Just read this from Dana Farber

EZLiving66

http://blog.dana-farber.org/insight/2016/08/what-is-the-latest-research-in-endometrial-cancer/

Love,

Eldri

TeddyandBears_Mom

Thanks Eldri. This comment in

Thanks Eldri. This comment in the article really surprised me:

He notes that because endometrial cancer is often detected in its early stages, treatment with surgery, radiation and/or chemotherapy, as well as hormonal therapy, usually cures the disease.

I was under the impression that it isn't normally caught early since we don't have any screenings for it. I really wish that vaginal ultrasounds would become part of the normal screenings for women over 50 just like mammograms have become the norm for women.

Love and Hugs,

Cindi

Kvdyson

Thank you for sharing this article

Hi Eldri, thank you for sharing this article. I'm so glad to finally see that there is research specifically on endometrial cancer. Kim

Soup52

Thanks Eldri for the article

Thanks Eldri for the article and yes Teddybear I agree with you. Why do they say it is caught early? How?? I saw the doctor as soon as I had symptoms, unexplained bleeding.... Really frustrating that I was 111C. I'm clear right now but unfortunately I don't expect to stay that way.

CheeseQueen57

I agree!

I had no symptoms until bleeding and I ended up with Stage IIIC, Grade 3!  I wish they would stop saying detected early.  I was shocked to see my pathology report.  I started bleeding in January and I was just in to my gyno in November and got a clean bill of health.  This disease sucks! 

MAbound

Awareness definitely lacking

Eldri-thank you for the link...I printed it out to refer back to. The comments posted after it have inspired me to rant a bit. Forgive me, but I can't help it!

A lot more could be done to make patients and doctors pay attention to this type of cancer. Seems like breast, and cervical cancer get all of the attention and research dollars.

I saw my primary every 6 months for a physical and follow-ups because of being on a diuretic, and I think she suspected cancer because she ordered 2 regular (not transvaginal) ultrasounds when I was 56 and 58, but was just keeping an eye on me otherwise because she felt I was just late for menopause. She never once mentioned endometrial cancer to me even though when she first said I was in late menopausse and offered me sympathy for it, I brought up that I had early onset menses and heavy, flooding periods all of my life. I was concerned that my weight was an issue making me estrogen dominant, but she was dismissive of that since I wasn't always overweight. She also wasn't treating me for pre-diabetes, even though my blood sugars put me in that category for the past 2 years and even though I asked if I needed to have at least an A1C test. The response was that my blood sugars weren't high enough to warrant having one! What I've learned since diagnosis about Metformin prevent progression to full diabetes and being preventive treatment for this cancer along with birth control was an eye opener and I sure wish I had pushed her hader about it, but didn't know enought then to do so. 

Since diagnosis I've learned that having early onset menses, late menopause, being overweight, and pre- or full diabetes are all risks factors for this cancer that I have and that pap smears won't detect it. I just feel that my doctor and probably a majority of other front line doctor are just not that skilled at finding it early and not aware of things they could do if one has risk factors that would  make this something to watch for more conscientiously.

This cancer, while common, is just not on doctors radars like it should be and women, in general, are not getting the preventive care and education about it like we get for breast and cervical cancers. Given the tidal wave of obesity and diabetes in this country, it's no surprise  how many of us are blindsided by this at diagnosis. 

Lou Ann M

I agree

i agree with the others. This is not often caught early enough.  I had no symptoms at all until I went to my GP with what I thought was a yeast infection and it was, but he saw a small tumor on my cervix. He sent me to a gynecologist.  D&C with a cone biopsie.  They first thought it was cervical that had gone up.to my uterus. Path reports to several  places showed serous pappillary Endomedrial andocarcinoma already stage III changed to stage IV in seven months after first courses of treatment.

Lou Ann

janaes

Me too.  I agree.  Mine was

Me too.  I agree.  Mine was found after a one really bad day of blood clots.  I remember it was on new years eve and the next two days were the weekend so no doctors were opened so i went to the inst care and that doctor there told me if my bleading clears up before monday (it was saturday when i saw him) you dont need to go to your doctors.  If it doesnt then go. well by monday the bleeding was pretty much done.  The clotting for sure was gone.  I wasnt going to go to the doctor and went to work that day.  I left early because i was worried the clotting might come back for my next cycle (maybe a little worried it might come back before that) and i wouldnt beable to work. Thats the only worry i had.  I wasnt concerned of cancer at all.  Thankfully my regular doctor gave me an ultrasound that day which led to another ultrasound and a visit with the gynocolist who gave me a biopsy.  No one mentioned cancer until they were going to give me a biopsy even at that time it sounded to me that doing a biopsy for cancer was pretty ruitene after finding a large fibroid.  To this day i dont know if the fibroid was the cancer or if that was a miricle they found that.

It almost scares me to think of what would have happened had i not gone to the doctors that day I left early from work.  It wasnt until after surgery that i found that unusual bleeding is a sign for this kind of cancer.

A test like a mamagram or papsmear for our cancer would be nice!!!!!!!!

Double Whammy

I think the article is about the garden variety type.

tThe Type 1 endometrial cancers, not the Type 2s that most of you women had.  You are correct, there is no "screening" for endometrial or ovarian cancer, they wait until you have symptoms,  but garden variety endometrial cancer is usually caught in the early stages because the symptom of postmenopausal vaginal bleeding USUALLY occurs early on.  Not so with ovarian cancer and those symptoms are not always Type 1 cancer.   

It is possible to screen for breast and cervical cancers (mammograms and Pap smears), but no screening for other gyn cancers, unless the doctor sees or feels something unusual during a pelvic exam.  I'm not exactly sure I understand why unless they just aren't accurate.   Mammograms and Pap smears are most often normal anyway, so why not do an ultrasound and see whatever they see?   Or a CA 125 now and then?   It may be all they have now, but at least they have that, doggone it.  Why do we have to wait until we take ourselves to the doctor because of symptoms?   Lots of talk about the dangers of radiation from mammograms, but most of us still get them anyway.  No palpable lumps, but we subject ourselves to that procedure at the insistence of our doctors.   Sreening for my endo cancer WAS prompted by a Pap smear.  I had sloughed off some endometrial cells and postmenopausal women are not supposed to do that.  My pelvic exam had been perfectly normal and I was a few years overdue because I was lazy.  It was very lucky for me that those cells were there.  I was diagnosed prior to having any symptoms.

 I have this theory that should we reach menopause naturally our reproductive organs just sit there and fester and get sick.  And all too often when those early symptoms present themselves, the trip to the doctor is either put off for a while or the disease turns out to be a higher stage/grade than "usual". 

Suzanne

Double Whammy

PS

Mammograms often miss breast cancer, and things that look suspicious often turn out to be benign.  Yet, this is the most common cancer in women and I'm perfectly happy to line up to be humiliated, having again been one of the lucky ones whose mammogram found that nasty breast cancer.

 

henhill

CheeseQueen57 said:

I agree!

I had no symptoms until bleeding and I ended up with Stage IIIC, Grade 3!  I wish they would stop saying detected early.  I was shocked to see my pathology report.  I started bleeding in January and I was just in to my gyno in November and got a clean bill of health.  This disease sucks! 

me2

I'm with you, Cheese, I had a PAP and pelvic exam while I first experienced clear discharge.   I was given a clean bill of health until I asked for a second exam 6 months later, when I was diagnosed with IIIa, which has metasticized.

rcdeman

CheeseQueen57 said:

I agree!

I had no symptoms until bleeding and I ended up with Stage IIIC, Grade 3!  I wish they would stop saying detected early.  I was shocked to see my pathology report.  I started bleeding in January and I was just in to my gyno in November and got a clean bill of health.  This disease sucks! 

Same here with my mom. She

Same here with my mom. She experienced just a little spotting, went in to get it checked out quite quickly, and now she's UPSC Stage IIIC, Grade 3.

rcdeman

Double Whammy said:

I think the article is about the garden variety type.

tThe Type 1 endometrial cancers, not the Type 2s that most of you women had.  You are correct, there is no "screening" for endometrial or ovarian cancer, they wait until you have symptoms,  but garden variety endometrial cancer is usually caught in the early stages because the symptom of postmenopausal vaginal bleeding USUALLY occurs early on.  Not so with ovarian cancer and those symptoms are not always Type 1 cancer.   

It is possible to screen for breast and cervical cancers (mammograms and Pap smears), but no screening for other gyn cancers, unless the doctor sees or feels something unusual during a pelvic exam.  I'm not exactly sure I understand why unless they just aren't accurate.   Mammograms and Pap smears are most often normal anyway, so why not do an ultrasound and see whatever they see?   Or a CA 125 now and then?   It may be all they have now, but at least they have that, doggone it.  Why do we have to wait until we take ourselves to the doctor because of symptoms?   Lots of talk about the dangers of radiation from mammograms, but most of us still get them anyway.  No palpable lumps, but we subject ourselves to that procedure at the insistence of our doctors.   Sreening for my endo cancer WAS prompted by a Pap smear.  I had sloughed off some endometrial cells and postmenopausal women are not supposed to do that.  My pelvic exam had been perfectly normal and I was a few years overdue because I was lazy.  It was very lucky for me that those cells were there.  I was diagnosed prior to having any symptoms.

 I have this theory that should we reach menopause naturally our reproductive organs just sit there and fester and get sick.  And all too often when those early symptoms present themselves, the trip to the doctor is either put off for a while or the disease turns out to be a higher stage/grade than "usual". 

Suzanne

You theory certainly seems

Suzanne, your theory certainly seems like it could be credible with all the cases of uterine/ovarian/endometrial cancer that happen after menopause. Does this mean that we should all just get a hysterectomy as a precautionary measure after we reach that age where we stop experiencing our menstrual cycles? (Just a rhetoric question.) If it guarantees that it would prevent that type of cancer, I'd do it in an instant!

henhill

rcdeman said:

Same here with my mom. She

Same here with my mom. She experienced just a little spotting, went in to get it checked out quite quickly, and now she's UPSC Stage IIIC, Grade 3.

It is sad because everyone

It is sad because everyone says it is so "curable" in the early stages, but two doctors I was dealing with at the time totally misssed it.  You can't help but think "What if?"  I am sad for all of us who will suffer the consequences of that, but it does no good to dwell there.  Prayers for you .... we will persevere

 

Double Whammy

rcdeman said:

You theory certainly seems

Suzanne, your theory certainly seems like it could be credible with all the cases of uterine/ovarian/endometrial cancer that happen after menopause. Does this mean that we should all just get a hysterectomy as a precautionary measure after we reach that age where we stop experiencing our menstrual cycles? (Just a rhetoric question.) If it guarantees that it would prevent that type of cancer, I'd do it in an instant!

No such thing as a hysterectomy for just in case

that I know of.  Surgery is risky so they only do surgery if they have to.  I guess the risk of surgery is higher than the risk of developing cancer.  I still believe that the longer those organs stay, the more likely they are to get sick, but this is simply based on what I think, not what the medical profession thinks.    However, I was actually going to have a prophylactic hysterectomy because prior to the diagnosis, over the past several years, I had had several endometrial biopsies due to postmenopausal bleeding.  I said I was sick and tired or having to go through this every couple of years and said I wanted it out and gone.  My gynecologist said I would be a good candidate for a prophylactic hysterctomy and she agreed to schedule one for me.  That was ursurped with the positive biopsy.  I had such a low grade cancer (grade 1), I bet it had been there for quite a while, but missed by previous biopsies.  It had been there long enough to grow to the size of a ping pong ball and to penetrate the uterine wall.  I'm so happy to have it gone. . .   I don't think you can have a hysterectomy to avoid potential uterine or ovarian or cervical cancers.  I do wish there was some better form of screening.