|
I reread the NCI criteria for this trial, and in the description it does refer to "efficacy measurable" trial subjects. That doesn't answer the question of why bone mets only would not be measurable disease - although it is true that bone mets sometimes "look worse" on scans initially even when a treatment is working. Maybe that has something to do with it. Maybe Barbara H can provide more insight.
Have you challenged your doctor on why this would not be "measurable"?
Good luck.
Chris
__________________
Chris in Scotts Valley
June 2002 extensive hi grade DCIS (pre-cancer-stage 0, clean sentinal node) Mastectomy/implant - no chemo, rads. "cured?"
9/2004 Diag: Stage IV extensive liver mets (!) ER/PR- Her2+++
10/04-3/05 Weekly Taxol/Carboplatin/Herceptin , complete response!
04/05 - 4/07 Herception every 3 wks, Continue NED
04/07 - recurrence to liver - 2 spots, starting tykerb/avastin trial
06/07 8/07 10/07 Scans show stable, continue on Tykerb/Avastin
01/08 Progression in liver
02/08 Begin (TDM1) trial
08/08 NED! It's Working! Continue on TDM1
02/09 Continue NED
02/10 Continue NED. 5/10 9/10 Scans NED 10/10 Scans NED
12/10 Scans not clear....4/11 Scans suggest progression 6/11 progression confirmed in liver
07/11 - 11/11 Herceptin/Xeloda -not working:(
12/11 Begin MM302 Phase I trial - bust:(
03/12 3rd times the charm? AKT trial
5/12 Scan shows reduction! 7/12 More reduction!!!!
8/12 Whoops...progression...trying for Perjeta/Herceptin (plus some more nasty chemo!)
9/12 Start Perjeta/Herceptin, chemo on hold due to infection/wound in leg, added on cycle 2 &3
11/12 Poops! progression in liver, Stop Perjeta/Taxo/Herc
11/12 Navelbine/Herce[ptin - try for a 3 cycles, no go.
2/13 Gemzar/Carbo/Herceptin - no go.
3/13 TACE procedure
|