Kinda Confused

The SNB has been around for almost 20 years now and they've had time to figure out who benefits from having it done and for whom it has no clinical benefit.  You are in the latter category.  I don't have any current stats, but stage 1a (used much more often than the T1aN0M0 designation you use) has a survival rate in the high 95+%.  It used to be stage IA encompassed those who had mitosis.  I was diagnosed in 1992 with a stage IA lesion (.58mm/1 mitosis) and that is now considered stage IB.  Stage IA is a more exclusive group, now, with a higher survival rate than previously seen.  Stage 1A designation changed in late 2010 so any stats prior to that don't reflect stage IA as you know it with zero mitosis.   You could have had the SNB done with a negative result – likelihood probably close to 100%.  So you would have had an unnecessary surgery.

You crave certainty, but you can't have that.  Even having a negative SNB does not guarantee someone won't have future spread.  It is an indication at this point in time only.  For most institutions, their cutoff is 1mm for the SNB as being clinically applicable.  Some used to use .76mm.  Either way, you are well beneath that number.   You have an extremely good prognosis and that's what you have to go with.  Dwelling on the very small possibility that something will recur in your case is pointless.  I've had 2 lesions deeper than yours (both stage IB in today's staging) and neither had the SNB.  I'm 11 years out from the deepest.  My .88mm lesion would have been borderline at some institutions for the SNB, but I've never regretted not having it.  I'm still here, still stage IB.  I've learned to live with uncertainty, I guess, and that's what every cancer patient gets to learn how to do.

Best wishes,

Janner

The SNB has been around for almost 20 years now and they've had time to figure out who benefits from having it done and for whom it has no clinical benefit.  You are in the latter category.  I don't have any current stats, but stage 1a (used much more often than the T1aN0M0 designation you use) has a survival rate in the high 95+%.  It used to be stage IA encompassed those who had mitosis.  I was diagnosed in 1992 with a stage IA lesion (.58mm/1 mitosis) and that is now considered stage IB.  Stage IA is a more exclusive group, now, with a higher survival rate than previously seen.  Stage 1A designation changed in late 2010 so any stats prior to that don't reflect stage IA as you know it with zero mitosis.   You could have had the SNB done with a negative result – likelihood probably close to 100%.  So you would have had an unnecessary surgery.

You crave certainty, but you can't have that.  Even having a negative SNB does not guarantee someone won't have future spread.  It is an indication at this point in time only.  For most institutions, their cutoff is 1mm for the SNB as being clinically applicable.  Some used to use .76mm.  Either way, you are well beneath that number.   You have an extremely good prognosis and that's what you have to go with.  Dwelling on the very small possibility that something will recur in your case is pointless.  I've had 2 lesions deeper than yours (both stage IB in today's staging) and neither had the SNB.  I'm 11 years out from the deepest.  My .88mm lesion would have been borderline at some institutions for the SNB, but I've never regretted not having it.  I'm still here, still stage IB.  I've learned to live with uncertainty, I guess, and that's what every cancer patient gets to learn how to do.

Best wishes,

Janner

The SNB has been around for almost 20 years now and they've had time to figure out who benefits from having it done and for whom it has no clinical benefit.  You are in the latter category.  I don't have any current stats, but stage 1a (used much more often than the T1aN0M0 designation you use) has a survival rate in the high 95+%.  It used to be stage IA encompassed those who had mitosis.  I was diagnosed in 1992 with a stage IA lesion (.58mm/1 mitosis) and that is now considered stage IB.  Stage IA is a more exclusive group, now, with a higher survival rate than previously seen.  Stage 1A designation changed in late 2010 so any stats prior to that don't reflect stage IA as you know it with zero mitosis.   You could have had the SNB done with a negative result – likelihood probably close to 100%.  So you would have had an unnecessary surgery.

You crave certainty, but you can't have that.  Even having a negative SNB does not guarantee someone won't have future spread.  It is an indication at this point in time only.  For most institutions, their cutoff is 1mm for the SNB as being clinically applicable.  Some used to use .76mm.  Either way, you are well beneath that number.   You have an extremely good prognosis and that's what you have to go with.  Dwelling on the very small possibility that something will recur in your case is pointless.  I've had 2 lesions deeper than yours (both stage IB in today's staging) and neither had the SNB.  I'm 11 years out from the deepest.  My .88mm lesion would have been borderline at some institutions for the SNB, but I've never regretted not having it.  I'm still here, still stage IB.  I've learned to live with uncertainty, I guess, and that's what every cancer patient gets to learn how to do.

Best wishes,

Janner