› Forums › General Melanoma Community › Tumor marker S-100 gone up again
- This topic has 12 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
RJoeyB.
- Post
-
- June 28, 2014 at 8:51 am
Hi all,
would appreciate any kind of info on the following:
Since I startred te taf / mek combo in February when I had lots of mets and rather high levels of s-100, the marker has constantly gone down. Scans a month ago showed considerable shrinkage of all mets.
I had another appointment at the clinic this week and just got a call that s-100 has now gone up and is slightly above the upper limit. They say not to worry as this could also be caused by the decay of tumor cells Obviously it should be enough that I come again for my next monthly appointment.
Do any of the stage IV folks have experience with S-100 and that it could suddenly go up and then down again without any need to worry?
Thanks!
Chris
- Replies
-
-
- June 28, 2014 at 8:57 pm
I've had 3 medical oncologists and none have ever tested for S-100. LDH yeah but not S-100. I guess they must not think it important to check. So I really dunno. I know I used to worry about my LDH and other things jumping way up but I've learned worrying does not help me in this fight so I try hard not to worry if I can. Easier said than done but I believe it helps me some. Granted the PET scan results I may still worry about because they are a fairly clear indication of what is going on although sometimes open to guessing. But blood work numbers, new aches and pains, etc. I try not to worry about anymore. Those things are so unclear to the cause it is really a guessing game even for the professionals. Yeah I was driving myself crazy with worry about such things but not anymore if I can help it.
-
- June 28, 2014 at 8:57 pm
I've had 3 medical oncologists and none have ever tested for S-100. LDH yeah but not S-100. I guess they must not think it important to check. So I really dunno. I know I used to worry about my LDH and other things jumping way up but I've learned worrying does not help me in this fight so I try hard not to worry if I can. Easier said than done but I believe it helps me some. Granted the PET scan results I may still worry about because they are a fairly clear indication of what is going on although sometimes open to guessing. But blood work numbers, new aches and pains, etc. I try not to worry about anymore. Those things are so unclear to the cause it is really a guessing game even for the professionals. Yeah I was driving myself crazy with worry about such things but not anymore if I can help it.
-
- June 28, 2014 at 8:57 pm
I've had 3 medical oncologists and none have ever tested for S-100. LDH yeah but not S-100. I guess they must not think it important to check. So I really dunno. I know I used to worry about my LDH and other things jumping way up but I've learned worrying does not help me in this fight so I try hard not to worry if I can. Easier said than done but I believe it helps me some. Granted the PET scan results I may still worry about because they are a fairly clear indication of what is going on although sometimes open to guessing. But blood work numbers, new aches and pains, etc. I try not to worry about anymore. Those things are so unclear to the cause it is really a guessing game even for the professionals. Yeah I was driving myself crazy with worry about such things but not anymore if I can help it.
-
- July 1, 2014 at 1:03 am
Chris,
Talked to my oncologist today. He told me S-100 is a protein on the surface of melanoma, as well as other types of tumors. You probably already knew that. He wasn't familiar with it enough to say whether it was an accurate marker for possible matastasis. He said in the states we really don't have a "standard" that is recognized as a reliable marker for disease spread. I guess the closet thing we have is LDH levels.
Brian
-
- July 1, 2014 at 1:03 am
Chris,
Talked to my oncologist today. He told me S-100 is a protein on the surface of melanoma, as well as other types of tumors. You probably already knew that. He wasn't familiar with it enough to say whether it was an accurate marker for possible matastasis. He said in the states we really don't have a "standard" that is recognized as a reliable marker for disease spread. I guess the closet thing we have is LDH levels.
Brian
-
- July 1, 2014 at 1:03 am
Chris,
Talked to my oncologist today. He told me S-100 is a protein on the surface of melanoma, as well as other types of tumors. You probably already knew that. He wasn't familiar with it enough to say whether it was an accurate marker for possible matastasis. He said in the states we really don't have a "standard" that is recognized as a reliable marker for disease spread. I guess the closet thing we have is LDH levels.
Brian
-
- July 1, 2014 at 3:37 am
Hi Chris,
I've seen S-100 mentioned in pathology reports from various excised tumors as verification that they were melanoma (along with staining for HMB-45 and MART-1, I believe), but never where the actual level was all that important, only whether the sample tested for S-100 or not. And I haven't seen it tracked in any routine blood work. As mentioned, LDH seems to be the one they watch closely, and even that is only a single data point that alone can be a false positive or negative. Through 4 years st Stage IV, my LDH has always been stable. I've been fortunate to not have had heavy tumor burden any point, which could help drive LDH up. A strong response to heavy tumor burden, resulting in lots of tumor destruction, can also drive LDH.
Have you seen your blood panel results and do they include a value for S-100? It seems odd because it's the first I've heard it used outside of a diagnosis/pathology discussion.
Joe
-
- July 1, 2014 at 3:37 am
Hi Chris,
I've seen S-100 mentioned in pathology reports from various excised tumors as verification that they were melanoma (along with staining for HMB-45 and MART-1, I believe), but never where the actual level was all that important, only whether the sample tested for S-100 or not. And I haven't seen it tracked in any routine blood work. As mentioned, LDH seems to be the one they watch closely, and even that is only a single data point that alone can be a false positive or negative. Through 4 years st Stage IV, my LDH has always been stable. I've been fortunate to not have had heavy tumor burden any point, which could help drive LDH up. A strong response to heavy tumor burden, resulting in lots of tumor destruction, can also drive LDH.
Have you seen your blood panel results and do they include a value for S-100? It seems odd because it's the first I've heard it used outside of a diagnosis/pathology discussion.
Joe
-
- July 1, 2014 at 3:37 am
Hi Chris,
I've seen S-100 mentioned in pathology reports from various excised tumors as verification that they were melanoma (along with staining for HMB-45 and MART-1, I believe), but never where the actual level was all that important, only whether the sample tested for S-100 or not. And I haven't seen it tracked in any routine blood work. As mentioned, LDH seems to be the one they watch closely, and even that is only a single data point that alone can be a false positive or negative. Through 4 years st Stage IV, my LDH has always been stable. I've been fortunate to not have had heavy tumor burden any point, which could help drive LDH up. A strong response to heavy tumor burden, resulting in lots of tumor destruction, can also drive LDH.
Have you seen your blood panel results and do they include a value for S-100? It seems odd because it's the first I've heard it used outside of a diagnosis/pathology discussion.
Joe
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.