› Forums › General Melanoma Community › Age old question of….Genetic Testing or No?
- This topic has 18 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by m355.
- Post
-
- April 28, 2016 at 7:52 pm
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.
- Replies
-
-
- April 28, 2016 at 8:02 pm
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 11:02 pm
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
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
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.
-
Tagged: cutaneous melanoma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.