just be aware of your body and watch for change. Don't sweat the statistics. You aren't one. Just monitor your body and that will give you a headstart on most everyone!
-
- April 5, 2013 at 5:38 pm
Janner are you educated about statistics for melanoma risk? (Percentage or 1 in however many people)What’s the risk for the general population? I read somewhere its about 2%?!?!
And is there guidelines as to depending how many dysplastic you have, the more the risk goes up? I also read somewhere if you have more than 10 dysplastic, your risk is 12 times higher than general population. That seems a bit high to me, but maybe it’s true. And I don’t know how reliable some websites are for information.
Do you know any reliable ones with accurate info?
-
- April 5, 2013 at 5:38 pm
Janner are you educated about statistics for melanoma risk? (Percentage or 1 in however many people)What’s the risk for the general population? I read somewhere its about 2%?!?!
And is there guidelines as to depending how many dysplastic you have, the more the risk goes up? I also read somewhere if you have more than 10 dysplastic, your risk is 12 times higher than general population. That seems a bit high to me, but maybe it’s true. And I don’t know how reliable some websites are for information.
Do you know any reliable ones with accurate info?
-
- April 7, 2013 at 9:34 pm
mildly atypical is hardly anything to be concerned about – my guess is if they biopsied everything on my body they would all be mildly atypical. . that's just what my body makes. . odds are none of them would become anything more
-
- April 22, 2013 at 9:43 pm
I have hundreds of dystplastic moles. Atleast 20 biopsies. Four biopsies were moderate (the rest were mild) and my derm told me they were my most "normal" looking moles and he took them off only after I insisted, because they were very dark compared to all my other ones. I have dysplastic nevus syndrome.
-
- April 22, 2013 at 9:43 pm
I have hundreds of dystplastic moles. Atleast 20 biopsies. Four biopsies were moderate (the rest were mild) and my derm told me they were my most "normal" looking moles and he took them off only after I insisted, because they were very dark compared to all my other ones. I have dysplastic nevus syndrome.
-
- April 22, 2013 at 11:37 pm
Even though they are dysplastic they are still benign. Mostly they are just markers for melanoma. It tells the dr that this person has a higher chance of getting melanoma. It's scary as hell seeing them all over my body. In your case you shouldn't worry so much. Most people have dysplastic naevi. If you would feel better have your derm remove them but if they are benign (which ALL dysplastic moles are) then just keep an eye on them. I am always living in fear my derm is missing something. I have seen 3 different derms. I still continue to search for the best one for me.
-
- April 22, 2013 at 11:37 pm
Even though they are dysplastic they are still benign. Mostly they are just markers for melanoma. It tells the dr that this person has a higher chance of getting melanoma. It's scary as hell seeing them all over my body. In your case you shouldn't worry so much. Most people have dysplastic naevi. If you would feel better have your derm remove them but if they are benign (which ALL dysplastic moles are) then just keep an eye on them. I am always living in fear my derm is missing something. I have seen 3 different derms. I still continue to search for the best one for me.
-
- April 22, 2013 at 11:37 pm
Even though they are dysplastic they are still benign. Mostly they are just markers for melanoma. It tells the dr that this person has a higher chance of getting melanoma. It's scary as hell seeing them all over my body. In your case you shouldn't worry so much. Most people have dysplastic naevi. If you would feel better have your derm remove them but if they are benign (which ALL dysplastic moles are) then just keep an eye on them. I am always living in fear my derm is missing something. I have seen 3 different derms. I still continue to search for the best one for me.
-
- April 22, 2013 at 9:43 pm
I have hundreds of dystplastic moles. Atleast 20 biopsies. Four biopsies were moderate (the rest were mild) and my derm told me they were my most "normal" looking moles and he took them off only after I insisted, because they were very dark compared to all my other ones. I have dysplastic nevus syndrome.
-
Tagged: cutaneous melanoma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.