So - when you repeatedly said mets don't look like this - and I bet this isn't mets, had you read and understood that the report I cut/pasted into the question describes a speculated lesion - which we referred to throughout several subsequent questions? If not, does this now make it more likely that this could be mets from the breast?
At several points, I asked again about the spiculated lesion versus ground glass:
Q. What about the spiculated lesion? Is that consistent with breast cancer?
A. no, it is ground glass as well
Q.I apologize Dr. D. - but I'm not sure I understand what 'no, it is ground glass as well" is in response to. I tried to space my questions out to try to avoid confusion on my part, but I guess I didn't do it too well!
A. you asked me about that 6mm spiculated lesion which was ground glass as well.
Q.I thought that many ground glass lesions are cancerous, and over 90% of spiculated lesions/nodules are cancerous in the lungs, which would hardly be considered rare. Is that wrong?
Are all spiculated lesions also ground glass? Are you as confident about the spiculated lesion not being mets as you are about the other ground glass lesions?
A.I am a cancer doctor.
I don't see mets in the lungs look like this.
mets in the lung look like solid round smooth multiple lesions in the lung field.
Is this accurate?