Connect
← Return to Is a Spiculated lung nodule always malignant?
Discussion
Is a Spiculated lung nodule always malignant?
Lung Health | Last Active: Nov 7 12:13pm | Replies (129)Comment receiving replies
I have been going through the same thing since Aug 23. Found 2 nodules. Been having CTs every few months. There is now a third. Ground glass. The dominant nodule is in the right lower lobe. They have tested my blood work for every single infection, inflammation, and auto immune disease out there. All negative. Had a PET scan and it lit up in the lung. SUV uptakes were 8.3 on the dominant and 4.6 on the other one. The third one was not there when I had the PET scan done in October. They kept saying lets watch it, lets watch it. On my last visit to pulmonary, that was the first time I had ever been told that the dominant one was "spiculated". The second one is pleural based (?). Got me concerned. Now the doctor says, "its time to get aggressive". I have an appt with a thoracic surgeon on the 28th of this month.
Good luck to everyone!!!
Replies to "I have been going through the same thing since Aug 23. Found 2 nodules. Been having..."
Hi @shellyrenee, Welcome to Connect. Sorry to hear that your nodules have changed that much in the past six months, but it's good that they found them at this early stage. I agree, if you've seen that much change over a six month time period, it's certainly time to take action. You may want to ask your surgeon if your samples will be sent for genetic/biomarker testing. As the results can impact any future treatment plans. None of your lymph nodes were lighting up on the PET scan, correct? Are all of the nodules isolated to the same lobe of the lung?
Connect
I was also not informed about the fact that one of my nodules is spiculated. It was only when I requested my report papers that I discovered one of them was described as such. Everything I've read so far indicates that spiculated nodules are considered a sure sign, so I'm confused as to why some still want to adopt a watch-and-wait approach. It seems they always want the nodule to be at least 1cm to be proactive, but this approach carries the risk of tumor spread. I don't understand why they take that risk. In my case, it's a solid nodule, which is known to be much more prone to spreading even at such small sizes compared to groundglass or semisolid nodules.