Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / January 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Results of latest MRI of spine -- not sure if good or bad...

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Kaye301 - 31 Dec 2003 06:46 GMT
--I am concerned about my latest MRI (12/24) report.  Last April I experienced
severe sciatic pain in lower left buttocks down back of that leg and down front
and around ankle.  I had an MRI which was ordered finally by my internist after
being bounced around between physicians, which reported either a synovial cyst
or mass.  (My onc. told me to call my neurologist and ask to see a
neurosurgeon.  My neurologist had retired and was scheduled for a neurologist
appt. 3 weeks after this happened.  I tried to get appt. sooner but was told by
on-call neurologist that 'she' didn't know me so all she could do was put me on
wait list.  Meanwhile my internist who never wants to get involved in anything
possibly cancer related referred me to the neurosurgeon.  He referred me to the
spine M.D.'s.  The spine M.D. recommended surgery to remove the cyst and rough
up the bone to prevent its return.  His partner whom we all consulted with
recommended the same.  I asked if they  could get clear margins.  I was told
that would not be possible because of its location that would most likely
result in paralysis if that were attempted.  I then asked even if it were
benign, did they ever do prophylactic chem just in case there were
micrometastases.  They told  me to ask my oncologyst.  The oncologist told me
that that was the reason he did not recommend surgery.  It was also recommended
that I just use an exercycle and give up walking for exercise.  (I had recently
gotten a treadmill).  I did for awhile but in June had the opportunity to sign
up for the Susan G. Komen 3-day breast cancer walk--and wondered if I was
completely nuts for even considering it.
I then had a second MRI in July and all was status quo.  The sciatic pain was
intermittent.  I then began walking more in July---went on vacation with my
husband where we did alot of hiking--pain and all.
In September I went on my first training walk for the 3-day, a 7-mile walk.  I
started out in agony.  I made myself continue.  The more I walked the less I
felt the pain--not sure why but thought it might have to do with the
endorphins.  I continued to train for the walk over the next few mos.  I did
the walk in November and must say by then the pain had lessened and still has.
I thought the spine dr. had said to have another MRI in 3 mos. after the last
one.  I didn't call until December--and the dr. ordered an MRI of the lumbar
and thoracic spine.
(I had also begun to have daily shoulder pain in August--and was bounced around
between physicians like a ping pong ball over that--nobody wanting to take
direct responsibility.  I finally had an MRI in October which showed increased
activity in the shoulder but the orthopedist thought the problem was in my
neck.  I had also had an MRI of the cervical spine in July and supposedly
something was going on there, too.  However, when the spine dr. ordered the
most recent MRI he only ordered it for the thoracic and lumbar spines, not the
cervical spine.  So, I called to see if I could get that done, too.  The
receptionist called me back--and said the dr. put in an order for that as well
and faxed it to facility I use for most care and where tests are done.
However, the day before MRI they said they hadn't received any fax or order.
So, on 12/24 I had the MRI done of just the lumbar and thoracic spines.  I put
a call into the receptionist last week asking about the order for the cervical
spine.  I received a call yesterday--she told me she had done it but doesn't
know why they didn't have it and did it again.  Yesterday, my facility
called--they now had the order and gave me an appt. to have it done in 2 weeks.
Meanwhile, today I got the report from the 12/24 MRI and am concerned.  I won't
go  into all of it on this post--it's long enough--but am concerned because it
states that "the previously demonstrated probably synovial cyst or other
extradural mass along the medial aspect of the left sided L4-5 facet joint
demonstrates a more heterogeneous contrast enhancement on the current study.
In addition, the borders are less well defined and there is a suggesion that
hte overall size has decreased in the interim.  The contrast enhancement is the
region of the left-sided neural foramen is also more prominent in this study.
Cause not clear."
I am not sure if that is good or bad or mixed.  My thoughts are that it is
both.  It had been previously pointed out to us that they (dr's were sure it
was a cyst rather than a malignant lesion because the borders were 'smooth.'
However, the latest report now states that 'the borders are less well defined.'
 At the same time it states that the 'overall size has decreased in the
interim' which sounds good.
My take--is that it wasn't a cyst but a mass.  I forgot to mention that in
October the dosage of Celebrex I was on was increased to 800 mg/day--the
highest 'safe' dosage--and the level recommended for anti-tumor activity (at
least for those who have colon cancer---which, as far as I know, I don't
have--but that level is also thought to be helpful for other tumor types).
Anyway, my thoughts are that that may have helped reduce the size of this mass
or whatever it is.   I am a bit uneasy about what may be going on.
Tim Jackson - 31 Dec 2003 10:14 GMT
To cut to the meat..
> --I am concerned about my latest MRI (12/24) report.  Last April I experienced
> severe sciatic pain in lower left buttocks down back of that leg and down front
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> I then had a second MRI in July and all was status quo.  The sciatic pain was
> intermittent.
...
> The more I walked the less I
> felt the pain  ...must say by then the pain had lessened and still has.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> region of the left-sided neural foramen is also more prominent in this study.
> Cause not clear."
...
> I forgot to mention that in
> October the dosage of Celebrex I was on was increased to 800 mg/day--the
> highest 'safe' dosage--and the level recommended for anti-tumor activity

Either it isn't malignant, or it is weakly malignant and the Celebrex and
hormone therapy are taking care of it.  Either way it's going nowhere and
can safely be ignored for now if the pain is under control.

Ragged and smooth edges: think of clouds.

1. A growing non-malignant mass has smooth edges like a cumulus (growing)
cloud because it is pushing the surrounding tissue aside and you are looking
at a pressure boundary, in this case a membrane under tension.  The edges
are sharp in image.

2. A receding non-malignant mass will cease to have smooth edges because the
pressure will collapse, and the surrounding membrane, once stretched will
fall all wrinkly as the surrounding tissue returns.  This is like a cirrus
(shrinking) cloud.  The edges are rather fuzzy in image.

3. A cancer erodes the surrounding tissue so does not usually develop much
pressure but grows along the paths of least resistance, spidery or
crab-like.  The edges are very hazy.  I can't really do a cloud analogy for
that, but alto-stratus would probably come nearest.

The MRI report above best fits case 2 - shrinking and a bit fuzzy.  The man
says "cause not clear" and we have to accept that.  Let's go with the
assumption that it is the walking that is acting on it, and see where that
takes us.

Tim
Kaye301 - 31 Dec 2003 15:02 GMT
Tim wrote: << Either it isn't malignant, or it is weakly malignant and the
Celebrex and
hormone therapy are taking care of it.  Either way it's going nowhere and
can safely be ignored for now if the pain is under control...The MRI report
above best fits case 2 - shrinking and a bit fuzzy.  The man
says "cause not clear" and we have to accept that.  Let's go with the
assumption that it is the walking that is acting on it, and see where that
takes us.>>

Thanks, I like that.  It is a bit more reassuring, but there is a 'but' to all
this.  2 days after the MRI--that would be 5 days ago I did something not so
smart which caused me to fall while on the treadmill.  I was multi-tasking to
save time.  I was watching a movie on my portable dvd player which was at the
top of the treadmill,  with headphones, and I started to unwind my lymphedema
bandages as I walked.  In addition I was wearing loafers rather than my running
shoes.  Not smart--downright 'dumb.'  I had a warning while just walking.
There was one area that seemed not to have as much traction.  It was either the
belt on the treadmill or my left shoe--and have since figured it was most
likely the latter.  Either way I wound up falling face down--my arms were
spread eagle.  In addition I wasn't wearing the safety belt so the treadmill
was still going.  Fortunately, there were others home at the time.  One of my
daughters came running and stopped the machine.  My husband, who is usually
quite sympathetic wasn't happy with me (don't blame him) not only for doing
what I had been doing but also not wearing the safety latch which would have
automatically stopped the machine.  I had forgotten all about it.  What I felt
most was a sore knee.  I was able to walk okay and went upstairs and iced much
of my body for the next hour and then took a warm shower.  That really helped
because all I have on my knee is like a 'rug' burn that is scabbed over without
any purple bruises--either there or anywhere.  However, my spine and lower back
are feeling it more along with my upper arms a bit.  Since then I have also had
some momentary joint pains in my elbow--which may not even be related--am even
thinking that (elbow joint pain) may be possible autoimmune reaction to flu
shot that I had 2 weeks ago (and am somewhat sorry I did).
Anyway, I continue to ice my back and hips daily .  I had a bit more hip pain
(which has also showed up as I think possibly increased activity) on scans (one
scan report indicated osteopenia).
I am wondering if I should have this checked out now or when?  I am doing my
own partial P.T. (with the ice and heat) but there is not going to be a record
of any changes that took place to know if it was fall-related or if I have
another MRI in 3 mos.--how much would be due to other changes.  I am definately
hurting more.  Funny thing, though, I still have to have an MRI of the CT spine
which the dr. forgot to include.  His receptionist did fax the order to  where
I had the MRI done but they hadn't received it at time of scan.  I had to call
and check on it.  The receptionist said it had been sent but wound up sending
it over 'again' (so don't really know which end messed up, if any).
Either way I am feeling more in my back than before and am not quite sure whom
to call or what to do about it, if anything.  I can still walk okay but for
first time my spine is bothering me while sitting...doesn't hurt but there is
pressure, tight, band-like feeling which only happened when under hot water
before.
Tim Jackson - 31 Dec 2003 16:07 GMT
> 5 days ago ...
> I wound up falling face down--my arms were
> spread eagle.
> However, my spine and lower back
> are feeling it more along with my upper arms a bit.
...
> I am feeling more in my back than before and am not quite sure whom
> to call or what to do about it, if anything.  I can still walk okay but for
> first time my spine is bothering me while sitting...doesn't hurt but there is
> pressure, tight, band-like feeling which only happened when under hot water
> before.

I don't much like the sound of that tight-band feeling, that sounds like
inflammation affecting the nerves in a vertebral foramen.  Can you describe
that in a bit more detail?

If it doesn't (continue to) improve, take it to your GP (as a fall) in the
first instance.  There is obviously some inflammation going on, but your
heavy Celebrex will be sitting on it, so you won't get the usual symptoms.
I'd give it not more than another week to show signs of improvement.  Might
be worth giving him/her a call and asking for advice straight away.

Tim
Kaye301 - 31 Dec 2003 16:20 GMT
Tum wrote << I don't much like the sound of that tight-band feeling, that
sounds like
inflammation affecting the nerves in a vertebral foramen.  Can you describe
that in a bit more detail?

I first reported that last Spring.  It would happen for a brief period of time.
M.S. could result in that feeling but I thought it would last longer than just
occur briefly.  The feeling had been occurring mostly when the water from the
shower would hit it.  I told the neurologist and the spine dr's.  They didn't
appear concerned.  I know it could be something spine-related--which is another
of the reasons why I have been petrified about the possibility of spinal mets.
The MRI report also states: "The contrast enhancement in the region of the
left-sided neural foramen is also  more prominent in the study.  Cause not
clear."
The band like feeling has come and gone, and in fact seemed to go away for
awhile and has returned.
I probably didn't mention it--too overwhelming to go into all the detail but
after last neurology visit we went to a private neurologist--top M.S.
specialist (or one of 'em) in So. Cal whom I used to consult with privately
before starting Beta Seron (interferon beta) for the M.S. I hadn't seen him
since '95.  I went to have him look at MRI's to verify that lesions were M.S.
related as opposed to brain mets.  He thought that they were.  In
addition--they had improved.  Interestingly, he said that the AC chemo could do
that.  I hadn't thought it could cross the blood-brain barrier.  Although am
wondering if the beta seron could have caused the improvement.  
Anyway, he thought I should have a special antibody test to see if I've
developed immunity to the beta seron to make sure the (spinal) symptoms were
not M.S. related.  I saw him a month ago but still don't have the report.  He
also recommended a bunch of tests to evaluate neck/cervical spine.  
I wanted to add, that I  have good movement of my neck  and that doesn't hurt,
although when I look down I get some tingling in my toes.  My range of motion
is still good as is my activity level and hope that I am not speaking or
writing too prematurely but the sciatic pain is rarely there.  My upper back on
right side is hurting a bit--from fall I presume, and of course the shoulder
pain is still there...
allan grossman - 31 Dec 2003 12:42 GMT
Kaye, you need a bone scan.

Might be time to pitch the HMO, kiddo.
Kaye301 - 31 Dec 2003 16:05 GMT
Allan wrote: << Kaye, you need a bone scan.
Might be time to pitch the HMO, kiddo.

Hi Allan, good to hear from you.  I've been thinking of you and Deborah--hope
things are going okay.  You are probably right about the HMO but it is probably
too late for that this year.  Why didn't I change when I could...
Anyway, A bone scan you suggest--well not sure where to begin on that one but
-- another 'chapter' between that and most recent CT scan but for now will just
report on that although may have to weave 'tale' of CT in with that to fully
explain.
I had a bone scan last month.  The clinical history on the order for the bone
scan correctly stated "shoulder pain" and incorrectly stated "hip pain."  I had
been experiencing lower back pain.  After the scan was done I wandered over to
the area where the films were on the screen and asked the tech if I could have
a look.  The tech, on her own, verbally told me I had some unusual 'hot spots'
which she  pointed out to me and I could clearly (black spots) see in both my
lower back L4/L5 area and in my left shoulder.  The report came back mentioning
'mild' uptake in my lower back but made absolutely no mention of anything going
on in my shoulder.  I pointed that out, along with what was going on in my CT
scan (which I will share in another post) but got absolutely no resolution
although he did say it was my 'right' to have it read outside, privately.
I am so tired of dealing with the medical system--it is very much
mind-boggling, and it seems that the more involved and one's case is, the more
convoluted things become.  There isn't enough time or man-power to manage
adequately by anyone.
Anyway, I called the manager or head of radiology to share my dilemna at the
same time asked for re-reading of my CT scans which were done.  I wasn't
notified that that had been done but there were new reports that I learned of
yesterday when I went to get my latest MRI films (copies) and report.  However,
there was no new re-reading of my bone scan.  I think that there needs to be
some follow-up and or perhaps it is time to go over all this with an 'expert.'
We are planning to consult with another nuclear radiologist--have the names of
two of 'em but they aren't around for the holidays...
Alex - 31 Dec 2003 16:30 GMT
It sounds like it is good news. Do you have your care at a Cancer
Treatment Center or do you go to many different facilities. Studies
have shown that younger women have better outcomes. It seemes like
everybody has a little piece of your care but no one is connecting all
the dots (except you). The team approach could be helpful.  Anyways
Happy and Healthy New Years. ALex
Kaye301 - 31 Dec 2003 17:52 GMT
Alice wrote: <<  Do you have your care at a Cancer
Treatment Center or do you go to many different facilities.

I am being treated through a non-profit HMO.   All care, for the most part, is
at the same facility.

<<Studies have shown that younger women have better outcomes. >>

I've read that but am not sure whether or not I would or wouldn't be considered
'younger.'  I felt the symptoms that led to my dx 10 days before I had the
biopsy.  I felt those symptoms in the wee hours of my 50th b'day before I
awoke.  However, I first felt the mass that was to be biopsied 9 mos. earlier
for whicy my ob-gyn 'dissed' me because the mammogram had been normal.  The
hardened area I felt was not noticeable before the mammogram but felt it within
a day afterwards--thought it was bruising or tissue damage from the mammo, but
when it was there 2 to 3 weeks later I then showed my dr. and the above
happened.  Treatment protocols are sometimes based on age or menstrual
status--either <50 or >50.   Since I was still getting my periods regularly for
the most part at time of dx and because the 'mass' that was first biopsied was
noticed about 3 mos. after my 49th b'day, I thought that I would most likely be
a better fit for the protocol  of <50.  However, since I first saw the onc.
about 5 weeks after my 50th b'day, I was classified as >50, although was told
that I was in the 'gray' area for that.

<< It seemes like
everybody has a little piece of your care but no one is connecting all
the dots (except you). >>

Yep, that's how it is and has been.  It is NOT what I want to be doing but feel
I need to for survival...I trusted the system before this all happened, and it
failed me.  How can I ever fully trust again, especially with all that's gone
on.  Granted, my case is a bit more complicated than most but do wonder if what
I am going through is unique to any system or more the norm than not, both
private and through managed care...After all, some of the private physicians
I've seen  didn't get it quite 'right' either.  I do believe, though, that most
are doing their 'best' with what they have or have been given--most, but not
all...
Tim Jackson - 31 Dec 2003 20:44 GMT
> Alice wrote
> << It seemes like
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> are doing their 'best' with what they have or have been given--most, but not
> all...

It's not unique to your system, although your case is certainly unusually
complicated.  I've had some similar disconnection problems in the UK NHS.

I believe it arises unavoidably from the specialisation of medical
consultants.  There really needs to be a central expert point of contact to
pull all the threads together.  NHS has made an attempt at this in bc by
building breast teams and assigning a "Breast Care Nurse" to that role, but
in my experience it rarely works properly, the nurse has neither the
expertise nor the information to perform this adequately.  While she is
available for the patient to ask questions or pass on comments, she is not
automatically informed by the consultants as to what is going on, and does
not hold (or even see) the clinical records.  So it is still up to the
patient to ensure that information gets to where it is needed, and no one
can completely trust the system.

Tim
Alexandra Koffman - 01 Jan 2004 22:46 GMT
> I am being treated through a non-profit HMO.   All care, for the most part, is
> at the same facility.
>
> <<Studies have shown that younger women have better outcomes. >>

First of all as far as breast cancer you are very young.

A second thought I had, do you have a case manager. When I worked for our
local HMO I was employed as a case manager. Are official goal was make sure
the members got quality care but unofficially we were trying to save money
for the HMO. Our boss would say provide good care and the cost savings will
follow. I think you are getting a very expensive run around. From my view
point....I see you have several issues - one has the cancer spread - with
all the conflicting information I don't think this has been answered to your
satisfaction. Secondly - you want to appropriate care for the level of
cancer that you have. If I read you right you expectations are not
unreasonable. Call customer service and ask if they have some case
management services.
Alex
Kaye301 - 02 Jan 2004 05:04 GMT
Alex wrote << I see you have several issues - one has the cancer spread - with
all the conflicting information I don't think this has been answered to your
satisfaction. Secondly - you want to appropriate care for the level of
cancer that you have. If I read you right you expectations are not
unreasonable. >>

Yep, you 'hit the nail on the head.'   That's exactly right.  I had wondered
about 'case management.'  I don't think they offer that beyond the initial
phase of dx and first treatments, although if someone is dx'd with mets, I am
assuming that something more is provided.  I think your suggestion is an
excellent one although do not think that anything is offered to the degree I
may need.  I would not want to subject myself to a situation which would leave
me worse off and more at loose ends than I am now.  As you know the work that I
have done to learn about what is going on, my fear is that I would end up with
a case manager who knew even less and/or someone who is somewhat passive when
it comes to getting the patient the optimal care available through the system.
I hope I am explaining the last part clearly.  I have worked with some
wonderful physicians through our HMO, particularly my new ob-gyn.  We have been
working together and through her I was able to see the top gynocological
oncologist who did my surgery.  I have also seen other physicians who don't
have the skills (socially) or personality to do such.  I am sure that if such a
person as a case manager for the system does exist, I would get at the least
"cook book" management.  However, from all of what I have learned, because of
the complexities involved, I need someone who thouroughly understands the
involved factors which are rare as well as has the savvy or know how to look
beyond the standard if and when appropriate.  I think I would go emotionally
ballistic if I had to deal with someone who 'dissed' (discredited and/or
dismissed) all that I have done.  I guess my fear is that any such person would
just make sure that the basic 'i's' were dotted and the 't's' were crossed and
not notice whether or not those 'i's' and 't's' should have been there in the
first place and/or if there were better better things that fit.
Alex - 02 Jan 2004 18:30 GMT
kaye301@aol.com (Kaye301) wrote in message As you know the work that I
> have done to learn about what is going on, my fear is that I would end up with
> a case manager who knew even less and/or someone who is somewhat passive when
> it comes to getting the patient the optimal care available through the system.

I guess that would be subjective to the case manager you were
assigned...a good one would help you navigate through the system not
be a paper pusher. ALso a good case manager would help you to adovcate
for you not work against you. But like anything in life there are
great case managers and horrible ones.

ALex
Kaye301 - 02 Jan 2004 19:01 GMT
Alex wrote: << a good case manager would help you to adovcate
for you not work against you. But like anything in life there are
great case managers and horrible ones.>>

True, but at this point in terms of where I am I think that a good case manager
would need to be someone separate from the system.  Supposedly, that was what
the 2nd opinion oncologist (who only does 2nd opinions) was going to be.
Unfortunately, I have been disappointed with most of what we've gotten so far.
I don't know if I shared one of the reasons here--but will try.  It related to
the liver 1.5 cm lesion I have that was noted on the first CT scan.  A tagged
red blood cell study was done to rule out hemangioma.  Results were
inconclusive.  Report stated that there wasn't enough resolution for lesions
less than 2.0 cm.  No further testing was done (although my clinical report
indicated that an MRI had been done.  It never was.  A year later, after an
attack of pancreatitis, the gastroenterologist recommended a 3-phase CT scan.
I was told it wasn't needed.  The private 2nd  opinion only onc said at first a
PET-CT scan should be done.  He also mentioned MRI.  We asked my onc. about it
again, and he said he'd do it if a private dr. ordered it.  So, we talked again
w/2nd opinion only onc.  He had a radiologist write up an order for it.  This
private onc, who said he'd like to work together with us as a team said he'd
charge a hundred dollars from time-to-time--not a problem.  He told me he was
going to consult with a radiologist and that there might be a $95.00 charge.
We were quite surprised when he sent a bill for $400.00.  We didn't dispute it
because we felt we may need him.
The letter that was written by his radiologist-friend did recommend the 3-phase
CT scan.  That was all we needed to have it done.  The letter then went on to
over-explain why that test should be done as opposed to an MRI.   There was no
need for any mention of an MRI and am thinking the only reason that was in the
report was because my clinical history has a box checked off that states that
an MRI of the liver had been done.  It has not been  done and I told that to
the 2nd opinion onc.  I was a bit uneasy about the letter but didn't want to
hassle it.
One week later, I learn on this board that another poster's wife also had a
similar situation.  She also had lobular cancer.  She had 3 positive nodes (I
had 9) and her scans were also clear.  She is receiving her health care from
the same non-profit HMO that we use in another part of the state.  However,
because her scans were clear and because she had positive nodes, she was also
given a full body MRI.  That showed 2 or maybe 3 lesions in the liver.
So, from what I can make of my case, the proper testing was not done initially.
Something more should have been done after the tagged red blood cell study was
inconclusive.  It wasn't.  My clinic record erroneously states that an MRI was
done.  It wasn't.  Now, the private recommendation for the 3-phase test
inappropriately talks about why an MRI should not have been done.  In addition,
I have since learned from the physician who has breast cancer herself, was
that there was a good chance that the 3-phase CT wasn't correctly done--timing
wise.  The report for that just compared it with the most recent CT scan rather
than the first and reported "no change."  There were 18 films and all the
report said was "no change" from a CT scan done 6 mos. earlier--but no
comparison with the first done 2 years before that or any of the others which
do suggest that some activity is going on--per our interpretation of report and
private internist (who consulted with an outside oncologist whom we have never
met).
So, now if something is going on and the correct testing was never done from
the start--even though report wrongly states that it was--that if something in
the liver starts up in that area we may not have any recourse because if we
argued that an MRI should have been done, and the report states that it was but
really wasn't, they can use the private 2nd opinion and radiologists report--in
which they unnecessarily elaborate why an MRI shouldn't have been done this
summer  (as opposed to the 3-phase  CT scan), saying that an MRI wasn't the
'right' test (although it probably would have been then) because they can use
the latest recommendations against it, saying it wouldn't have mattered since
it wasn't the 'right' test.
I hope this isn't too confusing--and probably repeated myself a bit in the
explanation--this whole situation is both tiresome and frustrating.  I would
love to find a good advocate but not even sure  I have the mental energy to
even begin to start the process of attempting to find one...
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.