Herceptin trial

[*_Michele U_*]

I listened to the ASCO presentation of the Adjuvant Herceptin trial i was in. I was alittle taken back by the difference between the 2 arms that actually got the Herceptin. the 52% decrease in recurrence is just for the arm that got Herceptin with Taxol. When the 2 arms were compared there was a 36% improvement in the Herceptin with Taxol then the other with Herceptin AFTER taxol.. when comparing Herceptin after Taxol, like i got, to none at all there was a 13% decrease in recurrence. That's a big difference. At least i got the Herceptin early and that is a positive.

[*_Julie_*]

Hi Michele,

My understanding of ASCO presentation is
AC->Taxol->Herceptin prevents recurrence by 46%
AC->Taxol+Herceptin prevents recurrence by 52% where as
AC->Taxol prevents recurrence by 33%

Can somebody comment whether it is correct or not.

Thanks
Julie

[michele u]

Julie,
Where did you find your stats? I listened to Dr. Perez's presentation on ASCO's slide show and audio. It was only the sunday presentations. Her presentation was on just the difference between the 2 arms and had lots of info. I really hope your stats are correct and mine are wrong!!!

[*_Julie_*]

Michele,

HERA's press release posted by Cristime MH and also by Joe clearly says Herceptin after chemo has a 46% reduction recurrence also it says Herceptin with Taxol has a 52% reduction recurrence.

Julie

[michele u]

Julie,
I did go back and listen to the Hera trial results. They do say that there is a 46% decrease in recurence and they are doing Herceptin after chemo. The only down fall is that they only have 1 1/2 years of stats instead of 4 like the other study, but hey, i will except the 46%!!! What trial did you do Julie?

[*_Julie_*]

Michele,

I am recieving Herceptin after Taxol(but not in a trial) like you and I was as eager as you, to know the outcome of the trial.

Julie

[*_jeff_*]

Hi Michele,

I've been anxiously scrolling through all these numbers (while also caring for my 8 year old who's got a nasty chest cold) this week and the first thing I'll say is that I don't know why I'm doing this! Rachel got her year of herceptin off-label and all I really wanted to know is that we were right to push for it. And this is clearly true. But I still have tried to make sense of the numbers and this is not easy for someone who stopped taking math as soon as it was allowed in high school (actually, earlier: I got a special waiver to take an extra lit class!)

Anyway...I can't exactly follow which numbers you are tracking (because I haven't listened to Perez's talk yet) but it seems possible to me that you are comparing apples and oranges, which in this case is the difference between "absolute risk" and "relative risk." Absolute risk is simple: if the control group had a recurrence rate of 33% and the ac-th group had a recurrence rate at interim analysis of about 15% (is that right?) than the difference in absolute risk is 18%. But the reduction in "relative" risk is more like 52 or 53% right? Does that make sense? I'm not sure if anything I've just said is even applicable..but if it is you can apply this to all the comparative questions.

As for the HERA data, that's gonna be a mess to make sense out becuase if you watch Piccart's presentation you'll see there is a huge number of variations in chemo and hormonal treatment that were at play...But it's clearly all positive news for people who got herceptin.

Best,
Jeff

[Kristen]

This might or might not be the place to post this, but I am wondering if anyone has seen the results of the 3rd arm with Carboplatin, Taxotere and Herceptin? Thanks in advance, K

[Rozebud]

K - I specifically listened for that in 3 of the presentations. Nada. The only thing was how much better cardiotoxicity in that arm was. Anyone else know?