CT scan results/findings....

[balkan1]

Hello. I'm 33 yrs old and going through treatment of metastatic breast cancer. I have one single lesion in my lung. I have been on Gezmar/Cisplatin 6 cycles. I have had 4 cycles so far. I had a abdominal/chest CT scan beginning of Sep 2010. Here are the findings :

Port a cath is seen on the right side.Previous right mastectomy and right breast implant are noted.A spiculated density is seen in the left apex, which is mostly linear and this represents a scar, rather than a mass.Aleft suphrahilar soft tissue mass is seen,measuring 1.3x1.7cm.This of cystic density and could represent an incidental cyst or cystic necrosis of a node. Faint fibrotic changes are seen in the left upper lobe, which could be longstanding or related to radiotherapy,if the patient has had one. The lungs are clear otherwise.

The liver demonstrates diffuse,decreased density,probably related to recent chemotherapy.No focal liver, spleen lesions are identified. Gallblader,pancreas,adrenals and kidneys are normal. No significant paraaortic or pelvic lymphadenopathy is seen.No free fluid or collections noted.

A 1.6x.09cm well definedsclerotic focus is seen in the right posterior ilium, with a narrow zone of transition. The differential for this wouldin clude a bone island and treated sclerotic metastatic deposit,most likely the former. No former boney abnormality is noted.

A low density lesion is seen in the left suprahilar region. The possibilities for which include incidential cyst or cystic necrosis of a node. A further spiculated, mostly linear, density is seen in the left upper lobe, which probably represents a focal scar, rather than a mass. However, both of these need to be followed up.
* I had previous radiotherapy on my right breast in 2008. Bone scan was done June 2010 and was clear*

What does this exactly mean?

[katarina777]

I agree with japdip.

No test is perfect. With myself, what seemed to help the most 'pin down the truth' were regular tumor marker checkups, and I have metastatic bc also. I think they are extremely reliable.

Katrin

[japdip]

It all sounds pretty good to me .... there seems to be an innocent explanation for all the findings except for the ones mentioned in the last paragraph. These however may also be benign in nature but do need some additional investigation. Everything else seems to be either incidental and could be found in someone without your BC history OR things that are a result of your previous treatment. Best wishes for continued successful treatment ......