Just read this from Dana Farber

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

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! 

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

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

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! 

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.

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

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!

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!

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.