Posts by Angela Wright

Emily Hayes said:Thanks. That clears things up a bit. We just got the referral for a CT scan. Honestly, I’m feeling pretty lost in all of this—which isn't like me at all, so it makes it even harder to deal with. 🙂
I've been reading that some machines are much higher quality than others and that using the better equipment really matters. This might sound like a silly question, but is a standard CT performed on the same machine used for a PET-CT? I read that the Mayo Clinic recently got a new PET-CT scanner, but I don't know if that actually helps me if their regular CT machine is still ten years old (like, with fewer slices or something).

A PET-CT is a compact, integrated unit that combines both a PET and a CT scanner into one, just like I mentioned before.
To be blunt, given how high those markers are and with that suspicious spot on the liver and that questionable lymph node, I’d personally push for the PET-CT. I don't quite get why anyone would opt for just a standard CT when it's going to struggle to uncover anything new... but hey, I'm no doctor. 🤷
Ask the doctor about the PET-CT and why it isn't being considered right now given the circumstances. It sucks that you can't just jump straight to a PET-CT if the CT doesn't show anything definitive, mostly because of the radiation dose involved. Just ask them straight out if they're trying to cut costs; if they are, look into paying for it privately yourselves.

Amanda Wells75 said:Angela Wright, thanks so much for all the info.
I have one more question. How many rounds of chemo do they typically give before the markers hit a certain level or normalize—I think I heard someone mention the number six—before they take a break and then start again?
We’ll just have to see how things play out.
Mom went in for her fourth round yesterday, and I’m really hoping—actually, I’m banking on it—that those marker numbers keep dropping.

Best,
Mary

There’s a set treatment protocol, but doctors also monitor the patient's overall status and their specific markers. It’s highly individualized depending on the specific drug being used, but one thing is absolute: if at any point the patient starts showing negative clinical signs—like severe side effects or crashing blood counts—they pull them off the therapy immediately. The worst-case scenario is when the treatment is actually working, but the body simply can't take the hit from the side effects anymore.

I forgot to ask:
given the size of the tumor, it feels like your mom might have been dealing with this for a while. How did she actually catch it in the first place?

Jose Howard24 said:Hey there,

Even though this thread hasn't seen any action in ages, I've got a question: how did you eventually sort this out? My dad's been wrestling with the exact same thing for ten days now. He’s tried everything from herbal teas to Largactil... that helped a bit (he can sleep through the night), and while things have calmed down during the day, the issue is still hanging around.

Check out this interesting article: City-srbija

Finally managed to grab a moment to sit down.
It’s still anyone's guess whether Mom actually has liver metastasis or not. I have this nagging feeling that the MSCT with contrast is a much more reliable diagnostic tool than an ultrasound, but on the bright side, the ultrasound didn't show any enlargement or any suspicious new spots.
Regarding the classification, looking at the pathology report under the TNM system, the tumor itself was quite large. They couldn't check the lymph nodes, so they couldn't definitively confirm if there's metastasis there either, but they still labeled it as metastatic carcinoma because it spread into the omentum.
As for markers, Ca 15-3 is used in ovarian cancer too. In breast cancer, when those levels spike, it usually points toward potential spread to the bones or the liver—I'm just not entirely sure if the same logic applies when dealing with ovarian cancer.

Amanda Wells75 said:...

Basically, my mom was diagnosed with metastatic disease right out of the gate because the cancer had already spread to the omentum—the abdominal lining.

I’ve already laid it all out for you without sugarcoating a single thing. Given how high those markers are, I’m worried there’s still a focal point somewhere in her body. Whether it's this specific node or something else entirely, I honestly can't say for sure. In my opinion, she needs more intensive imaging—likely a PET-CT and definitely a bone scan.
The silver lining is that she is currently on treatment, and those marker levels, even though they are incredibly high, have finally started to trend downward.
Look, I told you straight up: look into clinical trials immediately. This is a brutal disease, and once you hit the wall where standard options run dry, things get desperate fast.

I'll follow up with more info regarding the markers and classification later; I have to run and grab some groceries now so I can't stay on.
Hang in there, stay strong!

I’m quoting a beautiful post from one of our members over on the breast cancer thread. To me, she hit the nail on the head regarding the core essence of this whole cancer journey—facing it head-on and actually winning the fight. I really hope many people find some guidance here on how to maintain a healthy mindset toward the problem and ultimately beat it. 🙂

neenah1 said:So, in my case, menopause kicked in a little earlier than expected. It caught me off guard, and honestly, I was pretty bummed out about the loss; I felt old 😁 (though, hey, there are perks to that, haha), but now I'm actually glad because it puts me in a different, somewhat better position. Cancer in postmenopausal women tends to behave differently—let's just say it spreads slower, usually has a lower Ki-67, is more often estrogen-dependent, and is HER2 negative, which essentially means a better prognosis overall.
I'm taking Femara since it's an aromatase inhibitor prescribed for women in postmenopause. To my absolute delight, I haven't had any side effects, and I've been on it for three months now. I prepared myself for anything, though. 🤷
Now, I feel like my body actually protected me by doing this; everything just aligned perfectly... 🙂

Anyway, after digging through all the reading material—both the medical texts and the more anecdotal stuff—my takeaway is that while a low Ki might be linked to a better prognosis, it also implies a potentially weaker response to chemotherapy. So, to you and every other woman fighting breast cancer with high values: please know that this actually means chemo will likely work better for you; you have a highly effective weapon at your disposal. 👍
The same goes for HER2 positive cases—it means there is a specific, effective treatment available for those situations.

Personally, Tash, I really admire how you talk about all these treatment hurdles with such lightness and grace. If I were in your shoes, I don't know if I’d have the strength to push through it all, especially since I used to lean much more heavily on alternative treatments in the past. Luckily, I’m a thorough and analytical person; I don't take things at face value and I base my conclusions on facts and common sense. That’s why I went through conventional treatment, though I also spent a small fortune on various alternative therapies—I could probably write a novel about it...
It specifically gives me the chills when I hear people ranting about "Big Pharma" and the supposed "cancer industry," while those very same people are aggressively charging massive amounts for their own "cures," guides, pills, and whatnot (all while steering people away from the standard medical therapies that could actually save their lives in that moment).

After everything I've experienced and all the articles and books I've read—from the professional journals to the sensationalist rags—my conclusion is simple: definitely go through the conventional treatment first. After that, eliminate potential causes as much as you can control. Maintaining a positive attitude is vital, if not absolutely crucial. Change your diet (go organic with plenty of fruits and veggies; personally, I cut out animal proteins), get moving with exercise, and eventually, maybe consider some preventive alternative steps. (I personally found something that makes sense to me, but I won't name names or advertise it because that’s just my own impression and conclusion—I’m willing to risk my own money, but I won't take responsibility for anyone else).
Look, my philosophy is simple: focus on treatment first, then move toward prevention—and I mean for the rest of your life. Cancer is a heavy hitter, no doubt, but it isn't an unbeatable foe.

And honestly? I didn't view my diagnosis as some mortal enemy out to get me. Instead, I saw it as a massive red flag from my own body—a desperate plea to stop everything, break those old cycles, and finally listen. I had been dealing with an insane amount of stress, but since then, I’ve completely overhauled how I react to things and shifted my priorities. It might sound bizarre to anyone listening, but this diagnosis actually added a whole new dimension to my life; I can genuinely say I’m living with more quality and satisfaction now than ever before.
Sorry if this is a bit of a long read, but I figured sharing my experience might help someone out. 🙂

Hang in there, ladies. Sandra, I'm thinking of you specifically. 👍 🙂

One more thing—I brought two sets of button-up pajamas with me, but they turned out to be totally useless. The girl in the bed next to me (this was her third time being admitted to the hospital) was just wearing a wide-strap tank top, sort of like a sports bra paired with a tracksuit top and matching bottoms. It was perfectly fine, so I ended up asking them to bring me a tracksuit too. To give you some context, she had undergone a mastectomy on one breast and then had a reconstruction on the other using silicone, after previously having a mastectomy that required a latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction... I hope you catch my drift.

Emily Hayes said:I assume you all probably know this already, but I’m going to ask anyway (even if I sound silly). What’s the actual difference between MSCT and PET/CT? I’ve been looking at the instructions, googling, and checking where to book my appointment, and I’m totally confused because some places list MSCT, some just say CT, and others say PET/CT. Thanks.

Think of it this way: MSCT—or just CT for short—is basically multi-slice computed tomography. It's one specific type of imaging technology.
PET-CT, on the other hand, is a hybrid machine that combines two different technologies: PET (Positron Emission Tomography) and CT. While the CT handles the structure, the PET part tracks metabolic activity within the tissue. By merging them, you get a much more comprehensive map of what's actually happening inside the body.

In terms of raw diagnostic power, a PET-CT is definitely a more precise tool than a standard CT scan alone. That said, it really comes down to the specific goal of the scan; sometimes a simple CT provides everything a doctor needs to monitor or diagnose a condition. Ultimately, the treating physician is the best person to decide which tool is right for the job.

Amanda Wells75 said:Angela Wright, thanks so much for getting back to me.
With markers this high and the disease being at this stage, is it actually possible for the illness to go into remission and for those markers to return to normal levels? Or is that just wishful thinking? I need to know if there's any real hope for a period of stability.

It’s absolutely possible. Remission can happen, provided you hit the right drug that her body actually responds to. The catch here is that from what I gather, Mom is already on her second line of therapy, and since her markers are skyrocketing, it's clear she isn't responding to the current treatment. That’s a major red flag. She needs more comprehensive testing immediately—a bone scan is mandatory, along with an MRI or a PET-CT. Honestly, I think it's time to start hunting for clinical trials instead of sitting around waiting for things to spiral out of control. My internal alarm bells are ringing loud and clear on this one.
You can find open ovarian cancer studies right here: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/resul...ncer&recr=Open
The site has a world map where you can see exactly where open studies are located and click on them for details. There isn't anything suitable available locally right now, but there are options in neighboring countries.

Just let me know the exact diagnosis (it’ll be on the pathology report), whether she has the BRCA mutation, and everything she’s received for chemo so far, including the dosages.

Amanda Wells75 said:The lymph node didn't show up on the last ultrasound. But she mentioned that this time, the doctor really took her time to do a thorough exam. Before that, she had one appointment where the doctor barely looked at her—it felt like he was in and out in under a minute. So, it really comes down to what they actually caught on that previous scan.

Look, those tumor markers are pretty high...
They'll probably send her in for more intensive imaging, like a CT scan.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be anything serious. Lymph nodes can swell up due to various infections, and for plenty of people, they just stay enlarged for a while. Was the node visible on her last ultrasound? And what are her blood markers looking like?

Amanda Miller69 said:Would it be smart for my husband to get the flu shot given his underlying condition?
Since he needs an abdominal CT scan for his follow-up (which is about two months out), and I remembered how long those appointments take to schedule, should I ask his primary care doctor for the referral now, or does he need a specific recommendation from his oncologist first?

He’s actually feeling decent right now, so he’s under the impression he can stop taking the beta-glucan, but I told him there's absolutely no way we're stopping that.😵

The local clinic will probably suggest it to him... and honestly, if I'm being totally candid, I'm not a fan of those flu shots. My reasoning might not sit well with the medical establishment, but here it is.😁

I only ever got the flu shot once in my entire life, and that year, I caught such a brutal strain of the flu that I was completely wiped out for twenty days straight. I haven't touched a flu vaccine since then, and strangely enough, I haven't been hit by the flu once either.

Maria Fisher46 said:What you’re saying here feels a bit off to me.

Look, I don't get it. Why would anyone bother with a needle biopsy or some invasive puncture if they’re already planning to cut the whole thing out anyway? It seems totally redundant. You just perform the surgery, send the tissue straight to pathology, and call it a day. Why go through the hassle of a biopsy only to start prepping for surgery before you've even seen the results? Honestly, I've never heard of anyone doing it that way. 🤷

Under the latest Medicare guidelines, they’re pushing for as much pre-op testing as possible to be handled through your local primary care clinic. Honestly, I’m a bit lost on what they mean by an "abdominal exam" in this context. Is that just a standard physical, or are we talking about something more specific?

I think you’re all just writing from memory based on something you overheard or skimmed through somewhere, and frankly, it sounds like a massive game of telephone has taken place.

Honestly, when you're dealing with an institution like this, nothing really surprises me anymore. I’ve heard some pretty wild stories about what goes on behind those doors. You can probably get a rough idea of what's actually happening if you know what to look for, but you have to follow the standard medical protocol—start with the initial biopsy and then see how they proceed from there.
So, what’s the deal with this abdominal ultrasound? They want to run markers for colorectal cancer along with everything else? It feels like they’re trying to rule out every single possible thing before they actually get to the point.

Amanda Miller69 said:Does this mean that even though his results show he's in remission, we should just stick to checkups every 3-4 months, or should we just go ahead and test the markers on our own terms?

According to the official guidelines, what she said is the rule...but personally? I’d follow my gut. Look, you know as well as I do that these markers aren't exactly the gold standard for reliability. If it were me, I’d probably be heading in every single month—that’s just how I’m wired 🙂—but when I actually stop to think about it, does it really make sense to get blood drawn every month based on something so fickle? You end up stuck in this constant cycle of anxiety, waiting for results, and if something ticks up even slightly—even if it's still within the normal range—you spiral into total drama, only to find out later it was just a minor infection or a common cold...
...Stick roughly to the guidelines, sure, but if your intuition tells you to go sooner, then go.

You have to learn to step back from all of this and actually live your life, focusing on normal things... honestly, he handled everything incredibly well. My God, after all the complaining he did in the hospital and those infections he went through, I was genuinely worried his immune system would completely give out and everything would flare up again... he’s going to be fine.

Sophia Harris11 said:That’s exactly where the catch lies. It isn’t that she misread the situation; it’s that she went out and got a DNA test... well, let's just say things got complicated. Honestly, it sounds like her husband had his doubts for a reason, and he wasn't exactly buying what she was selling. I actually felt a bit bad for her. She’s a close friend of mine, so when she tried to wrap the whole thing up in pretty little packaging to tell me, I ended up feeling pretty let down—mostly because it seems like the guy’s suspicions were probably justified. That’s why I came here to dig for some answers; I wanted to make sense of it all since it was such a disappointment to hear from someone I trust. On a side note, the kid is five now and perfectly healthy.😒

Honestly, I think the issue stems from her being completely out of the loop. A lot of women act like they're just following the herd—taking everything at face value without a second thought. When they’re pregnant, they hear half a story, spin a wild tale around it, and then run with it instead of actually doing their homework or even just running a quick Google search to find the facts.
You brought up DNA testing when talking about identifying certain diseases, and since those specific screenings are performed by a geneticist, she basically concluded that it functions as its own kind of DNA test.

Of course the kid is healthy—why on earth wouldn't they be? 🤷 Screening tests and amniocentesis are standard procedure for just about every pregnancy, especially when the mother is over 35.

jadetinker85 said:I get you. I’m not positive, but looking at the medical history, it looks like they just flagged it as suspicious and recommended a lumbar puncture. 🤔 Anyway, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens next...

Are we talking a puncture or a biopsy? They already did the puncture, right? So now you're just waiting on the results.

By the way, if it helps you sleep better, most lumps turn out to be benign.

jadetinker85 said:My mom is dealing with this, not me. Her surgeon gave her a report stating the growth is suspicious and needs a biopsy, plus this checklist of everything required before surgery—blood typing, an anesthesia consult, you know the drill. Would a photocopy of that be enough to justify the referrals? Honestly, these local clinic admins act like they just landed on Mars; they claim they’re audited weekly, so they seem terrified of signing off on any single referral. 👎 How do we force a clinic admin to write out all the necessary referrals, even if the biopsy hasn't officially confirmed malignancy yet? We won't have the actual results for another three days.

I see what you mean now. I realized you were talking about her constant trips to the doctor, which is why I phrased it that way. 😁
Look, if the specialist still suspects a biopsy is needed regardless of what the initial puncture shows, the clinic admin is legally obligated to provide those referrals based on the specialist's written request (where they document exactly what needs to be done in the medical history). They have to issue them. If they refuse, file a complaint with Medicare and let them deal with the fallout.
Nothing life-altering is going to happen in three days regarding her condition. Just hang tight until you get the results and see what the specialist actually recommends.

It’s not a DNA test. He was almost certainly looking for screening results, likely suggesting genetic amniocentesis—which is standard practice for any pregnant woman over 35 here in the States. Those tests help determine the risk level for various genetic anomalies, like Down syndrome or Edwards syndrome. But even then, it’s never a 100% guarantee; it just points to a statistical probability.
She clearly misunderstood the whole "DNA" aspect, which explains why she phrased things that way when talking to you. Real DNA testing is an expensive endeavor and isn't part of the standard prenatal care protocol for most women.
BTW, autism isn't something you can just predict through these kinds of screenings. In fact, a formal diagnosis often doesn't even happen until a child hits five years old.

jadetinker85 said:This is awful. My mom had a biopsy today for a 2 cm lump in her breast. The doctor at the Tumor Clinic told her all these lumps need to be removed and gave us a list of all the tests she needs to get done. But our primary care doctor won't give her a single referral for anything except the initial biopsy, and now she refuses to issue anything else until the results come back. Can anyone recommend a sane primary care doctor in Washington, D.C., who would actually provide the referrals needed before surgery?

Tell her to have the doctor write down the specific reason why they are refusing to issue the referral. Take that documentation straight to Medicare and let’s see how that plays out. It’s entirely possible they are following some strict Medicare guideline they aren't allowed to break—maybe they have to wait for the biopsy results before they are legally permitted to trigger a referral for more testing. They have to have paperwork to justify it. There are so many mindless regulations in this system that you honestly wonder who wrote them; it doesn't feel like it was drafted by someone with medical training, but rather some brainless bureaucrat.
Look, there are plenty of doctors out there, it’s just a question of whether there is space to switch providers, since they have patient quotas they can't exceed.

Usually, at an institute, a specialist might be able to write an internal referral for a procedure. You should check if that's an option, because technically a biopsy is a diagnostic procedure. Another thing is that they often just remove everything right away. It's possible the specialist will eventually need to write the referral for the follow-up exams.

jadetinker85 said:I'm wondering—and I honestly don't know where else to ask—if a biopsy can actually trigger metastases?

From what I understand, it’s possible, though I'm not sure which specific types it applies to; it probably depends on the type and stage of the malignancy. For instance, if a sample is taken poorly and the fluid spills into the surrounding tissue, it could contaminate the area with malignant cells if they are present. There are also certain tumors that become more aggressive and start spreading rapidly just by being disturbed. Take glioblastoma cells, for example—they behave exactly like that, multiplying at an exponential rate.

Have you guys heard about Dr. Zhivkov? This fake doctor is out here peddling hemp oil at Marica's hair salon and scamming people who are seriously ill.
Watch your backs because these kinds of scammers are everywhere! Always double-check everything and don't go taking anything on your own without consulting a real doctor first.