Melanoma Cancer Center

Question: I recently had a biopsy on a spot on my hip. It came back no melanoma but they are sending me to a cancer? center to see an oncologist because they are not sure what it is. 4 different pathologist have looked at it and all of them said to get a further opinion. It was a red mark about 1in. long & 1/2 in. wide. It didn't bother me and wasn't sore but when you pressed on it you could fill a hard core and it concerned my doctor so she removed it. She said that is was very vascular when whe got in there to take it out. I'm just concerned that they say it was not melanoma but now they are sending me to a cancer center. What could it be???

Answer: I have an area in my eye that is very vascular - it is just watched and has never done anything for 30 years. My friend has a vascular growth on her liver - has a scan every year but it too has not done anything more. Just keep in mind that if all you have is a hammer, then every thing gets treated like a n ail. An oncologist treats cancers with poisons - he has nothing else to offer. Do as much research as you can. Good luck.

Question: Texas cancer centers? I am helping relative locate cancer treatment center for metostatic melanoma.

Answer: My dad has metastatic melanoma stage IV, the worst melanoma you could have. It is very difficult to deal with, so I feel for you. MD Anderson in Houston TX is where my dad gets his treatments. He was enrolled in a clinical trial and is now in regular treatment. They are one of the best cancer treatment centers in the world. We live in Topeka, KS and he chose to commute to MD Anderson after I did careful research for him. He says they are quicker about the treatments, more thorough, and are very caring. He has never felt so good about being seen for this, and he's been to a lot of places for unsuccessful treatments. They also provide tons of services for their patients and the patients family. I think sending him there may have added time to his life. Please look into this place, they are saving lives. People come from all over the world to go there because they are one of the best. Nothing but the best of wishes for you and your family!

Question: my son has cancer and no insurance can he get help at your center. he is a vet and is going to the vet hosp? he lives in san antonio . he has melanoma that has spread to his liver. he is 42 years old.

Answer: I'm a retired medical oncology MD. Unless things have changed since I have retired, there are no good systemic treatments for melanoma metastatic to the liver. Chemotherapy has never been very effective for this type of cancer. Unfortunately, the outcome for this disease will likely be exactly the same no matter what treatment your son receives. It would probably not make a difference if he had millions of dollars or terrific health insurance. It is possible that investigational treatments could be available at the larger cancer centers - especially M.D. Anderson since he is relatively near there already. In some cases they may treat patients with experimental regimens without requiring full insurance coverage. You can look into these options with his VA doctors or check online under the topic Melanoma, metastatic. There are some types of cancer for which we simply do not have good treatment options no matter who the patient may be. Sometimes melanoma patients do better than anyone expected, but in those cases it isn't the treatment but the body's immune system which seems to be the important factor. Let's hope your son is one of the ones who does much nbetter than most.

Question: Malignant melanoma on bottom of foot? I had a melanoma removed (supposedly completely) which measured .8mm in depth. It began as a small mole on the instep of my right foot. Some 5 years ago(now in thirties), it grew darker and larger while the borders became irregular. I denied myself treatment until last week when it was immediately removed. Is a melanoma with .8mm depth extremely dangerous? I was referred to a "mohs" surgeon who wouldn't even see me after looking at my case and biopsy results. He sent me to a premiere cancer center the next morning that ordered further tissue removal with skin grafts and sentinel lymph node biopsy. From the information I've read, a melanoma with depth less than 1mm can be safely removed without worry of spread to the lymph nodes. So why is this oncologist surgeon so worried as to demand these procedures? Could they know something from the biopsy results that they're not telling me?

Answer: Not to scare you, but malignant melanoma is very much a cancer that is known to metastize, or spread to different organs or tissues quite easily and rapidly. Even though your lesion was less than 1mm, your oncologist, pathologist, or doctor just wanted to make sure especially because you waited five years to receive any type of treatment (this is why that Mohs surgeon refused to operate on you). Having ANY type of skin cancer has a very high chance of NOT being able to cure 100%. In fact, you will probably have to go back in a few years for a similiar procedure. I believe it is because of the tissue invovled. Practically, skin is "damaged" microscopically or macroscopically every day and it has a high regeneration. This is why you may find yourself in the same predicament in a few years. Also, you said you found this malignant malanoma on the bottom of your foot. This is pretty rare. Usually most lesions are ones that have have been exposed to sunlight more often. I believe your surgeons (like I said before) are taking a precaution to make sure it has not metasitized. In their mind, they may have "thought" it had already metasize to the bottom of your foot and "just checking" the LN around it made sure that this was NOT the case. Just make sure, you are careful about ALL lesions, moles, etc. Follow the ABCs. A for area (more than a pencil eraser size is risky), B is border (irregular border shape is not a good sign either), and C is for color (having a mole that is dark on the inside and light on the outside, or vice-a versa, can be a cause for alarm.

Question: Does McCain really think we're stupid enough to fall for a market-based healthcare scam? THIS ALONE SHOULD CREATE A GROUND SWELL OF UNSHAKEABLE SUPPORT AND ACTIVISM FOR OBAMA AND AGAINST McCAIN IN THIS ELECTION!!!!!!!! IF McCAIN IS ELECTED YOU ARE SCREWED! EVERY MEMBER SHOULD BE ABLE TO RELATE TO A REAL LOSS IN INCOME OF BETWEEN $2,400 AND $3,300 OR MORE! READ THIS CAREFULLY AND MAKE SURE THAT THIS GETS IN THE HANDS OF EVERY MEMBER IN OUR UNION AND ANYONE YOU KNOW WITH AN EMPLOYER SPONSORED HEALTH CARE PLAN!!!!!! McCain's Health Care Plan McCain gave a speech on his health care plan yesterday which said very little. In this NY Times article, McCain's economic advisor Holtz-Eakin makes it clear that their political strategy is to avoid getting tied down on any details, so that the glaring flaws in the plan won't be quite so obvious. Let's start with the one hard proposal McCain has made: he would tax employer-sponsored health insurance and create new tax credits--$5000 for a family and $2500 for an individual--for people who buy their own insurance. As Holtz-Eakin made clear in the talk I attended last month, this means that workers would have to pay taxes on the value of health benefits they received from employers. This is explicitly an attempt to kill the existing system of employer-provided care by dramatically increasing taxes on workers. How would this work out for the typical worker? Consider this information from the most recent Kaiser Family Foundation study of health care costs: In 2007, for a family the average total premium for a health care plan was $12,106, with $8824 paid by the employer. Let's say the McCain plan is enacted. What would happen to that average family if the employer continued to provide coverage (Scenario 1)? For a married couple filing jointly with income $63K-128K, the marginal tax rate is 25%, so they would face a tax increase of $2406 (25% of $8824). But of course the intent of the McCain plan is to kill the employer-provided system. So let's say the McCain program is adopted and your employer drops your family's coverage (Scenario 2). What would happen? You would now have to foot the complete $12,106 bill for coverage, a $8825 increase over the employee-portion you're currently paying. This would be offset by a $5000 tax credit. So net, you would end up paying $3325 ($8825-$5000) more for your health care. So, remarkably, McCain has managed to design a heads-you-lose, tails-you-lose program. Either your employer keeps your coverage, in which case you face a huge tax increase. Or your employer drops your coverage, and you face an even more massive increase in your out-of-pocket health-care costs. The best-case scenario would be that employers who dropped coverage would then increase wages, compensating workers for the jump in what they have to pay for health care. In the long-run, there's a fair case to be made that this would happen, but as Keynes famously remarked, "In the long run, we're all dead," and the transition period would be extremely painful. Strangely, although the plan is plainly an attempt to deep-six the employer-provided system, according to the NY Time article, "Mr. Holtz-Eakin said he believed that many employers would still offer health insurance to try to attract the best workers ..." If that's right, these workers would face a huge jump in their tax bill (see Scenario 1 above). None of this gets to the key problem in McCain's plan: on the individual market, people with pre-existing conditions would be denied coverage. Here's the relevant part of the Times article: Mr. McCain had previously described aspects of his health care plan but on Tuesday offered new details on how to cover people with existing health problems, in a nod to the growing concerns about the difficulties that many sick, older and low-income people have getting insurance. Elizabeth Edwards ... recently pointed out that both she and Mr. McCain could be left uncovered by Mr. McCain’s plan because she has cancer and he has had melanoma. Stung by such criticism, Mr. McCain is trying to develop a way to cover people with health problems while still taking a generally market-based approach to solving the health care crisis. “I’ll work tirelessly to address the problem,� Mr. McCain said in a speech here at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute. “But I won’t create another entitlement program that Washington will let get out of control. I won’t do it. Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate.� For people who currently get health insurance through their jobs, Mr. McCain’s plan would give them a tax credit that they could put toward buying a different, and potentially less expensive, health insurance plan tailored to their needs — and allow them to keep that health plan, and their doctors, even if they switch or lose their jobs. But Democrats and some experts said the proposal might lead some employers to stop offering health insurance, and questioned whether the tax credit would cov But Democrats and some experts said the proposal might lead some employers to stop offering health insurance, and questioned whether the tax credit would cover the cost of private insurance .... Mr. McCain’s speech here implicitly acknowledged some of the shortcomings of his free-market approach. But rather than force insurers to stop cherry-picking the healthiest — and least expensive — patients, Mr. McCain proposed that the federal government work with states to cover those who cannot find insurance on the open market. With federal financial assistance, his plan would encourage states to create high-risk pools that would contract with insurers to cover consumers who have been rejected on the open market. Mr. McCain was vague Tuesday about just how his safety net would be structured, and did not specify how much it might cost, leaving the details to negotiations with Congress and the states. But his top domestic policy adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said in an interview that the fede federal share could cost between $7 billion and $10 billion — money he said could be redirected from existing federal programs that pay for uncompensated medical care, mainly in hospitals. Mr. Holtz-Eakin said that sum, when combined with contributions expected from the states and insurers, could provide coverage for the five million to seven million uninsured people that he estimates cannot obtain it because of their health or age. These figures are nonsense on their face. If the federal government is going to subsidize a high-risk pool of 5-7 million people with $7-10 billion a year, the proposed subsidy is $1400 year. There is no way to this is going to be anywhere close to covering the extra insurance costs for a group that consists of old and sick people. Although McCain intentionally leaves out the details, the only place these extra funds could come from is from the states. In other words, although McCain says, "Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate,� this is exactly what his plan would do. Additionally, the 5-7 million is surely a vast underestimate of the number of people who would not be able to obtain health insurance in McCain-land. Anyone old, sick, or with a prior condition--a number that would easily be in the several tens of millions--would not be able to obtain insurance at anything other than obscene rates. Faced with no restrictions, insurers would cherry pick only the low-risk customers. Overall, the McCain plan would raise taxes on workers in an effort to eviscerate the current health care system in the name of free market idolatry. To the extent it fails to completely destroy the existing system--as McCain's advisor anticipates--it would saddle the average family with $2400 in extra taxes to penalize them for having employer-sponsored care. And if the McCain plan succeeded in killing the current system, it would leave tens of millions unable to buy any care, until he comes up with some new safety net, details to be provided later, i.e. never. http://bp1.blogger.com/_vt1LPZed0LU/SBh9v6aUseI/AAAAAAAAAFg/Okv41l946vU/s1600-h/kff.jpeg

Answer: We already have a market-based healthcare system. Isn't that the problem in the first place. The insurance industry is the only industry that makes higher profits than the oil industry.

Question: Your Opinion:Does this sound/look like melanoma? I have a mole slightly larger than a pencil eraser on my back and is discolored: edges are tan then fades to white and has black center-if not black, very dark brown. It just recently got discolored, I had the mole for quite awhile. It doesn't really hurt, only if you push on it. It has a pretty consistent circular shape with one side slightly larger than the other. Mother had skin cancer-non malignant, which has not returned. I plan on seeing the doctor when i get insurance but would like some unoffical answers.

Answer: You are describing several factors that are warning signs for moles to be checked out. irregular shape, changing color, uneven color, larger diameter. See a dermatologist and have is removed and biopsied to be sure and safe. Good luck

Question: Which forms of cancer are associated with cherry angiomas? For years I've had these tiny little pinprick dots on my arms, just about 1 mm each, but lately I've been noticing more and more. I don't know what they are, since I looked at pictures online and they don't fit the criteria for petechiae or angiomas, but cherry angiomas are what look the most like them. I may have around 100 of these tiny things. They don't ulcerate, they don't blemish, and all of them are bright red. I go to the gym regularly and strain my muscles every now and then. I heard that Hodgkin's lymphoma, disseminated melanoma, multiple myeloma, and lymphatic leukemia can cause such things to appear. What else could? Is this all in my head? I had a normal urinalysis and WBC count so I can rule out leukemia and myeloma. I also saw a dermatologist and she saw no suspicious mole. Here are some of my symptoms - Feeling of incomplete defecation Lower abdominal discomfort I noticed red streaks on my stool yesterday, though today everything was fine Nausea Fatigue/Lightheadedness Mild intermittent night sweats No fever, no swollen lymph nodes/spleen, my abdomen felt perfect according to my Dr., I seem to feel much better when I'm active, and I can sleep fine I'm going to the health center tomorrow to urge for a referal to a gastroenterologist about the red streaks I've been under a ton of anxiety for about a month and a half, I've been taking Celexa for a week, Xanax for two, and I've been taking some multivitamins.

Answer: Why do they have to be associated with any cancer? I think you need more time for your meds to kick in as they do not appear to be working yet.

Question: atypical mole should I be concered? so my mom had just got her physical and came back telling me she may have a mole that just may be pre cancerous or cancerous. Now the doctor told my mom that she was not worried and should come back on sept. 9 to get it removed. so i did a little Research and found what my mom had was called an atypical mole. What I found was that these mole can turn into a deadly cancer called Melanoma. Not all of the them turn into cancer.My mom has no family history of melanoma at all. Online it says that most are bigger then a pencil eraser and are not symmetrical.Well my moms mole is smaller then a pencil eraser and looks symmetrical to me. the only description that really matches my mom mole is the color it is brown on the outside and black near the center. I know the dr. told my mom not to worry about it but it's kind of scary thinking that my mom might have cancer. Is there anyone who has had to have a mole removed due to cancerous concerns. Feel free to leave more info regrading these moles. THANKS!

Answer: For suspicious moles, the doctors remove them and have them biopsied. The layman's terms atypical or pre cancerous means that the moles have some abnormal cells. This means that you need to continue to get periodic Dermatologist exams to monitor any other suspicious moles. Keeping up with this is the best way to avoid a mole from becoming Melanoma. The key is regular self exams and Dermatologist exams. Even if it was Melanoma, caught early, is very treatable. You also should have your moles looked at as family history is a risk factor.

Question: Where are the best cancer centers for Metastatic Melanoma? I think some hospitals and Doctors only treat what the insurance will pay. I need to know where the best cancer center are that will treat fully and completely

Answer: There are medical research facilities and universities that are networked throughout the United States designated as Comprehensive Cancer Centers. What this means is that they share the latest research information with each other to provide the best possible treatment available for that particular cancer. You can find a list of the comprehensive cancer centers at the National Cancer Institute site: Comprehensive Cancer Centers by state http://cancercenters.cancer.gov/cancer_c… National Comprehensive Cancer Network http://www.nccn.org/ NCI: Cancer Centers Programs http://cancercenters.cancer.gov/cancer_c… You might benefit from contacting other patients with metastatic melanoma and asking what treatments options are currently available: ACOR: Email Melanoma Support Group http://listserv.acor.org/archives/melano… Melanoma Patients Community http://www.mpip.org/ Melanoma Center http://www.melanomacenter.org/ American Melanoma Foundation http://www.melanomafoundation.org/ Best to you.