Management of Pleomorphic Calcification

I am 36 years old, and had my baseline mammogram at age 35, October 2008.  No family history, no lumps, no clinical findings.  The mammogram was abnormal, recommended an MRI.  MRI was abnormal.  Two clusters of pleomorphic calcifications in the right breast.  One at the 6 o'clock and one at the 10 o'clock.  A sterotactic biopsy was performed 10/08/08.  There were four samples, all contained mircrocalcifications and all were benign, no atypia.  Recommend repeat biopsy in 6 months.  April 2009 mammogram showed that not all of the "worrisome" calcifications were removed by the stereotactic biopsy in the 6 o'clock  area (no other concerns), and a biopsy was recommended by the radiologist.  My surgeon indicated that we could wait and do a repeat mammogram in 6 months.  Had that mammogram on October 1, 2009.  Again, "worrisome" calcifications were at the 6 o'clock area, but they were unchanged since April 2008.  Again, the radiologist recommended biopsy.  My surgeon indicated that I could go either way -- surgical biopsy or wait another 6 months for mammogram.  Surgeon indicated that at 2 years without change the pleomorphic calcifications would be ruled benign.  Advice please.  (I do have my family doctor discussing my case with another radiologist and my surgeon as well.)

[iam1butterfly]

It depends, in great part, on how you feel about that 6 month wait-and-see approach.
I was given that option twice within the last 4 years. And, both times, I opted to go with a biopsy (surgical and stereotactic) instead of waiting.
Thankfully the microcalcifications in my right breast were found to be of a benign origin. But, it's true... you "could go either way" with this.
To me, 6 months is just too long a long time to learn whether or not a malignancy is present. In my case, the pathology results were relatively quick; and, my "peace of mind" was beyond measure. So, I would say, go with your gut feeling and do what you feel is right for you. Good luck with whatever you decide.

[zouzi]

I would agree with iam1butterfly that peace of mind is so important! A radiologist is the more experienced one in viewing the imagery seen and if he has recommended a biopsy,he must have a good reason wanting to further investigate .Surgeons are very good in their fields, but radiologists view hundreds of films daily and in my opinion they know when it's necessary or not to proceed with a biopsy.If still in doubt you can have your films viewed by another radiologist.If I were you I would go for the biopsy, the procedure takes only a few minutes, and soon after you'll know what's happening,but waiting 6 months it's going to make you worry the whole time.Good luck in whatever you'll decide.Take care.