Page 1 of 2

Pathology report

Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:52 pm
by natasha
Please , help me to understand my report.
This is second opinion on my melanoma and again the same.
'' No evidence of vertical growth phase melanoma. Lesion is small and NOT all the features of melanoma present but ,at worst , the appearances could represent an early superficial spreading melanoma , radial growth phase AT WORST.
Diagnosys : SSMelanoma RGP at worst.
Breslow 0.2. ''
Does that mean they are not sure it is melanoma in fact??
Both pathologists said the same - another opinion required - not melanoma clearly. I have done pathology twice. What else can I do?

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 6:06 pm
by Worrywart
If it isn't a melanoma, it is a very severely atypical...so best to treat it as a melanoma and have it excised. Don't let it worry you though, as it says radial growth phase, which is very low risk. Now you know to watch your skin for change and see a derm every 6 mos to every year for skin checks.

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:39 am
by Catherine Poole
Looks to me like a very low risk melanoma.  Who gave you the opinions?
Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation
The MIF Website and Forums are designed for educational purposes only and are not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through this Website should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, you should consult your health care provider.
 

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:13 am
by natasha
Thanks ,Catherine !
One opinion ( first pathology ) was done in Latvia Riga ( Eastern Europe) ,while on holiday .After what England requested samples and second pathology is done in large hospital in Cambridge.
Both pathologists are not sure it is 100% melanoma .
I do not know what to do .to ask for Third opinion is just redicilous , I suppose.

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:25 am
by cohanja
I don't think it's at all ridiculous.  I've had 3 path opinions and probably will get a 4th.  First one was differential diagnosis of in-situ or superficially invasive 1a 0.3mm no mitosis, second report was superficially invasive 1a 0.2mm no mitosis radial growth phase, third report was 1a 0.33mm <1 mitosis vertical growth phase. . . so 3 different path reports with 3 different things within them. . . I'd be curious to see what a 4th would say.

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:28 am
by natasha
Cohanja ! did you do all reports in one country but in defferent hospitals??
In my case both reports are the same - radial growth ,the same depth ,no mitosis ,not sure it is melanoma.
This ' not sure' does not give me to live normal live .This is source of my worries
Did you do path reports in England or usa?

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:34 am
by natasha
Dear Cohanja ! Just another thing I want to tell you.
I think in your case (the same like in mine) risk is very low. And difference in reports is 0.1 mm .
This difference anowhere will not change anything in your medical history ,I mean they will not do SNB even for 0.3 mm depth (at worst in your pathology).
So I suppose you are in the same 3 months checks up as I am.
 

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:39 am
by cohanja
This was in the U.S.  Different hospitals, first 3 all in the same state. . . 4th will probably be a different state.  I guess someone could say what's the difference . . it is what it is and no matter how many reports I get, it won't change what it is or what I'm doing (had WLE and SNB, and now just getting skin exams), but I want to know the facts about my pathology. . is the mitosis 0 or <1 or 1. . is growth phase radial or radial and vertical. . .what is the thickness 0.22, 0.3, 0.33. .  I'd like to know definitively these things.  Don't know I ever will, but not sure how much difference there is anyway among these variations/differences.

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:41 am
by cohanja
Yes, I'm getting skin checks every 3 months.  Actually I did have SNB.  Dr said was not clinically recommended or necessary, but I pushed for it because I knew if I didn't I would regret it later or always wonder.  But, after that was done, then the 3rd path report said dermal mitoses were identified, so I'm glad in hindsight that I did get the SNB done.

Re: Pathology report

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 6:57 am
by natasha
If you even had SNB and it is o'k ,so I would say it is very very low risk.
I am in England and they don't do SNB for less then 0.75 mm.
If you want to have one ,you need to pay and it is thousands pounds.
I did not want to do it in my case anywhere.
I hope and pray ,we ARE the very low risk.