HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > her2group
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-03-2008, 10:31 AM   #1
dlaxague
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 221
relatively resistant to hormonal therapy - not just Tamoxifen

Hi all,

When the adjuvant AI data first started appearing, there was a lot of talk about AI's being better in HER2+ cancer because HER2+ cancer was Tamoxifen resistant. But I think that over the last few years the thinking has changed a bit. Yes, HER2+ cancers tend to derive less benefit from hormonal treatment. That is probably in part because the levels of hormone receptors tend to be lower, and in part because of resistance to hormonal treatment. But it's looking as if that resistance is similar for AI's. It's not just Tamoxifen.

And alas, the jury is still out on the whole issue. It's interesting to me that the garden-variety community oncs are the ones who'll tell us that they know these answers: "AI's are more effective for HER2+", or "Tamoxifen is fine for HER2+", or "Herceptin makes Tamoxifen work better". Any or all of these statements may be true, or not. We do not (yet) know enough to make such broad statements.

I think that these docs make these silly statements for several reasons. One, they know that we like to hear that it's all under control. They, too, like to feel that it's all under control. So they tend toward giving answers that sound more secure or absolute than they really are. Secondly, these busy community oncs probably do not read all there is to read about breast cancer. They may be hanging their hat on one or two studies, when there are 10 studies and the results are contradictory. You can find one or two studies to support almost anything you'd like to support. The experts in the field of hormone treatment and hormone resistance will be the first to say that they do not (yet) know enough to make such statements.

There's a lot of information going to appear next week at SABCS. In the meantime, here's a recent (2008), long, and complicated discussion:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/580741_3

You may have to register to see this but Medscape registration is free. The link is to page 3 of 7, so scroll through it all. If you're like me, you'll skim the details of the complicated discussion of pathways and crosstalk but still be able to get the gist of it. I'll copy/paste some relevant snips (broken up for readability) below. Remember that they are talking about hormonal treatment in the absence of Herceptin or other HER2 targeted therapy (although if you follow the link, page 4 and 5 do bring in Herceptin and friends).


There was some initial enthusiasm that HER2+ tumors would be more sensitive to AIs than to tamoxifen.[76] Careful analysis of published data, however, suggests that even with AIs, patients with HER2+ disease have a poor response.[83,84,85,86,87,88]

For example, a phase III trial of 916 patients[17] with advanced breast tumors and an unknown HER2 status treated with first-line endocrine therapy showed superiority of letrozole over tamoxifen in terms of TTP (9.4 months versus 6.0 months; P <0.0001) and overall response rate (ORR; 32% versus 21%; P = 0.0002).

Nevertheless, subsequent analysis of HER2 status[83] revealed that in HER2+ patients there was no significant difference between those treated with letrozole and those treated with tamoxifen in terms of ORR (17% versus 13%; P = 0.45) or clinical benefit[89] (33% versus 26%; P = 0.31), although a strong trend towards a longer duration of response with letrozole was observed (6.1 months versus 3.3 months; P = 0.0596).[83] These poor results in the HER2+ subpopulation contrast with the median TTP observed in the HER2-negative subgroup (12.2 months in letrozole-treated patients and 8.5 months in tamoxifen-treated patients).

Finally, early preliminary reports from the Breast International Group 1-98 Study (BIG 1-98) and the Arimidex or Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial, which compared tamoxifen with either letrozole or anastrozole, revealed that HER2+ status is associated with a significantly higher relapse rate, regardless of whether an AI or tamoxifen is administered.[86,88]

Taken together, these studies strongly suggest that HR+/HER2+ breast cancer may be less responsive to tamoxifen and estrogen-deprivation therapies with AIs than cancer negative for HR and HER2 expression, which could be an indication than HER2 overexpression and/or amplification results in a dominant phenotype in ER+/HER2+ tumors.

Are you still reading? There's LOTS more - that's only a portion of page 3, and he goes on to discuss Herceptin and other targeted therapies in conjunction with hormonal treatment, etc. Let me know if you have trouble with the link.

Debbie Laxague
dlaxague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2008, 12:12 PM   #2
Hopeful
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,380
The difference I see between AI's and Tamoxifen is that Tamoxifen is both an angonist and an antagonist for ER receptors. While it is supposed to be strictly an antagonist for bc, in Her2+ patients in particular, it has the capacity to act as an agonist, to actually promote the growth of the cancer. The GUNN study from Naples was the first to recognize this, when their data showed that ER+ Her2+ bc patients fared worse on Tamoxifen than those that received no hormonal treatment.

I have not yet read any papers that intimate that AI's have a similar result. I think this is most likely because they work by removing ER rather than manipulating it.

Hopeful
Hopeful is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2008, 02:01 PM   #3
wtfsanjo
Member
 
wtfsanjo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 10
thanks for bringing up all the contradictions; i am aware of many conflicting studies. bearing that in mind, how do you (or anyone else) conceptualize the "real world" decision-making process around AIs versus Tamoxifen for Her2+ women? (full disclosure: i am a phd student at johns hopkins doing research in patient-centered decision making in chemoprevention.)

the clinical answer can't be "do neither" for various reasons. and it's neither safe nor pragmatic to put women on herceptin for the entirety of their hormone therapy. the options are limited, but a choice must be made. the glut of information that exists on the internet (published and unpublished) and beyond complicates such a decision to the point of total paralysis for a patient.

so: what is a marginally well-educated Her2+ and hormone positive patient to do? if a person can't reliably look at outcome data, should we instead be focusing solely on the risks and side effects of each particular hormone therapy to guide decisions?
__________________
Katie
dx 11/15/06 @ 27 years old (now 29)
1.7cm IDC with extensive DCIS; no nodes
ER-/PR+(10%)/Her2+++
grade 3 (9/9), Ki-67 85%
DD AC/DD T, herceptin, tamoxifen
bilateral mastectomy w/ saline impants
wtfsanjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter