HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - Routine marker testing and recurrence... worth it?

AlaskaAngel · 10-25-2007, 11:18 AM

After seeing how wrong the scientific community was over time about the risks and benefits involved with the use of the combination of estrogen and progestins, I look closer at their guidelines and recommendations to see how well they match up with "common sense" as well as whatever studies have been done.

I respect the basis for someone who is pretty thoroughly educated about breast cancer to make strong efforts to be sure people here know what the recommendations are, and provide some explanation for the basis behind them. I think that is admirable.

On a personal level, for me the rationale based on common sense holds water even for those who are diagnosed wtih high-risk early stage bc , or "primary" bc.

My rationale is this: If as an early stage breast cancer patient I am considered at high enough risk to be expected to accept and follow through with such toxic and expensive and difficult treatment as chemotherapy and radiation and synthetic antihormonal treatments, then I am at high enough risk for recurrence to be offered the right to periodic measurement with reasonably useful TMs such as CA 15-3 and CA 27.29. And of course I feel the same about anyone diagnosed with higher stage bc

One might argue that after having treatment I am at less risk so less likely to benefit from periodic marker testing. But given that we are currently still stuck with hardly any targeted testing at time of diagnosis, and because the current blanket approach with treatment only works for some (with resistance known to develop to treatment), I feel marker testing is truly justified -- especially since it is relatively inexpensive and nontoxic.

Regardless of whether markers improve survival (although I suspect they do now for HER2's to some degree, with more recent treatments), there are other reasons to want to know if one is progressing that are very relevant.

It would be interesting to see what the professional recommendations would be if they were made by a group of professionals who had undergone treatment for breast cancer.

AlaskaAngel

10-25-2007, 11:18 AM	#75
AlaskaAngel Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 2,018	Sifting through the discussion on markers After seeing how wrong the scientific community was over time about the risks and benefits involved with the use of the combination of estrogen and progestins, I look closer at their guidelines and recommendations to see how well they match up with "common sense" as well as whatever studies have been done. I respect the basis for someone who is pretty thoroughly educated about breast cancer to make strong efforts to be sure people here know what the recommendations are, and provide some explanation for the basis behind them. I think that is admirable. On a personal level, for me the rationale based on common sense holds water even for those who are diagnosed wtih high-risk early stage bc , or "primary" bc. My rationale is this: If as an early stage breast cancer patient I am considered at high enough risk to be expected to accept and follow through with such toxic and expensive and difficult treatment as chemotherapy and radiation and synthetic antihormonal treatments, then I am at high enough risk for recurrence to be offered the right to periodic measurement with reasonably useful TMs such as CA 15-3 and CA 27.29. And of course I feel the same about anyone diagnosed with higher stage bc One might argue that after having treatment I am at less risk so less likely to benefit from periodic marker testing. But given that we are currently still stuck with hardly any targeted testing at time of diagnosis, and because the current blanket approach with treatment only works for some (with resistance known to develop to treatment), I feel marker testing is truly justified -- especially since it is relatively inexpensive and nontoxic. Regardless of whether markers improve survival (although I suspect they do now for HER2's to some degree, with more recent treatments), there are other reasons to want to know if one is progressing that are very relevant. It would be interesting to see what the professional recommendations would be if they were made by a group of professionals who had undergone treatment for breast cancer. AlaskaAngel