Hi, Julierene,
Here's another reference I found, from last year. Each research design is going to invariably come up with different stats - depending on the subjects selected (the study I'm referencing used patients who'd been heavily treated for bcmets prior to going on the Tykerb + Xeloda, or Xeloda alone, arms of the study.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...1/ai_n16621413
The other thing to keep in mind is that the time-to-progression (or recurrence interval) ISN"T about survival rates (like staying alive an extra 2 months, or double the amount of time) - it's about the time before the bcmets were detected to be multiplying, or moving to another organ. That doesn't necessarily affect survival rate - each progression can then get treatment - usually chemo and/or radiation and/or surgery, and sometimes, the "right"/ most effective treatment is found (usually by trial and error, unfortunately - we have few means to detect which chemo will work for whom).
Does DOUBLE the time-to-recurrence rate sound better to you? "Dr. Charles E. Geyer Jr. reported the median time to progression was 37 weeks for 160 women treated with the two-drug combination, but only 20 weeks for 161 women given capecitabine alone." That's still only a 4 month statistical average of difference in time to progression for those on the Tykerb along with Xeloda. Still, the fewer treatments we "use up" in the course of advanced bc, the more chance we have of still having an array to try, and thus still finding one that works really effectively. To me, it sounds like a worthwhile trade-off - especially since the Tykerb seems to curb brain mets, which few-if-any of the other treatments do!
(((hugs)))
Sandy in Silicon Valley