Breast Cancer Surgery on the Margins
Source: UC Irvine Health News, Making Breast Cancer Surgery More Precise; ucirvinehealth.org
One of the many problems facing breast cancer patients is weather their surgeon cut out all of the cancer in her breast during surgery. The goal in a lumpectomy is to completely remove the cancer while preserving as much normal breast tissue as possible. If a pathologist finds cancer cells on the edges of the tissue taken out, surgeons must assume the lumpectomy didn’t get the entire tumor. According to some statistics 30-60% of the time cancerous cells are found on the margins of the original cutting area, which require another surgery for the patient.
Using a sterile handheld probe and a portable console, surgeons at UC Irvine Medical Center are the first in the country to find a better way to get a definitive answer, the first time. When the probe tip touches an excised lumpectomy specimen, radio-frequency signals are transmitted into the tissue and reflected back to the console (think sonar), where they are analyzed using a specialized algorithm to determine tissue status. The MarginProbe System lets the surgeon immediately assess whether cancer cells remain on the margins of excised tissue. Currently, patients have to wait days for a pathologist to make the determination, assuming the pathologist gets it right.
“All of my patients know someone who has had to go back into surgery because their doctor didn’t get the entire tumor out,” said UC Irvine Health surgical oncologist Dr. Alice Police. “The ability to check tissue in the operating room is a game changer in surgery for early-stage breast cancer.” The US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approved MarginProbe in December 2012, and UC Irvine Medical Center is the first hospital in the U.S. to employ the system, according to manufacturer Dune Medical Devices. Dr. Police, assistant professor of surgery at UC Irvine and medical director of Pacific Breast Care in Costa Mesa, and Dr. Karen Lane, associate professor of surgery and clinical director of the UC Irvine Health Breast Health Center in Orange, began operating with MarginProbe in early March.
They had participated in an FDA trial that included more than 660 women across the U.S. In the prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-arm study, surgeons applied the device to breast tissue removed during in-progress initial lumpectomies and, if indicated, shaved additional tissue on the spot. This was found to reduce by 56 percent the need for repeat surgeries. ”It will save you a lot of anxiety,” said Jane Madigan, a Costa Mesa resident who underwent the procedure with Police as part of the MarginProbe trial. “You will come out of that surgery knowing you are cancer-free.”
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed with breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Breast Cancer New Research
Source: Molecular Cell, May 2013; Western Schulich School of Medicine & Denistry (Ontario, Canada)
Breast Cancer isn’t all the same. There is a type of breast cancer called “triple negative” which has limited treatment options and the worst chance of survival. Triple negative breast cancer is generally diagnosed based upon the presence, or lack of, three “receptors” known to fuel most breast cancers: estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2).
The most successful treatments for breast cancer target these receptors. Unfortunately, none of these receptors are found in women with triple negative breast cancer. In other words, a triple negative breast cancer diagnosis means that the offending tumor is estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative and HER2-negative, thus giving rise to the name “triple negative breast cancer.” While triple negative breast cancer is typically responsive to chemotherapy, triple negative tumors generally do not respond to receptor targeted treatments. Depending on the stage of its diagnosis, triple negative breast cancer can be particularly aggressive, and more likely to recur than other subtypes of breast cancer.
New research explains why some cancer cells don’t respond to chemotherapy, and identifies a mechanism to rectify that. The team at Western’s Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, led by Shawn Li, PhD, identified that a protein called “Numb” functions to promote the death of cancer cells by binding to and stabilizing a tumor suppressor protein called p53 -a master regulator of cell death. The scientists found when Numb is reduced or methylated by an enzyme called Set8, it will no longer protect p53. The research is published in the May 23rd issue of Molecular Cell. A related research paper on the role of chemotherapeutic agents on regulating protein methylation, also from the Li lab, will be published in the June 7th issue of Molecular Cell.
“If you don’t have Numb in a cell, then the p53 can be degraded very quickly, and these cells become resistant to chemotherapy,” explains Li, a professor of Biochemistry and Canada Research Chair in Cellular Proteomics and Functional Genomics. “So if we can prevent Numb from being methylated in cancer cells, then we will have the means to sensitize the cell to chemotherapy.”
Now that they’ve identified the Set8-Numb-p53 pathway, Li and his team are investigating various drugs to find a Set8 inhibitor which could be used as a novel breast cancer therapy alone, or in combination with other chemotherapy regiments.
For more information on Triple Negative Breast Cancer Click here for the TNBC Foundation®
The TNBC Foundation® is devoted to finding targeted treatment for triple negative breast cancer. With your help, we will find a cure.
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed with breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Skin Cancer Season
It’s almost Memorial Day weekend, the kick-off to Summer and with Summer comes much needed warnings to enjoy, but be safe and aware of the cancer facts, in the sun!
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing patients diagnosed with cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with skin cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Click on image to view Infographic
Skin Cancer is on the rise in the U.S. Your skin matters, get educated. Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer, of all the cancers in the U.S. 50% are skin cancer. Skin cancer medication is more expensive in the U.S than in Canada and other countries.
Brought To You By NorthWestPharmacy.com
Medical Malpractice Myths
Sources: David A. Hyman, MD, JD ; and Charles Silver, JD; CHEST 2013; 143(1):222–227
Take it with a grain of salt as it comes from a physician-lawyer and a lawyer, but strongly consider a well-researched article published in a peer reviewed medical journal which seeks to dispel the 5 Major myths that are consistently brought up by advocates for tort reform.
Myth 1: Malpractice Crises Are Caused by Spikes in Malpractice Litigation (ie, Sudden Rises in Payouts or Claim Frequency)
So-called “runaway” jury verdicts are rare and payment on them rarer still. Using data from State and Federal databases, including the National Practioner Databank, the authors determined that the frequency of medical malpractice claims and medical malpractice payments on malpractice claims were either stable or declining in the years preceding the “medical malpractice crisis” 1999 to 2000. The vast majority of patients who have bad medical outcomes do not retain a lawyer and do not ever file a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Myth 2: The Tort System Delivers Jackpot Justice
Again, most medical malpractice cases are settled with less than 5% of medical malpractice cases going to trial. And the doctors tend to win, at least 75% of the time. The big verdicts get publicity because, well they are big verdicts. But the fact is that big verdicts aren’t typically paid verdicts. Appeals almost always follow and such cases, if not retried, are settled for substantially less money than the original reported verdict. Settlements are almost always on the condition of non-disclosure agreements and therefore these do not get published with the detail and names that the original sensational news item will.
Myth 3: Physicians Are One Malpractice Verdict Away From Bankruptcy
Any verdict, blockbuster or otherwise, that exceeds the limits of a provider’s insurance coverage (typically $500,000 to $1 million) is very unlikely to be paid. It certainly would be difficult if not impossible in some circumstances to collect a verdict directly from a doctor. Out-of-pocket payments by physicians are extraordinarily rare. In sum, physicians have effectively no personal exposure on malpractice claims (other than the obvious and unavoidable side effects of litigation, eg, the emotional and time-related costs of being deposed and the surcharges from their insurance company).
Myth 4: Physicians Move in Large Numbers to States That Adopt Damages Caps
The “we’re losing our doctors” cry has fallen on deaf ears. Your doctors are still here, for the most part. It is true that doctors are electing not to go into higher risk professions (obstetrics, surgery) and that this may be a response to medical malpractice claims but babies continue to be delivered at hospitals both with and without incident. According to the authors’ extensive research, those patients who suffered grave and permanent injuries (including death) received a mean payout of only $1.25 million and a median payout of about $1 million. Not the kind of thing that causes doctors to leave en mas
Myth 5: Tort Reform Will Lower Health-care Spending Dramatically
The direct costs of medical malpractice claims (including the cost of malpractice awards and settlements and all costs associated with defending against such claims, including the administrative costs of medical malpractice insurers is relatively modest. There is broad agreement that the direct costs of the malpractice system are on the order of 2% of health-care spending. Studies, commissioned by the Federal Government suggest that a cap on non-economic damages would reduce Medicare spending by a statistically insignificant 1.6%.
Damages caps do little to improve the malpractice system. Although they can dramatically reduce claims frequency, payouts per claim, and insurance premiums, they do not make health-care safer, reduce health-care spending, compensate those who are negligently injured, or make the liability system work better. The best reforms are patient safety initiatives that reduce the frequency and severity of medical mistakes. Those tend to come from medical malpractice lawsuits.
The Lewis Law Firm handles cases of medical malpractice in Philadelphia and New Jersey. Call for FREE consultation today. Have you or a loved one been the victim of medical maplractice? Contact the Lewis Law Firm for a free consultation.
Breast Cancer and Mammography Centers
Sources: Current Litigation; US Food & Drug Administration
Breast Cancer can be detected early in many women who undergo routine mammography. Unfortunately, simply having a mammogram isn’t always a guarantee that you or your doctor will receive your results. The Lewis Law Firm urges all women who have a mammogram to follow up with their referring doctors. Under Federal Law in the US, you are supposed to receive a letter from the center performing the mammography within 30 days advising you, in simple terms, of the results. But does that mean you will?
Mammography is a business and like all businesses, mammography centers aren’t always successful. We are aware of no less than 3 mammography centers in Northern New Jersey which went bankrupt in 2009 and 2010 -literally closing their doors with patients still in radiology rooms.
Did you have a breast cancer screening mammogram scheduled and performed at any of the following New Jersey Mammography Centers?
Bergen Open MRI & Diagnostics, located at 1 W. Ridgewood Ave., Paramus, NJ;
Englewood Imaging Center, P.A., located at 177 N. Dean Street, Suite 102, Englewood, NJ; or
Imaging Center of Oradell, LLC, located at 680 Kindremack Road, Oradell, NJ.
Each of these facilities has gone through bankruptcy proceedings. Their records (YOUR films and reports) may not have been sent to your referring doctor! What does that mean for you? It means that you may experience difficulty and or a significant delay in trying to obtain the results of your diagnostic studies. This can have serious consquences to your health. If you have breast cancer which is shown on any prior mammography then any delay in the diagnosis of your breast cancer can mean a missed opportunity for treatment and may eliminate or reduce the possibility of a cure.
Facilities performing breast mammography have reporting requirements which are established by Federal Law. The failure to timely and properly interpret and report the results of a mammogram which reveals breast cancer is not only a violation of Federal Law, it is in our opinion, malpractice.
We are already aware of at least one patient who will likely not survive her breast cancer because these mammography centers did not send her mammogram results to the patient or to her doctors! The delay in her diagnosis caused her breast cancer to progress from a lesser stage to a metastatic (spread) stage.
If you had a mammogram at any of the above mammography centers, or if you had a prior mammogram for which you never received a report, or if you believe that a mammogram was misread then contact the Lewis Law Firm. The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed with advanced breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Cancer Misdiagnosis Common
Sources: Best Doctors and the National Coalition on Health Care Joint Study; American Journal of Medicine; BMJ Quality and Saftey
Cancer is diagnosed more commonly than most physicians, themselves are aware. A series of recently published studies indicate a misdiagnosis rate from 15% to 28% of the time. There are a number of reasons cited by medical professionals for this seemingly high rate of misdiagnosis for cancer: Among these are: fragmented medical records; time-strapped doctors simply not having enough time with patients; errors in pathology interpretation; patients not knowing or sharing important pieces of their family medical history; and an inflexible adherence to protocols. In addition to the number of lost and damaged lives, there are considerable financial costs associated with a high misdiagnosis rate. $700 Billion dollars are estimated to be wasted by the US Medical System each year– countless billions of which are from diagnostic error.
Over 1.6 million new cancer cases in the U.S. are projected to occur in 2013, according to the American Cancer Society. Some 400 pathologists, medical oncologists and surgical oncologists were polled to determine their awareness of the relative rate of cancer misdiagnosis. When participating doctors were asked how often they would estimate misdiagnoses rates in oncology, the majority (60.5%) estimated 0 to 10% of the time. Only 4.8% believed misdiagnoses occur 20-30% of the time. These numbers counter published studies which show misdiagnosis rates in general reaching up to 28%, and up to 44% for some types of cancer, according to the Journal of Clinical Oncology. This lack of physician awareness is also concerning.
When asked what types of cancer conditions physicians believe are most often misdiagnosed or mischaracterized, 21 conditions were named. Leading the top five misdiagnosed cancer conditions by a considerable margin was Lymphoma, followed by Breast Cancer, Sarcomas and Melanoma.
Does this mean that all cancer misdiagnosis is the result of medical malpractice by a physician? No. However the number is too large to attribute the rate of misdiagnosis to exemplary medical care in all circumstances. So what does this mean for you, the patient? Be your own health care advocate. Insist on follow up testing if you feel that something is being treated lightly or may be overlooked. If physicians who specialize in the recognition and treatment of cancer are unaware of how frequently it is misdiagnosed, they might not be so quick to find it.
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed late with breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Hospital Infections. No Big Improvements.
Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Press Release
Hospital infections persist, according to the recently issued National Healthcare Quality Report and National Healthcare Disparities Report by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to the conclusion that improvements in patient safety continue to lag.
Very little progress has been made on eliminating hospital infections (hospital-associated-infections) or (HAIs), according to a new section added to the quality report. For example, of the five types of hospital infections in adult patients who are tracked in the reports:
- Rates of postoperative sepsis, or bloodstream infections, increased by 8 percent.
- Postoperative catheter-associated urinary tract infections increased by 3.6 percent.
- Rates of selected infections due to medical care increased by 1.6 percent.
- There was no change in the number of bloodstream infections associated with central venous catheter placements, which are tubes placed in a large vein in the patient’s neck, chest, or groin to give medication or fluids or to collect blood samples.
- However, rates of postoperative pneumonia improved by 12 percent.
In addition, although rate of hospital infections could improve incrementally, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians are less likely than whites to receive preventive antibiotics before surgery in a timely manner.
“Despite promising improvements in a few areas of health care, we are not achieving the more substantial strides that are needed to address persistent gaps in quality and access,” said AHRQ Director Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D. “Targeted AHRQ-funded research in Michigan has shown that infection rates of HAIs can be radically reduced. We are now working to make sure that happens in all hospitals.”
Over 100 participating hospital intensive care units in Michigan have been able to keep the rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections to near zero, 3 years after adopting standardized procedures. The project, conducted by the Michigan Health and Hospital Association Keystone Center, involved the use of a comprehensive unit-based safety program to reduce these potentially lethal infections. Last year, AHRQ announced new funding that has expanded the project to all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.
AHRQ’s annual quality and disparities reports, which are mandated by Congress, were first published in 2003. The reports show trends by measuring health care quality for the nation using a group of credible core measures. The data are based on more than 200 health care measures categorized in four areas of quality: effectiveness, patient safety, timeliness, and patient-centeredness.
The reports indicate that the lack of health insurance slows improvement in health care quality and reduction of disparities. For many services, not having insurance is the single strongest predictor of poor quality care, exceeding the effects of race, ethnicity, income or education.
Americans with no insurance are much less likely than those with private insurance to obtain recommended care, especially preventive services and management for diabetes. While differences between blacks and whites in the rates of lack of insurance have narrowed in the past decade, disparities related to ethnicity, income and education remain large.
The Lewis Law Firm handles cases of hospital infection and hospital malpractice in Philadelphia and New Jersey . Call for FREE consultation today. Have you or a loved one been the victim of hospital maplractice? Contact the Lewis Law Firm for a free consultation.
Advanced Breast Cancer Increase in Women under 40
Sources: JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) 2013;309(8):800-805; National Cancer Institute, SEER Cancer Statistics Review
ADVANCED breast cancer, or metastatic breast cancer (spread through the body) effectively tripled among women younger than 40 between 1976 and 2009. These are women whose cancer had already spread by the time it was diagnosed. In this small, but statistically significant trent, 800 women between age 25 and 39 are now being diagnosed with advanced cancer as compared with 250 a year in the mid-1970s.
Researchers analyzing trends in cancer rates have published their findings in a recent issue of JAMA. Among the more troubling things they found were: that the rate of cancer incidence has gone up fastest in younger women — ages 25 to 34; and, that the trend affects women of all ethnic backgrounds, in rural areas as well as cities, and it has been accelerating in recent years. Because young age itself is an independent adverse prognostic factor for breast cancer, and the lowest 5-year breast cancer survival rates as a function of age have been reported for 20- to 34-year-old women. The most recent national 5-year survival for distant disease for 25- to 39-year-old women is only 31% according to SEER data, compared with a 5-year survival rate of 87% for women with locoregional (non-metastatic) breast cancer.
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in US adolescent and young adult women 15 to 39 years of age, accounting for 14 percent of all cancer in the age group. The individual average risk of a woman developing breast cancer in the United States was 1 in 173 by the age of 40 years when assessed in 2008. Young women with breast cancer tend to experience more aggressive disease than older women and have lower survival rates.
Rebecca H. Johnson, M.D., of Seattle Children’s Hospital and University of Washington, Seattle, and colleagues conducted a study in which breast cancer incidence, incidence trends, and survival rates as a function of age and extent of disease at diagnosis were obtained from 3 U.S. National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries. These registries provide data spanning 1973-2009, 1992-2009, and 2000-2009. SEER defines localized as disease confined to the breast, regional to contiguous and adjacent organ spread (e.g., lymph nodes, chest wall), and distant disease to remote metastases (bone, brain, lung, etc).
Since 1976, there has been a steady increase in the incidence of distant disease breast cancer in 25- to 39-year-old women, from 1.53 per 100,000 in 1976 to 2.90 per 100,000 in 2009. The researchers note that this is an absolute difference of 1.37 per 100,000, representing an average compounded increase of 2.07 percent per year over the 34-year interval. And the trend shows no signs of stopping.
The researchers also found that the rate of increasing incidence of distant disease was inversely proportional to age at diagnosis. The greatest increase occurred in 25- to 34-year-old women. Progressively smaller increases occurred in older women by 5-year age intervals and no statistically significant incidence increase occurred in any group 55 years or older. Incidence for women with estrogen receptor-positive subtypes increased more than for women with estrogen receptor-negative sub-types.
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed with advanced breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.
Childhood Disease Rates Rise
Sources: U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention; National Institutes of Health
Childhood Disease Rates have been kept low with the advent of vaccination programs. Childhood disease is common in the early months and years of life. Some upper respiratory viral or bacterial infections—colds, bronchitis, or croup—are quite common. Also common are ear infections, sinusitis, impetigo (skin infection), and conjunctivitis (pinkeye). However, there are diseases which used to kill large numbers of children before they reached adulthood. Vaccines have been incredibly effective in preventing childhood diseases and improving child mortality rates.
Childhood diseases such as Diphtheria lead to breathing problems. Pertussis is another name for whooping cough, and it hinders breathing and eating. Tetanus is a serious bacterial infection that can be fatal if not prevented or treated. Vaccinating your child against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis can be done in a single dose (DTP Vaccine). Thanks to a vaccine, the United States is one of the only places in the world where polio is completely eradicated. One shot is all it takes to prevent this paralyzing condition. Getting a flu shot and a pneumonia vaccine are also recommended for infants six months or over. A certain strain of pneumonia can lead to blood infections and meningitis, which is covered in the vaccine. Similarly, the MMR vaccine protects against measles, mumps, and rubella, viral infections that cause serious symptoms. Measles and mumps often can lead to chronic conditions, such as deafness, brain damage, and reproductive problems. Rubella (also known as the German measles) and causes a high fever.
Why?
The childhood diseases of Pertussis and Measles have been seen more frequently than expected in the United States as parents “opt out” of vaccination programs because of misplaced fears regarding the safety of vaccines. More than 41,000 cases of pertussis were reported to CDC during 2012. 18 pertussis-related deaths during 2012 were been reported to CDC as of January 5, 2013. The majority of deaths continue to occur among infants younger than 3 months of age. The incidence rate of pertussis among infants exceeds that of all other age groups. The second highest rates of disease are observed among children 7 through 10 years old. Rates are also increased in adolescents 13 and 14 years of age.
The CDC reports several important milestones already have been reached in controlling vaccine-preventable diseases among infants and adults worldwide. Vaccines have drastically reduced infant death and disability caused by preventable diseases in the United States. In addition:
- Through immunization, we can now protect infants and children from 14 vaccine-preventable diseases before age two.
- In the 1950s, nearly every child developed measles, and unfortunately, some even died from this serious disease. Today, few physicians just out of medical school will ever see a case of measles during their careers.
- In March 2005, CDC announced that rubella is no longer a major health threat to expectant mothers and their unborn children, thanks to a safe and effective vaccine, high vaccine coverage.
- In September 2010, CDC announced that childhood immunization rates for vaccines routinely recommended for children remain at or near record highs.
- Yet, the CDC reports, “without diligent efforts to maintain immunization programs in the United States and to strengthen them worldwide, vaccine-preventable diseases will remain a threat to children. As illustrations, it’s only necessary to consider the 2010 California outbreak of whooping cough where over 8,000 cases were reported in the state and where there were 10 infant deaths, or measles, which takes the lives of more than 100,000 children globally each year.”
- Over the last two years, Pennsylvania has had one of the highest rates of pertussis outbreaks in the US.
For more information search for “childhood immunization” or “shots” on medlineplus.gov. Or visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at www.cdc.gov/vaccines for more about vaccination schedules.
The Lewis Law Firm has a long history of representing children, and their families in Philadelphia and New Jersey. If your child has been diagnosed with preventable childhood disease, contact the Lewis Law Firm for a FREE consultation and review of your case, today.
Early Detection Critical for Breast Cancer!
Sources: American Cancer Society; and 30+ years of medical malpractice experience
EARLY detection of breast cancer, before it causes symptoms, is the key to cure and long-term survival of this disease. The goal of screening exams for early breast cancer detection is to find cancers before they start to cause symptoms. Breast cancers that are found because they are causing symptoms tend to be larger and are more likely to have already spread (metastasized) beyond the breast.
Although not all will admit this when they are Defendants in a medical malpractice case, most doctors believe that early detection tests for breast cancer save thousands of lives each year and that the size of a breast cancer when it is found and how far it has spread, and genetics, are the most important factors in predicting the prognosis (outlook) of a woman with this disease.
What are the risk factors for breast cancer? Many women with breast cancer have no apparent risk factors. There are breast cancer risk factors you cannot change. Among these are: Gender, men can develop breast cancer, but this disease is about 100x more common in women; Aging, your risk of developing breast cancer increases as you get older; Genetics, 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases are caused directly from genes BRCA1 and BRCA2; Family history of breast cancer, having a first-degree relative (mother, sister, or daughter) with breast cancer almost doubles a woman’s risk. 85% women who get breast cancer do not have a family history for it; Personal history of breast cancer, a woman with cancer in one breast has a 3- to 4-fold increased risk of developing a new cancer in the other breast (contralateral) or in another part of the same breast; Race and Ethnicity, white women are slightly more likely to develop breast cancer than are African-American women, but African-American women are more likely to die of this cancer; Dense breast tissue, women with dense breasts have a higher risk of breast cancer; Menstrual periods, women who started menstruating early (before age 12) and/or went through menopause later (after age 55) have a slightly higher risk of breast cancer; Previous chest radiation, treatment for hodgkin’s disease or lymphoma increases the risk of breast cancer as does chemotherapy.
What are the Signs and symptoms of breast cancer? The most common symptom of breast cancer is a new lump (mass). A mass that is painless, hard, and has irregular edges is more likely to be cancerous, but breast cancerscan be tender, soft, or rounded. They can even be painful. For this reason, it is important to have any new mass, lump, or breast change checked by your doctor and possibly by a breast surgeon. Other signs are: Swelling of the breast; Skin irritation or dimpling of the breast; Nipple pain or retraction (turning inward); Redness or scaliness of the breast; and, discharge. The American Cancer Society recommends that women age 40 and older should have a mammogram every year.
The Lewis Law Firm has a history of representing women who are diagnosed late with breast cancer. If you are in Philadelphia or New Jersey and you or a loved one have been diagnosed with breast cancer contact the Lewis Law firm today for a FREE consultation.