HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post

chrisy · 06-27-2006, 06:11 PM

Hi,
Sorry if my response was confusing! I did not mean to imply that a person's score would correlate to the degree of response, just that strong positive is an indicator of who is more likely to respond to herceptin. This article is old (in terms of Her2 research, anyway!) but does explain a little bit about how the FISH and IHC are used. It basically says that by IHC, 3+ (strong positive) is a good indicator, but for IHC scores below that, FISH is a more accurate predictor. And it is true (according to this data) that FISH positive, no matter to what degree, seems to be a good indicator for responding to herceptin.
Bottom line is, just as with any treatment, the disease either will or will not respond - and the only certain way to determine this is with hindsight!

Pam, you didn't indicate ER/PR status. Are hormonals an option for you?

http://www.breastcancer.org/research...in_050001.html

06-27-2006, 06:11 PM	#5
chrisy Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Central Coast, CA Posts: 3,207	Hi, Sorry if my response was confusing! I did not mean to imply that a person's score would correlate to the degree of response, just that strong positive is an indicator of who is more likely to respond to herceptin. This article is old (in terms of Her2 research, anyway!) but does explain a little bit about how the FISH and IHC are used. It basically says that by IHC, 3+ (strong positive) is a good indicator, but for IHC scores below that, FISH is a more accurate predictor. And it is true (according to this data) that FISH positive, no matter to what degree, seems to be a good indicator for responding to herceptin. Bottom line is, just as with any treatment, the disease either will or will not respond - and the only certain way to determine this is with hindsight! Pam, you didn't indicate ER/PR status. Are hormonals an option for you? http://www.breastcancer.org/research...in_050001.html