[phil]

I am not going to debate too long on the above issue. My focus is on reforming the present cancer drug approval process, and having it reflect the advances in cancer tx in the 21st century. Greg, I hope more effective " individual " cancer screening tests get tested and approved . Quickly. But i say it again, i feel your focus on that issue , your desire to see Rat. Ther. more widely used , is affecting your perspective on related cancer war issues. I dont think you are in the chemo room like we are. I think some of your generalizations about herceptin risks affect that . you are not the only one. FDA officials are similar. If i took your approach with issues , I would be questioning everything the FDA Oncology review division does . I am not. They have kept un-safe drugs off the market , at least gave quick partial appr. to pertuzumab. I am glad that the prevous FDA admin gave accelerated approval to tyk. in 07 ", even tho i feel it is a lesser drug to t dm-1.
These stats on herceptin have to be put in perspective. I am grateful for herceptin , it has saved countless lives . It helped get my wife to t dm-1. even tyk played a small role. My first wife never saw herceptin, in 88-"92. No testing for her2 genethen. Talk about progress , back then adria was the drug everyone pinned thier hope on ! No taxanes even. herceptin by itself cures 20 %, w/ chemo , more. Of course as we see yrs of use , problems become evident. cardiac issues in 30-40 %, doesnt cross bbb in 30-40 %. that stat becomes clearer only because herc has kept so many alive for so long. But we in the chemo room say : without herceptin , whats the percentage of survival , compared to pre-herc. To talk up tykerb, and talk down t dm-1 w/ minimal info on it, is biased on your part .