← Return to CA 27-29 numbers rising: Does anyone else have an issue like this?
DiscussionCA 27-29 numbers rising: Does anyone else have an issue like this?
Breast Cancer | Last Active: Aug 16 10:03am | Replies (176)Comment receiving replies
Replies to "Hi all - the CA 27-29 question was posted back in 2019 but still always relevant...."
I'm glad to read that monitoring tumor markers caught a problem early! My oncologist includes them too. And it reassures me because there are so few very-early indicators of breast cancer developing. Even if insurance considered covering monthly mammograms or CT scans, it would be bad medicine as excessive radiation. And a lot of breast cancers, mine included, gave no symptoms at all and were only caught by mammo and ultrasound followed by vacuum-assisted, wide-needle biopsy. The good thing about the simple blood test for tumor markers is that, if a result looks 'interesting', it's easy and inexpensive to repeat quickly. I don't really understand why all oncologists don't automatically include these tests. Data is data and every data point contributes to the big picture. A data point that seems to contradict all the others can be re-verified and, if just an anomaly, discounted.) I had the OncotypeDX test done for the same reason and am glad that it was available.
I support keeping copies of, and tracking, all of one's medical tests and results. By having a hard copy of my own medical file, I can make an appointment with a new doctor without waiting for someone else to forward a file. This helped me get a second opinion, on the same day I called for one, with an oncologist who was otherwise booked six weeks in advance but had a cancelation that very day, as I could take a copy of the medical record with me. (The doctor thought it great that I kept a current copy of all tests.) It also made a big difference during lockdown when medical facilities were radically understaffed so getting a file forwarded by my PCP was impossible for over a month.
Amen!