HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - Moderate stance in Sydney..is it the $$$?

Christine MH-UK · 09-24-2005, 12:59 PM

Hi Rich,

I think that there are genuine concerns in many countries about giving patients who are likely to survive a disease a drug before all of the data is in, particularly following the vioxx fiasco. In the UK, for example, women who can go on aromatase inhibitors seem to be finding it hard to get oncologists to agree to prescribe herceptin. Of course, there are problems with the herceptin/vioxx analogy since few people die of arthritis and women with her2 positive cancer end up on palliative herceptin anyway if the first treatment fails.

This groups statements are only somewhat true regarding herceptin following chemo, which has not yet been shown to increase life expectancy. This is due partly to a short follow up period, since her2 patients can live a while with secondaries. The statements are not true regarding the U.S. herceptin-based chemo trials, where the treatment was shown to increase survival.

I do find it appalling, though, that this group seems to be doing nothing for groups of Australian breast cancer patients (such as inflammatory breast cancer, ER-/PR-, pre-menopausal, stage III) for whom the odds are often poor. It makes it sound like all patients have a 90% survival chance, and this is not the case. I was also wondering about the 90% five-year survival figure, since five-year survival stats are something UK breast cancer patients love to hate because they do not mean disease-free survival. It sounds like this group is trying to calm patients down, but turning a blind eye to the plight of the least fortunate patients.

09-24-2005, 12:59 PM	#2
Christine MH-UK Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 414	Maybe only partly Hi Rich, I think that there are genuine concerns in many countries about giving patients who are likely to survive a disease a drug before all of the data is in, particularly following the vioxx fiasco. In the UK, for example, women who can go on aromatase inhibitors seem to be finding it hard to get oncologists to agree to prescribe herceptin. Of course, there are problems with the herceptin/vioxx analogy since few people die of arthritis and women with her2 positive cancer end up on palliative herceptin anyway if the first treatment fails. This groups statements are only somewhat true regarding herceptin following chemo, which has not yet been shown to increase life expectancy. This is due partly to a short follow up period, since her2 patients can live a while with secondaries. The statements are not true regarding the U.S. herceptin-based chemo trials, where the treatment was shown to increase survival. I do find it appalling, though, that this group seems to be doing nothing for groups of Australian breast cancer patients (such as inflammatory breast cancer, ER-/PR-, pre-menopausal, stage III) for whom the odds are often poor. It makes it sound like all patients have a 90% survival chance, and this is not the case. I was also wondering about the 90% five-year survival figure, since five-year survival stats are something UK breast cancer patients love to hate because they do not mean disease-free survival. It sounds like this group is trying to calm patients down, but turning a blind eye to the plight of the least fortunate patients.