Never say that to a woman diagnosed with cancer who has a young child. We already know that, thanks. But my kid is a teenager now so I’m very lucky. |
Really? Hmm, now I'm wondering if I should request the same. I've been getting the 3D mammograms for my dense tissue. |
An MRI with contrast dye is best. I get one, along with a mammogram and ultrasound, every year. My breasts are very dense as well and, even though mammograms don't cause me any discomfort, I've been told that mammograms aren't great for seeing anything in dense breasts. My MRIs have twice detected something that the mammogram missed completely. (The ultrasound missed one of them). I'm high risk so I've been screened very carefully since I turned 30. |
thank you for sharing. sometimes beyond all the snipe and viper, DCUM comes through with gems such as this. much appreciative for this information. |
I just went looking for the answer to your very good question. Looks like the reason is, mammograms can catch very small calcifications (earliest signs of cancer), ultrasounds can’t. But ultrasounds can distinguish between simple cysts and cancers, which mammograms can’t. Hence their use as a follow-up tool. |
NP. Why do you mention the covid vax? Is there a correlation? |
I talked to a friend's friend, who also has BC and she swears that she got it after her two covid vax......who knows....I got five Pfizers vaxs... |
Didn’t she have breast enhancements? Perhaps why mammogram didn’t catch it. |
Fake news |
I'll read the article. I'm curious what led her to be checked again two months later.
I didn't realize mammograms missed breast cancer. |
They miss 20% of breast cancers. Mammograms have difficulty detecting cancer if you have dense breasts. It can also be hard to detect depending on the type of breast cancer. Lobular breast cancer grows in long strands, so it is difficult to spot with a mammo, MRIs are more accurate for anyone high risk. |
It's hard to wrap my brain around Olivia's story. Why would you have your first screening at 43 if you've always gone to the doctors and were high risk? I've been in enhanced surveillance since I was 25 even though my mom was 44 when she was diagnosed. They take it seriously and offer MRI every 6 months. Then you move to alternating MRI and mammogram in your 30's. Anyone with even one relative with breast cancer would have had a first screening way before 40. My assessment score is 10 points lower than Olivia's and I know I'd be sent packing with a negative mammogram even with my risks. What on earth made her number increase by that much? I know it's not having a baby at 40 because my sister had her child at 40 and her score isn't as high as Olivia's either even with all of our other risk factors. They might have kept my already existing screening schedule but they wouldn't order an urgent MRI after a clear mammogram and negative BRCA test.
I have too much direct experience with this to not ask these questions. How does someone with the highest assessment score I've personally seen have her first screening as late as 43? Why would anyone keep pursuing a diagnosis after a negative BRCA test and negative mammogram? It doesn't make any sense. |
the most surprising thing to me in her story is that the mri missed a tangerine-size tumor. not surprising the mammogram missed it unfortunately, but for the mri after to have missed this, and not to be found until mastectomy surgery? |
That’s highly unusual. MRIs are more likely to miss something tiny - not tangerine-sized. Unless it was lobular. |