Low PET intake?

Sherryg683 · 02-01-2008, 10:40 AM

I finished my PET/CT scans last week and Oncologist told me everything was still great, I was still NED. He showed me the scans on the computer. On the scans, I noticed a red dot on my effected breast. I asked him what that was. He said that the PET was detecting where the surgery had been done, the tumor bed and the surgical staples were and that there was nothing to worry about. He showed me the different colors that the PET puts out that determine whether or not the intake is high or low. Mine was pink, he said which shows it had a low PET intake. The scale went all the way to a maroon color. On the radiologist report, it indicated "low to intermediate PET intake of 2.4 at surgery site, similar to previous scan of 1.4".. CT scan clear. Now this was a different radiologist who read my report than the usual one and he had a lot more stuff on it. On all my other reports it never mentioned a PET intake of 1.4 or anything. I really can't help but worry about this and almost want to ask my oncologist for a biopsy of the area or something. I know that PETs can pick up lots of other things but my surgery was 2 years ago, you wouldn't think it would still be an active area...although it still hurts like crazy. I don't know why I have such a hard time trusting what my Oncologist says, he's a great doctor. I just have a trust issue period. He's moving my scans back to every 6 months now and I just worry that if it is something there, it could spread in 6 months. What do you all think, ever had something similar...sherryg

Mary Jo · 02-01-2008, 01:36 PM

Hi Sherry,
Of course I can't answer why your surgical site showed a bit of uptake but I can tell you that I believe you can trust your oncologist on this one. I believe (because you tell us he is a "great" doctor) that if he felt there was reason for concern he would be the first one to tell you that. Why wouldn't he? He knows how concerned you are and how you worry about these things. If he felt something should be done I'm SURE he would recommend that to you. As far as an every 6 month PET scan, I also feel that is fine. You are at the 2 year mark now and although PET scans don't pick up a cancer that is very, very small, it wouldn't grow that much in a 6 month period. As far as that goes, I always thought a person could only have so many PET scans in a lifetime? Is their any truth to that - anyone?

Well anyway Sherry, I'm answering your post not because I know what's best - because I don't - just responding to help put your mind at ease. I know that after a cancer diagnosis it is hard to trust our bodies again but trust we must. There really is nothing else we can do until a problem arises. You are aware of your body - you get scanned on a regular basis and you have a "great" doctor. All that being said, my advice to you would be to enjoy the NED status and try to trust that if your doctor felt there was a problem he would tell you. Like I said before, why wouldn't he? He's there to help you.

Praying for God's Peace to hold you close today.

Mary Jo

Sherryg683 · 02-01-2008, 02:52 PM

Tks Mary Jo, you are right..I need to relax and enjoy my clean bill of health. I just have never seen it mention on all my reports any indication of PET intake, although this radiologist seemed to go into much greater detail than any other one I've had. I usually have the same guy that reads my report and I'm kind of use to his terminology. Even so, this recent report said "no marked change since last scan", so I guess I should take this as good. My husband says that I always go looking for the worst. I just feel like I need to prepare for the worst and hope for the best and enjoy every day that I am healthy. When I was diagnosed, I had just had a visual breast exam from my GP. He missed the lump in my breast and didn't take me seriously when I called him a week later saying I had found something. I guess I now feel like I have to be on top of everything and second guess everything. I do need to believe in my Oncologist because in 2 years, he has never steered me wrong and has been right about everything. As far as frequency of PETs, I don't think there's a limit...if there is, I've used probably most of mine. I have had scans every 3 to 4 months. It's nice to know that I don't have to do it again for 6 months but a little scary. Tks again for responding, sometimes you just need someone to say "relax"..sherryg

Mary Jo · 02-01-2008, 02:57 PM

Oh, you're welcome Sherry and I hope I didn't come across as unfeeling or trying to insinuate to you that you shouldn't worry. Of course, we ALL worry - that's a given - BUT - like you said, all I was TRYING to do is to help you relax and enjoy your NED status.

Love & Peace,

Mary Jo

chrisy · 02-01-2008, 03:35 PM

Sherry,

I agree, accept the good news as that. Sounds like you had a different radiologist do this read, and he is more detailed. That just means more information (and of course, there is that fine line of "too much information). That it reads at all may just indicate that there is some inflammation, which jives with your comment of it hurts. The change in uptake could be anything, and it is not significant. So I agree, relax, enjoy the good news~

hutchibk · 02-01-2008, 09:40 PM

Sherry - does this help? It sounds like low uptake is not a bad thing or something to worry too much about...

"Different tissues in your body take up different radionuclides, and therefore the radioactive substance used during a PET scan depends on the organ your doctor wants to investigate. The radioactive substance gives off tiny amounts of energy (radiation) in the form of positrons. These positrons are detected by a device called a PET scanner or gamma camera. The number of positrons emitted by an organ or area of tissue indicates how much of the radioactive substance the organ or tissue has taken up and, therefore, how chemically active it is. Areas that take up more glucose are more metabolically active and appear brighter on a PET scan. Areas that don't use much energy or that are damaged don't take up as much glucose and therefore aren't as bright on a PET scan.

Information from a PET scanner or gamma camera is processed and converted into images. A PET scan portrays chemical activity in parts of your body as images, or colors, of intensity. Areas of more intense color, or high uptake of the radioactive substance, are called hot spots. Areas of less intense color, which indicate a low uptake of radioactive substance, are called cold spots."

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/pet-scan/CA00052

Donna · 02-02-2008, 12:32 PM

Hi Sherry,

It's easy enough to take the bad news at face value, take the good news the same way and live the best, happiest life you can - that's what I try really, really hard to do. It's so easy to get caught up in the "what ifs" after what we have been through and very difficult to ever get back to a normal life.

Just want you to know I am thinking about you and wishing you well.

Donna

Sherryg683 · 02-02-2008, 08:58 PM

Thanks all. And thanks Hutchibk for that article. That set my mind at ease. I was trying to find something on the net about the PET intake myself but couldn't. I can always count on you gals. I will now enjoy the next 6 months before I get back to my worrying ways again...lol..sherryg

Bill · 02-02-2008, 09:09 PM

It sounds like good news to me, Sherry. Like my friend often tells me, "Don't borrow trouble". You rest easy. All of our prayers and well wishes are coming your way. Love, Bill