Mar 19, 2012 - 10:10 am
As I posted last week, I sent an email to my urologist about the vascular invasion question that was discussed in an earlier posting. He returned to the office today and got back to me immediately. Kudos to him for that.
Below is his response to my question about vascular invasion and tumor necrosis.
I'm not sure I completely understand his second sentence because the way it is worded is somewhat confusing. But I guess this confirms the idea that if vascular invasion is listed as present on the pathology report it can be a negative factor in prognosis. In other words, it's not something to jump up and down with joy about, but it's not necessarily an awful thing unless before the nephrectomy the cancer cells had already spread outside the kidney through the lymph channels and vascular spaces. The >90% survival figure is encouraging to me, though.