Scan results, mixed bag- BIG OVARIES?

[jcawork]

Ok, got my scans back and chest is great and no other mets anywhere, but......

PET lights up like an xmas tree on my ovaries. SUV numbers were even higher than my original lung tumors. So I am not sure if I am NED.

Been around the world of tests all week. No answers. All Docs say they have never seen sclc met to the ovaries-EVER. One docs wants it all taken out anyway just for fun.

FYI, I learned that sclc can start as a primary in the gyn tract. It not from smoking w/ its there, but I didn't know it was found in other places not as a met.

I have chose the lets wait and see for 6 weeks and rescan approach. Considered a reasonable choice.

Has anyone had their ovaries light up the PET? My ovaries have a few cycts and have doubled in size since 11/04.

Thanks,

Jen

[Elaine]

Did you have big babies??? LOL. Just kidding.

Don't know what to say except it does seem strange that it would met to BOTH ovaries at the same time and that they would be pretty much the same size, sooooo.....

Enjoy the relief from no tests for awhile! Hope you hubby is doing fine, too.

love and fortitude

elaine

[lilgna]

Cannot give an answer but would like to offer up my thoughts and prayers, hoping all turns out well..... gina

[Remembering Dave]

well, to the "never seen a met there" comment, famous last words, since it probably took two months to diagnose Dave's bonkitis met since all the docs said that about the bonkitis. having said that . . . I dunno, I think I'd just want the darn things taken out anyway. you're done with them, right? and ovaries in my book are just a cancer magnet anyway, right? although I think it sounds very reasonable to wait six weeks and rescan. the reasonable side of me says do that, the I Hate Cancer part of me says yank 'em out. I lost a good friend at age 38 to ovarian cancer so I hate the darn stuff.

Keep us posted, this is very interesting indeed.

God Bless,

Karen

[SDianneB]

Hey Jen! First of all, I'm with Karen - take the danged things out! Ha.

Seriously though, my opinion of PET scans has been going downhill fast. Apparently the only one out of 6 docs I've seen since my diagnosis who thinks they are any good is the Oncologist, and she hardly ever goes with the results.

Last week while they were still messing around with my stopped up bile duct, I had a CT scan w/contrast, an Ultrasound, and then a PET scan. Guess what? Equivocal. Actually, the gastroenterologist I saw said that if you mention cancer to a radiologist, they will mention cancer in their report -- guaranteed. CYA. He told me my Ultrasound was "normal" except for my restricted bile duct, distended gallbladder, and pancreatitis, with some liver inflammation where that all comes together. Meaning - "normal" for the malady I had at the time. DUH.

He said there was SO much PET scan activity, that there was no way it was mets -- he said the scan was probably faulty (and unnecessary) because I was full of infection, bile going through my kidneys instead of intestines, etc. Of course, all that unusual cell activity is going to show up on a PET scan. For it to have been any good at all, they should have waited until he got my bile duct fixed (got that done Monday - will update in the SCLC folder! - YAY!) and I had time to process all the icky stuff from my system.

So, I'm back to my Pulmologist tomorrow -- the only one who can and will make sense of all this. He will look at the scans himself, as usual, and give me good advice where to go next.

Glad to "see" you again!

Di