MRF-Logo2019-Horizontal-RGB
jodaro
REGISTER
The information on this site is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Content within the patient forum is user-generated and has not been reviewed by medical professionals. Other sections of the Melanoma Research Foundation website include information that has been reviewed by medical professionals as appropriate. All medical decisions should be made in consultation with your doctor or other qualified medical professional.

jodaro

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 11 reply threads
1 2
  • Replies
      • April 14, 2016 at 8:18 pm
      jodaro
      Participant

        Thanks for posting, very interesting. The Menzies method page also has a lot of great information about lesion features as well.

        While reading the first article this one from last month popped into the Recommended Reading box: http://www.cancernetwork.com/melanoma/number-moles-not-always-related-likelihood-melanoma

        Especially interesting to those of us with a bunch of moles.

         

        • April 14, 2016 at 8:18 pm
        jodaro
        Participant

          Thanks for posting, very interesting. The Menzies method page also has a lot of great information about lesion features as well.

          While reading the first article this one from last month popped into the Recommended Reading box: http://www.cancernetwork.com/melanoma/number-moles-not-always-related-likelihood-melanoma

          Especially interesting to those of us with a bunch of moles.

           

          • April 14, 2016 at 8:18 pm
          jodaro
          Participant

            Thanks for posting, very interesting. The Menzies method page also has a lot of great information about lesion features as well.

            While reading the first article this one from last month popped into the Recommended Reading box: http://www.cancernetwork.com/melanoma/number-moles-not-always-related-likelihood-melanoma

            Especially interesting to those of us with a bunch of moles.

             

            • March 22, 2016 at 9:00 pm
            jodaro
            Participant

              Sorry, meant to also ask … what's next? It is it reasonable to just continue to shave these guys off and see what's in there? If I have, say, 10 moles that look somewhat suspicious, but have had 8 biopsied and only one was melanoma … does that mean anything? Does taking further diagnostic steps make any sense, or is that excessive at this point? The doctor did do an abdominal and lymph node palpation exam and said both felt normal. 

              • March 22, 2016 at 9:00 pm
              jodaro
              Participant

                Sorry, meant to also ask … what's next? It is it reasonable to just continue to shave these guys off and see what's in there? If I have, say, 10 moles that look somewhat suspicious, but have had 8 biopsied and only one was melanoma … does that mean anything? Does taking further diagnostic steps make any sense, or is that excessive at this point? The doctor did do an abdominal and lymph node palpation exam and said both felt normal. 

                • March 22, 2016 at 9:00 pm
                jodaro
                Participant

                  Sorry, meant to also ask … what's next? It is it reasonable to just continue to shave these guys off and see what's in there? If I have, say, 10 moles that look somewhat suspicious, but have had 8 biopsied and only one was melanoma … does that mean anything? Does taking further diagnostic steps make any sense, or is that excessive at this point? The doctor did do an abdominal and lymph node palpation exam and said both felt normal. 

                  • March 10, 2016 at 9:55 pm
                  jodaro
                  Participant

                    Based on my similar experience (.75mm, Stage 1b upper back/neck area) late last year and subsequent frantic Googling, it sounds like .76mm or less with lower mitotic rate doesn't indicate a SLNB, so your doctor probably did the right thing.

                    Good to hear that test shows you as low risk. I haven't done anything like that yet, but I have a checkup appointment soon so I'll bring it up.

                    • March 10, 2016 at 9:55 pm
                    jodaro
                    Participant

                      Based on my similar experience (.75mm, Stage 1b upper back/neck area) late last year and subsequent frantic Googling, it sounds like .76mm or less with lower mitotic rate doesn't indicate a SLNB, so your doctor probably did the right thing.

                      Good to hear that test shows you as low risk. I haven't done anything like that yet, but I have a checkup appointment soon so I'll bring it up.

                      • March 10, 2016 at 9:55 pm
                      jodaro
                      Participant

                        Based on my similar experience (.75mm, Stage 1b upper back/neck area) late last year and subsequent frantic Googling, it sounds like .76mm or less with lower mitotic rate doesn't indicate a SLNB, so your doctor probably did the right thing.

                        Good to hear that test shows you as low risk. I haven't done anything like that yet, but I have a checkup appointment soon so I'll bring it up.

                        • January 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm
                        jodaro
                        Participant

                          From my understanding the SLNB isn't typically indicated for tumors less than 1mm, so presumably because the initial biopsy only showed .66mm, it wasn't done with the second because the depth wasn't known to be/expected to be greater than 1mm. Just a guess.

                          The SLNB is done to determine if any cancer cells from the melanoma are present in the lymph nodes, so yes, it is a diagnostic procedure to determine whether the cancer has spread, but no, they don't know that yet simply based on the tumor itself.

                          Lots more info here: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/diagnosis-staging/staging/sentinel-node-biopsy-fact-sheet

                          • January 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm
                          jodaro
                          Participant

                            From my understanding the SLNB isn't typically indicated for tumors less than 1mm, so presumably because the initial biopsy only showed .66mm, it wasn't done with the second because the depth wasn't known to be/expected to be greater than 1mm. Just a guess.

                            The SLNB is done to determine if any cancer cells from the melanoma are present in the lymph nodes, so yes, it is a diagnostic procedure to determine whether the cancer has spread, but no, they don't know that yet simply based on the tumor itself.

                            Lots more info here: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/diagnosis-staging/staging/sentinel-node-biopsy-fact-sheet

                            • January 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm
                            jodaro
                            Participant

                              From my understanding the SLNB isn't typically indicated for tumors less than 1mm, so presumably because the initial biopsy only showed .66mm, it wasn't done with the second because the depth wasn't known to be/expected to be greater than 1mm. Just a guess.

                              The SLNB is done to determine if any cancer cells from the melanoma are present in the lymph nodes, so yes, it is a diagnostic procedure to determine whether the cancer has spread, but no, they don't know that yet simply based on the tumor itself.

                              Lots more info here: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/diagnosis-staging/staging/sentinel-node-biopsy-fact-sheet

                              • April 14, 2016 at 8:14 pm
                              jodaro
                              Participant

                                See the second link in the original post: http://www.dermoscopy.org/consensus/2c.asp

                                • April 14, 2016 at 8:14 pm
                                jodaro
                                Participant

                                  See the second link in the original post: http://www.dermoscopy.org/consensus/2c.asp

                                  • April 14, 2016 at 8:14 pm
                                  jodaro
                                  Participant

                                    See the second link in the original post: http://www.dermoscopy.org/consensus/2c.asp

                                Viewing 11 reply threads
                                1 2
                                About the MRF Patient Forum

                                The MRF Patient Forum is the oldest and largest online community of people affected by melanoma. It is designed to provide peer support and information to caregivers, patients, family and friends. There is no better place to discuss different parts of your journey with this cancer and find the friends and support resources to make that journey more bearable.

                                The information on the forum is open and accessible to everyone. To add a new topic or to post a reply, you must be a registered user. Please note that you will be able to post both topics and replies anonymously even though you are logged in. All posts must abide by MRF posting policies.

                                Popular Topics