Age old question of….Genetic Testing or No?
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.

Age old question of….Genetic Testing or No?

› Forums › General Melanoma Community › Age old question of….Genetic Testing or No?

  • Post
    • April 28, 2016 at 7:52 pm
    m355
    Participant

    I have had 2 MIS and one stage 1a.  Derm said it might be a good idea given my history.  No one in my family has had melanoma, well immediate.  My grandmothers father did. So I guess that counts. I do have alot of atypical moles. I mean it would be good to know if this is genetic but at the same time does that increase my worry even more? I am already a worry wart of this stuff.  indecision

Viewing 8 reply threads
  • Replies
      • April 28, 2016 at 8:02 pm
      Janner
      Participant

      What do you really gain by knowing?  Not much.  You already know you are high risk for other primaries and since you have had melanoma, your family is at higher risk just for that.  Multiple primaries fits the profile unless you have dysplastic nevus syndrome – that's a different type of defect.  But typically you find melanoma in every generation – it doesn't skip.  So your family background doesn't really work.  I have the gene CDKN2A and honestly, there is nothing I do differently because of it.   I only found out because I participated in a clinical trial and wanted to give back to research.  I don't really see the point in knowing.  If there were some treatment advantage to knowing, that would be totally different.  Your mileage may vary.

        • April 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm
        m355
        Participant

        I do make alot of atypical moles that is for sure.  But nothing crazy, crazy are the normal ones that go rogue. My thoughts exactly if there was to ever be a treatment advantage.

        • April 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm
        m355
        Participant

        I do make alot of atypical moles that is for sure.  But nothing crazy, crazy are the normal ones that go rogue. My thoughts exactly if there was to ever be a treatment advantage.

        • April 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm
        m355
        Participant

        I do make alot of atypical moles that is for sure.  But nothing crazy, crazy are the normal ones that go rogue. My thoughts exactly if there was to ever be a treatment advantage.

      • April 28, 2016 at 8:02 pm
      Janner
      Participant

      What do you really gain by knowing?  Not much.  You already know you are high risk for other primaries and since you have had melanoma, your family is at higher risk just for that.  Multiple primaries fits the profile unless you have dysplastic nevus syndrome – that's a different type of defect.  But typically you find melanoma in every generation – it doesn't skip.  So your family background doesn't really work.  I have the gene CDKN2A and honestly, there is nothing I do differently because of it.   I only found out because I participated in a clinical trial and wanted to give back to research.  I don't really see the point in knowing.  If there were some treatment advantage to knowing, that would be totally different.  Your mileage may vary.

      • April 28, 2016 at 8:02 pm
      Janner
      Participant

      What do you really gain by knowing?  Not much.  You already know you are high risk for other primaries and since you have had melanoma, your family is at higher risk just for that.  Multiple primaries fits the profile unless you have dysplastic nevus syndrome – that's a different type of defect.  But typically you find melanoma in every generation – it doesn't skip.  So your family background doesn't really work.  I have the gene CDKN2A and honestly, there is nothing I do differently because of it.   I only found out because I participated in a clinical trial and wanted to give back to research.  I don't really see the point in knowing.  If there were some treatment advantage to knowing, that would be totally different.  Your mileage may vary.

      • April 28, 2016 at 8:21 pm
      Mat
      Participant

      I'm stage IV and had genetic testing done in order to have the report for my kids.  (Turns out, I have no "melanoma" genes, just some unfortunate luck, etc.)  If I wasn't stage IV, I probably would've deferred the testing to a later date given the rapid advances in that area.  Again, the primary motivation being having the info for my kids, not for myself.

      • April 28, 2016 at 8:21 pm
      Mat
      Participant

      I'm stage IV and had genetic testing done in order to have the report for my kids.  (Turns out, I have no "melanoma" genes, just some unfortunate luck, etc.)  If I wasn't stage IV, I probably would've deferred the testing to a later date given the rapid advances in that area.  Again, the primary motivation being having the info for my kids, not for myself.

      • April 28, 2016 at 8:21 pm
      Mat
      Participant

      I'm stage IV and had genetic testing done in order to have the report for my kids.  (Turns out, I have no "melanoma" genes, just some unfortunate luck, etc.)  If I wasn't stage IV, I probably would've deferred the testing to a later date given the rapid advances in that area.  Again, the primary motivation being having the info for my kids, not for myself.

      • April 29, 2016 at 3:41 am
      Charlie S
      Participant

      MIS?? What is that Mission Impossible?

      State your case and say what you mean.

      Fortunately for you I could decipher what you mean.

      One melanoma insitu………………..which is NOT melanoma.

      A one a?  Show me the pathology.

      I get your concern, but this is a non-question, given your history.

      Your derm has given you bad advice.

      Worry all you want; no medical test is going  to alleviate that for you.

       

        • April 29, 2016 at 9:11 pm
        jenny22
        Participant

        WOW, awfully strong response!!!!!!

        ….and melanoma in-situ, IS still melanoma

        • April 29, 2016 at 9:11 pm
        jenny22
        Participant

        WOW, awfully strong response!!!!!!

        ….and melanoma in-situ, IS still melanoma

        • April 29, 2016 at 9:11 pm
        jenny22
        Participant

        WOW, awfully strong response!!!!!!

        ….and melanoma in-situ, IS still melanoma

        • April 29, 2016 at 11:02 pm
        m355
        Participant

        this is my 3rd melanoma. given it is my 3rd, the derm, pathologist and oncologist said it is something to consider.  and here is the most recent report:

        Here is lab report:

        A) Skin, right upper back, punch biopsy: Severely
        atypical compound melanocytic proliferation, see
        Comment.

        COMMENT:
        This is a worrisome lesion, with epidermal atypia
        (pagetoid extension, confluent growth) consistent with
        melanoma in situ and a dermal component that also
        demonstrates atypia with areas of morphologically
        similar cells to the epidermal component, but also some
         reassuring features (dispersion with increasing dermal
         depth, absence of mitoses). These findings engender a
        differential diagnosis that could reasonably include
        melanoma in situ evolving within a dysplastic nevus or
        a superfically invasive melanoma. Given this
        differential, it would be reasonable to treat this
        lesion as if it represents a malignant melanoma with
        the following prognostic factors: Breslow depth 0.32mm,
         Clark's level II, 0 mitoses/mm2, no ulceration.
         

        MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION:
        A) Sections show a punch biopsy with a compound
        melanocytic proliferation. The junctional component
        shows crowding, with fusion between adjacent rete and
        horizontal nests. Areas of upward extension of single
        melanocytes and nests are seen, and highlighted by
        Melan-A. Intraepidermal melanocytes show cytologic
        atypia, with nuclear enlargement and abundant
        cytoplasm. A patchy lymphohistiocytic inflammatory
        infiltrate is present. The lesion is free of the punch
        biopsy margin. Additional step sections are examined.
         

        • April 29, 2016 at 11:02 pm
        m355
        Participant

        this is my 3rd melanoma. given it is my 3rd, the derm, pathologist and oncologist said it is something to consider.  and here is the most recent report:

        Here is lab report:

        A) Skin, right upper back, punch biopsy: Severely
        atypical compound melanocytic proliferation, see
        Comment.

        COMMENT:
        This is a worrisome lesion, with epidermal atypia
        (pagetoid extension, confluent growth) consistent with
        melanoma in situ and a dermal component that also
        demonstrates atypia with areas of morphologically
        similar cells to the epidermal component, but also some
         reassuring features (dispersion with increasing dermal
         depth, absence of mitoses). These findings engender a
        differential diagnosis that could reasonably include
        melanoma in situ evolving within a dysplastic nevus or
        a superfically invasive melanoma. Given this
        differential, it would be reasonable to treat this
        lesion as if it represents a malignant melanoma with
        the following prognostic factors: Breslow depth 0.32mm,
         Clark's level II, 0 mitoses/mm2, no ulceration.
         

        MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION:
        A) Sections show a punch biopsy with a compound
        melanocytic proliferation. The junctional component
        shows crowding, with fusion between adjacent rete and
        horizontal nests. Areas of upward extension of single
        melanocytes and nests are seen, and highlighted by
        Melan-A. Intraepidermal melanocytes show cytologic
        atypia, with nuclear enlargement and abundant
        cytoplasm. A patchy lymphohistiocytic inflammatory
        infiltrate is present. The lesion is free of the punch
        biopsy margin. Additional step sections are examined.
         

        • April 29, 2016 at 11:02 pm
        m355
        Participant

        this is my 3rd melanoma. given it is my 3rd, the derm, pathologist and oncologist said it is something to consider.  and here is the most recent report:

        Here is lab report:

        A) Skin, right upper back, punch biopsy: Severely
        atypical compound melanocytic proliferation, see
        Comment.

        COMMENT:
        This is a worrisome lesion, with epidermal atypia
        (pagetoid extension, confluent growth) consistent with
        melanoma in situ and a dermal component that also
        demonstrates atypia with areas of morphologically
        similar cells to the epidermal component, but also some
         reassuring features (dispersion with increasing dermal
         depth, absence of mitoses). These findings engender a
        differential diagnosis that could reasonably include
        melanoma in situ evolving within a dysplastic nevus or
        a superfically invasive melanoma. Given this
        differential, it would be reasonable to treat this
        lesion as if it represents a malignant melanoma with
        the following prognostic factors: Breslow depth 0.32mm,
         Clark's level II, 0 mitoses/mm2, no ulceration.
         

        MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION:
        A) Sections show a punch biopsy with a compound
        melanocytic proliferation. The junctional component
        shows crowding, with fusion between adjacent rete and
        horizontal nests. Areas of upward extension of single
        melanocytes and nests are seen, and highlighted by
        Melan-A. Intraepidermal melanocytes show cytologic
        atypia, with nuclear enlargement and abundant
        cytoplasm. A patchy lymphohistiocytic inflammatory
        infiltrate is present. The lesion is free of the punch
        biopsy margin. Additional step sections are examined.
         

      • April 29, 2016 at 3:41 am
      Charlie S
      Participant

      MIS?? What is that Mission Impossible?

      State your case and say what you mean.

      Fortunately for you I could decipher what you mean.

      One melanoma insitu………………..which is NOT melanoma.

      A one a?  Show me the pathology.

      I get your concern, but this is a non-question, given your history.

      Your derm has given you bad advice.

      Worry all you want; no medical test is going  to alleviate that for you.

       

      • April 29, 2016 at 3:41 am
      Charlie S
      Participant

      MIS?? What is that Mission Impossible?

      State your case and say what you mean.

      Fortunately for you I could decipher what you mean.

      One melanoma insitu………………..which is NOT melanoma.

      A one a?  Show me the pathology.

      I get your concern, but this is a non-question, given your history.

      Your derm has given you bad advice.

      Worry all you want; no medical test is going  to alleviate that for you.

       

Viewing 8 reply threads

Tagged: 

  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
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