Breast Cancer: My Interview With Dr. Laura Esserman
I was honored to be asked to attend the Avon Foundation’s Breast Cancer Forum last week in San Francisco. And I have a lot of information to share with everyone. I’m going to start with an interview I did with Dr. Laura Esserman. If the name doesn’t sound familiar, she was one of the researchers behind the controversial change in mammogram recommendations. I wrote about it for BlogHer back in November in a post titled…
Breast Cancer Screening: Are women just too emotional for mammograms before 50?
I guess the title of the post speaks to where I stand on the issue.
Although my feelings on this topic are contrary to Dr. Esserman’s point of view, I do think that she believes she has a woman’s best interest at heart.
This is from Dr. Laura Esserman’s bio…
Dr. Laura Esserman, a nationally known breast surgeon, is the director of the UCSF Carol Franc Buck Breast Care Center at the Mount Zion campus. Her work is devoted to developing new, more effective ways to care for and empower breast cancer patients during treatment and to tailor treatments using biology, personal preference and constant feedback regarding outcomes of care.
Shortly after Dr. Esserman spoke about her study to the attendees of the breast cancer forum, I had an opportunity to interview her.
In part one of my interview Dr. Esserman clarifies a few questions I had about digital mammography…
In the next part of the interview I made an attempt to have Dr. Esserman explain how better risk assessments would justify reducing mammograms, and how the new guidelines might complicate a woman’s access to mammograms. In both cases, I’m not sure her answers were sufficient to reduce concerns of missed opportunities for diagnosing breast cancer early. What do you think?
In the last part of our interview we spoke about why Dr. Esserman believes some mammograms and biopsies are unnecessary, as well as her thoughts on DCIS.
Although I agree with much of what Dr. Esserman spoke of, I still believe it’s a bad idea to change the mammogram guidelines before there is more clarity for women under age 50. What do you think?
Comments
Comment from Catherine Morgan
Time: March 1, 2010, 4:12 pm
Thanks Cascia. I think 50 is a good age for some, especially if they are being educated about other ways to assess their risks. I just don’t think it should be an across the board recommendation, I think each woman needs to understand their risks and make decisions about mammograms and biopsies with their health care provider.
Thanks again. You have a great day too.
Comment from Brenda
Time: March 7, 2010, 10:26 pm
Hmmm, I really think that mammograms should start at 40. I was taught that most cases of breast cancer are actually random, not due to any genetic predisposition (which accounts to only 5% of the cases). Having gone through breast cancer in my 40’s, and having it be worse because I was NOT doing my mammograms, I would not want to see this guideline change. I kind of don’t think it can be something that is left up to each individual woman because insurance companies will only cover what is necessary, not what a woman feels like she needs. So I would prefer to see the guidelines for mammograms at 40, and then women can opt out (as I regrettably did) if they choose to. But setting them older give us no options because insurance companies will not pay for it.
Comment from Catherine Morgan
Time: March 7, 2010, 10:43 pm
I totally agree Brenda. The most troubling part of all of this is that it seems to open the door for insurance companies to “opt out” of paying for mammograms before the age of 50…Ultimately, that will contribute to deaths of women who may have otherwise been saved if their breast cancer had been detected earlier…and that is a tragedy.
Thank you for commenting.
Comment from WhyMommy (Susan)
Time: March 17, 2010, 5:38 am
Catherine, I have to agree with you — it’s the insurance coverage changes for women whose doctors recommend mammograms that bother me most.
I think everyone agrees that self-awareness is an undisputed key, though — so let’s keep talking about it!
Susan
Comment from Catherine Morgan
Time: March 17, 2010, 12:02 pm
Thanks Susan. I totally agree…We need to keep talking about it.
Thanks for commenting.
Comment from Jennifer Reese
Time: March 27, 2010, 10:25 am
Laura Esserman was my mother’s breast surgeon. After a (seemingly) successful surgery for DCIS she did no follow-up whatsoever, as she said it was unnecessary, that the chances of a recurrence were vanishingly small. Almost exactly 2 years later my mother was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, a cancer that could potentially been
eradicated with proper follow-up by Esserman. I should add that my mother WANTED follow-up and was blown off until she had grinding pains in her chest and went to see her primary care physician who sent her straight up to oncology. The cancer eventually killed her. This is what I dislike about blithe by-the-numbers medicine and why I can’t listen to Laura Esserman without cringing.
Comment from Catherine Morgan
Time: March 27, 2010, 3:07 pm
Hi Jennifer. I’m so sorry to hear about your mother. I totally agree with you that there is no one-size-fits all when it comes to treating breast cancer (any cancer).
Comment from Gladys V. Range
Time: August 8, 2010, 1:43 pm
Dear Jennifer, I am very sorry about your experience and your Mom’s advanced stage finding. I am also very happy to find about Dr. Laura Esserman’s efforts to protect women by reducing mammogram use. I have also experienced very closely several loses to cancer. I have experienced conflict, and I know how painful and intense the process is from the patient, family, physician, medical supporting personnel, insurance, and care providers’ aspects. From experience I know, either one, or all involved in the process can fail at any given time, without recognizing it, finding or admitting it. However, here is a thought in support of Dr. Esserman – Scientific and Medical research driven by technology advances are in a real-time continuous state of advancement. Methods used 5, 10, 20, 30; 40 yrs ago are no longer effective in some instances. In fact they might be dangerous or ineffective to be used or continued. Ideally diagnostics as well as treatment should be total independent of high or low cost, concentrating in effectiveness. Today, when new scientific advanced methods and non-invasive procedures are in place, and can substitute prior; I believe Dr. Esserman’s proposed, a less invasive procedure could lead to better patient diagnostics and overall benefit to all involved. Catherine – Thanks for initiating this blog forum.
Comment from Cascia @ Healthy Moms
Time: March 1, 2010, 2:07 pm
That was a wonderful interview. I agree with you. I don’t think enough women really understand why law makers want to change the guidelines. I think that 50 is a good age to start having mammograms.
Have a fantastic Monday!