By coincidence, I was reading an older article (2002) today that addresses a similar subject. The abstract can be found at
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cg...act/62/22/6667 with a free link to the full article at that site. The objective of the study was to determine whether measuring activated (physphorylated) her2 in DCIS provided better prognostic information than simply measuring the amount of her2 expressed. They found that there was a higher percentage of activated her2 in DCIS than in IDC, a result they described as "paradoxical," and went on to say:
"This suggests that Her-2/neu signaling activity is a very important component of the biology of DCIS itself and possibly plays a criticial role in tumerogenesis. As a tumor advances to a more abnormal, invasive phenotype, other biological changes may occur that supplant the requirement for continued Her-2/neu signaling; this may explain the low response rate in the treatment of Her-2/neu overexpressing advanced breast cancer patients with single agent trastuzumab (Herceptin), the therapeutic anti-Her-2/neu antibody. Such anti-Her-2/neu-targeted therapy could be more efficacious at treating DCIS than invasive carcinoma, although it would be a difficult clinical area to explore because one would not want to compromise the nearly 100% cure rate achieved surgically. However, this may bode well for the incorporation of anti-Her-2/neu-targeted therapy into the adjuvant treatment of early stage breast cancer."
Hopeful