What Is Stage Three Unresectable Melanoma?
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.

What Is Stage Three Unresectable Melanoma?

› Forums › General Melanoma Community › What Is Stage Three Unresectable Melanoma?

  • Post
    • October 22, 2011 at 3:55 am
    Charlie S
    Participant

    I sense a bunch of esoteric bullshit relative to Yervoy,  I  would ask anyone, particularly the MRF to give an actual  definition of what constitutes "unresectable Stage III Melanoma" ?

    Simple question, and I am soooooooooooooooooo looking for that answer.

    Personally, I think the term/phrase  is nothing but a bunch of pimped up horse shit  for appeasement, because this definition is not affording, but rather denying STage III patients a option for a way forward.

     

    Anyone?

     

    Charlie S

    I sense a bunch of esoteric bullshit relative to Yervoy,  I  would ask anyone, particularly the MRF to give an actual  definition of what constitutes "unresectable Stage III Melanoma" ?

    Simple question, and I am soooooooooooooooooo looking for that answer.

    Personally, I think the term/phrase  is nothing but a bunch of pimped up horse shit  for appeasement, because this definition is not affording, but rather denying STage III patients a option for a way forward.

     

    Anyone?

     

    Charlie S

Viewing 20 reply threads
  • Replies
      • October 22, 2011 at 4:08 am
      shellebrownies
      Participant

      Well, Charlie, for an example, Don had some infected lymph nodes that were located in an area in his inner shoulder that was right under where a bunch of blood vessels and nerves congregated. We were told in the earliest stages before we knew he was already Stage IV that that area would be considered "unresectable" except to only the uppermost echelon of oncology surgeons, and that if the tumors had gotten wrapped into the nerve endings and/or blood vessels, no one would touch it.

      So, apparently, there ARE actually places that would be considered Stage 3 and unresectable…

      Michelle, wife of Don

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:08 am
      shellebrownies
      Participant

      Well, Charlie, for an example, Don had some infected lymph nodes that were located in an area in his inner shoulder that was right under where a bunch of blood vessels and nerves congregated. We were told in the earliest stages before we knew he was already Stage IV that that area would be considered "unresectable" except to only the uppermost echelon of oncology surgeons, and that if the tumors had gotten wrapped into the nerve endings and/or blood vessels, no one would touch it.

      So, apparently, there ARE actually places that would be considered Stage 3 and unresectable…

      Michelle, wife of Don

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:08 am
      shellebrownies
      Participant

      Well, Charlie, for an example, Don had some infected lymph nodes that were located in an area in his inner shoulder that was right under where a bunch of blood vessels and nerves congregated. We were told in the earliest stages before we knew he was already Stage IV that that area would be considered "unresectable" except to only the uppermost echelon of oncology surgeons, and that if the tumors had gotten wrapped into the nerve endings and/or blood vessels, no one would touch it.

      So, apparently, there ARE actually places that would be considered Stage 3 and unresectable…

      Michelle, wife of Don

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:58 am
      FormerCaregiver
      Participant

      Charlie, my late wife had an unresectable tumour in the lymph node next to her aorta. A top surgical oncologist tried to remove it, but decided to abandon the attempt due to the proximity of the aorta.

      The primary was on the chest, and only one other node was found to have melanoma in it. We were not given a stage at the time, and that could certainly be open to interpretation.

      Best wishes

      Frank from Australia

        • October 22, 2011 at 7:51 am
        LynnLuc
        Participant

        MIne was stage 4 melanoma and it was in the superior mediastinum and it was unresectable due to its location- they wouldn't try and remove it and getting a biopsy was even difficult- the melanoma was pressing against my superior vena cava…however a few 9 months later they did it  as I had nothing to lose…I mean I was suppose to be dead…and they removed it…so then it was resectable =:o)  !!! wink Lynn

        • October 22, 2011 at 1:23 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        The compassionate use of Yervoy in the clinical study I'm in, is for Stage 4 and Stage 3 unresectable melanoma. This means unable to remove via surgery or was able to remove but not to clear margins.

        Lisa

        • October 22, 2011 at 1:23 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        The compassionate use of Yervoy in the clinical study I'm in, is for Stage 4 and Stage 3 unresectable melanoma. This means unable to remove via surgery or was able to remove but not to clear margins.

        Lisa

        • October 22, 2011 at 1:23 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        The compassionate use of Yervoy in the clinical study I'm in, is for Stage 4 and Stage 3 unresectable melanoma. This means unable to remove via surgery or was able to remove but not to clear margins.

        Lisa

        • October 22, 2011 at 7:51 am
        LynnLuc
        Participant

        MIne was stage 4 melanoma and it was in the superior mediastinum and it was unresectable due to its location- they wouldn't try and remove it and getting a biopsy was even difficult- the melanoma was pressing against my superior vena cava…however a few 9 months later they did it  as I had nothing to lose…I mean I was suppose to be dead…and they removed it…so then it was resectable =:o)  !!! wink Lynn

        • October 22, 2011 at 7:51 am
        LynnLuc
        Participant

        MIne was stage 4 melanoma and it was in the superior mediastinum and it was unresectable due to its location- they wouldn't try and remove it and getting a biopsy was even difficult- the melanoma was pressing against my superior vena cava…however a few 9 months later they did it  as I had nothing to lose…I mean I was suppose to be dead…and they removed it…so then it was resectable =:o)  !!! wink Lynn

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:58 am
      FormerCaregiver
      Participant

      Charlie, my late wife had an unresectable tumour in the lymph node next to her aorta. A top surgical oncologist tried to remove it, but decided to abandon the attempt due to the proximity of the aorta.

      The primary was on the chest, and only one other node was found to have melanoma in it. We were not given a stage at the time, and that could certainly be open to interpretation.

      Best wishes

      Frank from Australia

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:58 am
      FormerCaregiver
      Participant

      Charlie, my late wife had an unresectable tumour in the lymph node next to her aorta. A top surgical oncologist tried to remove it, but decided to abandon the attempt due to the proximity of the aorta.

      The primary was on the chest, and only one other node was found to have melanoma in it. We were not given a stage at the time, and that could certainly be open to interpretation.

      Best wishes

      Frank from Australia

      • October 22, 2011 at 3:27 pm
      fgilbert63
      Participant

      Charlie,

      I agree with you,who cares if it's resectable or not.  If some one is stage III regardless of resectable status allow them to have the drugs.  Anyone who thinks just because a lymph node has been resected that all cancer cells are gone is simply naive.  It's all politics and $$.

      • October 22, 2011 at 3:27 pm
      fgilbert63
      Participant

      Charlie,

      I agree with you,who cares if it's resectable or not.  If some one is stage III regardless of resectable status allow them to have the drugs.  Anyone who thinks just because a lymph node has been resected that all cancer cells are gone is simply naive.  It's all politics and $$.

        • October 22, 2011 at 4:00 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        Absolutely!  Now I understand what Charlie was implying 🙂

        I was Stage 3 in February – all cancer was removed.  In April, I had mets to my lungs. Regardless of whether it's removed or not able to be resected, treatment should always be started at Stage 3 and I never had that option.

        Lisa

        • October 22, 2011 at 4:00 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        Absolutely!  Now I understand what Charlie was implying 🙂

        I was Stage 3 in February – all cancer was removed.  In April, I had mets to my lungs. Regardless of whether it's removed or not able to be resected, treatment should always be started at Stage 3 and I never had that option.

        Lisa

        • October 22, 2011 at 4:00 pm
        Lisa13
        Participant

        Absolutely!  Now I understand what Charlie was implying 🙂

        I was Stage 3 in February – all cancer was removed.  In April, I had mets to my lungs. Regardless of whether it's removed or not able to be resected, treatment should always be started at Stage 3 and I never had that option.

        Lisa

      • October 22, 2011 at 3:27 pm
      fgilbert63
      Participant

      Charlie,

      I agree with you,who cares if it's resectable or not.  If some one is stage III regardless of resectable status allow them to have the drugs.  Anyone who thinks just because a lymph node has been resected that all cancer cells are gone is simply naive.  It's all politics and $$.

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:52 pm
      mombase
      Participant

      Hi Charlie,

      I don't have the answer, but I LOVE the question!!

      Cristy, Stage IV

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:52 pm
      mombase
      Participant

      Hi Charlie,

      I don't have the answer, but I LOVE the question!!

      Cristy, Stage IV

      • October 22, 2011 at 4:52 pm
      mombase
      Participant

      Hi Charlie,

      I don't have the answer, but I LOVE the question!!

      Cristy, Stage IV

      • October 22, 2011 at 11:59 pm
      NYKaren
      Participant

      Yes, I was a little slow on the uptake too, Charlie. I did qualify based on that definition–so I'm supposed to be happy that I'm 3C instead of 3B???

      great question.

      karen

        • October 23, 2011 at 12:50 am
        shellebrownies
        Participant

        Ah, I am also slow on the uptake. I totally agree that it is BS that only patients who have unresectable melanoma can get Yervoy. That is totally insane thinking! It makes the most sense to give it while patient is NED so that the system can kill off any microscopics that cannot be seen yet. 

        Those criteria sound suspciously like Insurance-speak. I don't think there would even be a question about whether it was resectable if the drug wasn't so damme expensive for them to pay for. 

        Michelle, wife of Don

        • October 23, 2011 at 12:50 am
        shellebrownies
        Participant

        Ah, I am also slow on the uptake. I totally agree that it is BS that only patients who have unresectable melanoma can get Yervoy. That is totally insane thinking! It makes the most sense to give it while patient is NED so that the system can kill off any microscopics that cannot be seen yet. 

        Those criteria sound suspciously like Insurance-speak. I don't think there would even be a question about whether it was resectable if the drug wasn't so damme expensive for them to pay for. 

        Michelle, wife of Don

        • October 23, 2011 at 12:50 am
        shellebrownies
        Participant

        Ah, I am also slow on the uptake. I totally agree that it is BS that only patients who have unresectable melanoma can get Yervoy. That is totally insane thinking! It makes the most sense to give it while patient is NED so that the system can kill off any microscopics that cannot be seen yet. 

        Those criteria sound suspciously like Insurance-speak. I don't think there would even be a question about whether it was resectable if the drug wasn't so damme expensive for them to pay for. 

        Michelle, wife of Don

      • October 22, 2011 at 11:59 pm
      NYKaren
      Participant

      Yes, I was a little slow on the uptake too, Charlie. I did qualify based on that definition–so I'm supposed to be happy that I'm 3C instead of 3B???

      great question.

      karen

      • October 22, 2011 at 11:59 pm
      NYKaren
      Participant

      Yes, I was a little slow on the uptake too, Charlie. I did qualify based on that definition–so I'm supposed to be happy that I'm 3C instead of 3B???

      great question.

      karen

      • October 23, 2011 at 8:55 am
      JerryfromFauq
      Participant

      Charlie, my good man.  I think people are finally seeing the point.  I have long wished they would have a trial of a shortened trreatment time for stage 2 people (wonder if just one or two doses would make a difference in the re-occurance rate?  Insurance would hate that!  The increased production and sales volumn would then possibly lead to a reduced treatment cost.

      • October 23, 2011 at 8:55 am
      JerryfromFauq
      Participant

      Charlie, my good man.  I think people are finally seeing the point.  I have long wished they would have a trial of a shortened trreatment time for stage 2 people (wonder if just one or two doses would make a difference in the re-occurance rate?  Insurance would hate that!  The increased production and sales volumn would then possibly lead to a reduced treatment cost.

      • October 23, 2011 at 8:55 am
      JerryfromFauq
      Participant

      Charlie, my good man.  I think people are finally seeing the point.  I have long wished they would have a trial of a shortened trreatment time for stage 2 people (wonder if just one or two doses would make a difference in the re-occurance rate?  Insurance would hate that!  The increased production and sales volumn would then possibly lead to a reduced treatment cost.

      • October 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm
      Dynasysman
      Participant

      Charlie —

      I agree with your contention that "unresectable" is political BS that allows insurance companies to deny coverage to credulous patients and ONCs.  However, we can use the language to our advantage…Say, for example, that you were a Stage 3a or b patient.  Now, perhaps your ONC decides s/he could not be confident that your Stage 3 tumor IS resectable.  S/he can declare it unresectable, start Yervoy, and then take the tumor out.  I know of cases where insurance has covered exactly this situation.

      We simply need to be more resourceful and do a better job of taking all the advantages we have…but thanks as always for cutting through the haze.
      • October 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm
      Dynasysman
      Participant

      Charlie —

      I agree with your contention that "unresectable" is political BS that allows insurance companies to deny coverage to credulous patients and ONCs.  However, we can use the language to our advantage…Say, for example, that you were a Stage 3a or b patient.  Now, perhaps your ONC decides s/he could not be confident that your Stage 3 tumor IS resectable.  S/he can declare it unresectable, start Yervoy, and then take the tumor out.  I know of cases where insurance has covered exactly this situation.

      We simply need to be more resourceful and do a better job of taking all the advantages we have…but thanks as always for cutting through the haze.
      • October 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm
      Dynasysman
      Participant

      Charlie —

      I agree with your contention that "unresectable" is political BS that allows insurance companies to deny coverage to credulous patients and ONCs.  However, we can use the language to our advantage…Say, for example, that you were a Stage 3a or b patient.  Now, perhaps your ONC decides s/he could not be confident that your Stage 3 tumor IS resectable.  S/he can declare it unresectable, start Yervoy, and then take the tumor out.  I know of cases where insurance has covered exactly this situation.

      We simply need to be more resourceful and do a better job of taking all the advantages we have…but thanks as always for cutting through the haze.
Viewing 20 reply threads
  • 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