AboutClaes-Gustaf Nordquist, M.D. Expertise I`m a doctor of medicine and a specialist in radiation therapy and medical oncology. I have long experience in diagnostics and treatment of breast tumours.
Experience I'm a Doctor of Medicine. Licensed/certified physician and surgeon and specialist in Medical Oncology and Radiation therapy in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and the European Union. Background in Radiation Therapy, Medical Oncology, Radiation Protection, Nuclear Medicine, Diagnostic Radiology, Gynecological Oncology, Clinical Pathology, Clinical Cytology,Hematology and Internal Medicine. M.D. from the faculty of medicine, Royal Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Have also been an exchange student at the Hebrew University, Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem Israel. Former medical consultant, Swedish National Board of Radiation Protection. Former Police Surgeon and Medical Examiner, Stockholm Police Department. Former Chief Medical Officer, The Royal Guards, The Royal Horse Guards and the Royal Household Brigade, Royal Swedish Army Medical Corps. Now in private practice in Stockholm, Sweden.
Question "Hello,
I am 40 years old. When I was 29 I discovered that I had a 12cm (13x8) lump in my breast. I was told that it was a fibroadenoma with refined borders and that I should not worry. I then had routine check ups annually until I was 34 and the lump remained the same size and shape.
2 months ago, as a result of recurring breast pain, I decided to do a mammography. The result was that the lump was the same size but they concluded that now there are also some calcifications. They recommended a fine needle biopsy.
The result of this first biopsy revealed that I had some malignant cells and the lump was a ductal carcinoma G2. They soon after did a core biopsy. To my surprise, this second biopsy revealed that the lump was a fibroadenoma and calcifications.
Now I don't know how to interpret these results. One doctor said that I'm clear and I should just remove the lump for peace of mind. Another said that she still believes that there are some malignant cells and she was lucky to have seen them from the first biopsy since they didn't appear in the second.
My question:
1. How is it possible that in one biopsy there was a presence of malignant cells and in the second biopsy (the one that should be more accurate) there are none?
2. Is it possible for a biopsy to falsely detect malignant cells? If so, how? Are there some cells that look like malignant cells and then with the second biopsy it clarifies that they are not?"
Answer There are always some uncertainties with every test. Also the fine needle and the core needle may have hit different parts of your lesion. To be sure I agree that your lesion should be removed as a "lumpectomy"! Then based on the pathology report of the whole of your lesion we can decide what more to do - if indeed anything! Good luck! Please do keep me posted!
