Posted on: Nov 27, 2019 09:16PM
The following is from an article I recently read and I don't think I was told which one I have - hopefully because mine is the classic version. Was anyone told which type of ILC they have: These are subtypes of the classic ILC - all three have a somewhat different prognosis than classic ILC. Since mine was actually a hard lump it doesn't sound too classic to me.
Page 1 of 1 (11 results)
Posts 1 - 11 (11 total)
Nov 28, 2019 01:55PM wallycat wrote:
I don't recall being told anything. I know there are subgroups of ILC but that was recent in comparison to when I was dx. Don't know which subtype I am either.
Nov 29, 2019 06:36AM claireinaz wrote:
Can you post the article you are referring to, Jessie? I'd like to read it.
Claire in AZ
Nov 29, 2019 07:15AM MelissaDallas wrote:
Looks like she’s quoting an article here.
Nov 29, 2019 12:45PM jessie123 wrote:
Clair-- yes I need to find the article that showed the different prognosis for the 4 types. I don't know why our pathologist don't go the extra step and name our subtype.
Nov 29, 2019 12:54PM - edited Nov 29, 2019 02:00PM by AnnC2019
I looked at my pathology reports and It said Invasive lobular carcinoma Glandular (Acinar). The largest tumor description reads,“tan/gray mass with poorly defined borders." It also reads “There is no component information for this result.“
Nov 29, 2019 01:17PM jessie123 wrote:
I need to find a more recent article, but did find this on my history which was written in 2006: I really hope that I don't have the solid type.PROGNOSIS AND TREATMENT
Thirty-two to 43 % of patients with infiltrating lobular carcinoma have associated axillary nodal metastases and 8 % distant metastases. Histologic subtype of invasive lobular carcinoma is a predictor of prognosis; the tubulo-lobular variant has a significantly lower risk of regional (17 %) and distant (13 %) recurrence relative to the other subtypes, whereas the solid variant has significantly higher risk of recurrence (82 and 54 %, respectively). The remaining subtypes do not show a significant difference in these rates. These trends are also, however, reflected in disease-free intervals and likelihood of nodal positivity in tumors less than 2 cm in diameter. The 12-year actuarial survival of 100 % for the tubulo-lobular variant contrasts with 47 % for the solid variant. The classical variant has the second best disease-free and overall survival
Nov 29, 2019 02:08PM jessie123 wrote:
This is from Stanford
Nov 29, 2019 02:16PM MelissaDallas wrote:
Here is the clickable link:
Nov 29, 2019 02:27PM - edited Nov 29, 2019 03:09PM by AnnC2019
I found this website with an interesting section on lobular.
After reading this article about implicated genes in breast cancer, I took a look at the 83 genes tested through Invitae that was done and the majority of these listed in this article beloware not even tested. What good is it to only test a fraction of breast cancer causing genes?
And an interesting article here:
Another site for ILC that has interesting information.
Nov 29, 2019 02:56PM mac5 wrote:
Thanks for the information Jessie123 and Ann.
I just reread my Pathology Report but it doesn’t mention what Type of ILC I have. The MRI lit up the chest wall so the current Staging is Stage IV. The Oncotype is 18 with a probability of chemo working is 1%.
BUT the Study that these results are based on specifically excluded tumors over 2cm and recurrent Primary tumors. So I said why not give it a try. Beats the heck out of taking Endocrine Therapy for a year before doing Surgery.
I’m glad they are doing more research on ILC. And it reads like they are headed in the right direction of Targeted Therapy
Page 1 of 1 (11 results)