That’s always how it goes, isn’t it. Briefly, I managed to ignore the new breast cancer screening guidelines. I’ve even known for years that screening mammograms offer questionable benefits. It’s funny how perspective changes, though. If these guidelines had been released a year ago they would have made perfect sense to me. Now they do not.
Really, these guidelines don’t even apply to me. Mammograms aren’t exactly necessary after a bilateral mastectomy. Self breast exams have changed to chest wall exams. But. To argue that self-exams aren’t worth it? I just can’t understand that. I understand the epidemiological statistics but I don’t understand how they conclude there aren’t ANY benefits to self-exams. None, really? Just thinking about it in the context of my own diagnosis:
I was never good about doing self exams, and I found my lump in the shower. Had I not forgotten a washcloth that day, there’s no telling when I would have found it. Had I done regular self-exams, I probably would have found it the following week when I did my monthly exam. Without a regular self-exam and without forgetting my washcloth? My tumor was poorly differentiated, fast growing, and triple negative – the most aggressive type.
And then I realized – my real concern here isn’t the guidelines at all – it’s finally allowing myself to think about what could have happened to me. What could still happen to me. Cancer sucks. Cancer is scary. Cancer can go undetected until it’s too late. What if my tumor had been deeper and I hadn’t been able to feel it. How big would it have gotten and how quickly would it have spread? How bad would it have been before I found it?
I’m also worried about what this could mean for insurance coverage for mammography. A lot of what I read today said that we need a test with better specificity – a test that identifies cancer without the false-positives associated with mammography. I agree – that’d be great. But we don’t have that test! Unfortunately, with health care reform legislation working it’s way through Congress, we can expect that coverage decisions will be made based upon the findings of this Task Force – for breast cancer, women’s health, men’s health, cardiovascular disease…
Oh yes, about cardiovascular disease. Currently, most insurance companies essentially rely on Medicare to determine what they will cover for cardiac rehabilitation. This includes diagnosis codes (many insurance companies do not yet cover cardiac rehab after valve replacements, for instance, though I believe Medicare recently started covering it) as well as components of the cardiac rehab program. If insurance plans typically do not reimburse for the services of nutritionists or counselors to provide dietary and stress management counseling, facilities cannot afford to include those components in their programs.
This can easily be tied back to mammography. It is forseable that a national health care plan would no longer cover screening mammograms for women under 50. That could result in private companies not covering them, either. So, the guidelines put forth by the Panel said that mammography should be decided on a case-by-case basis between the ages of 40 and 49. What would it take to get those mammograms covered by insurance?
Furthermore, I can’t help but wonder what it would have meant for me if these recommendations had come out a few years ago. Would I have gotten the testing I needed when I presented with my lump, or would I have been pushed aside and told I was too young to have breast cancer and just to monitor the lump for changes? What if 6 months later was too late for me? A fast-growing tumor. . . maybe it could have spread by then. At the very least, it’s likely it would have made it to my lymph system. I would have gone from Stage I with a (somewhat acceptable) prognosis to Stage II with a much less-happy prognosis.
So many issues upon which to dwell…