HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post

Debbie L. · 03-13-2009, 11:17 AM

Like StephN said in another post, it's hard tell from just the abstract. I think that HERA's best report was 34-36% maybe? So now it's 25% but is that including the cross-over people? I couldn't really tell from the abstract but if they're now doing stats that include the cross-over people in the no-Herceptin group that could account for the apparent decrease in benefit.

I don't say this to in any way deny that there is an amazing number of dedicated and brilliant scientists working on the cancer puzzles. But there is also a lot of corporate mentality ($$$) driving the train. My cynical voice says that IF 2 years of Herceptin were even hinting (trending) in a better-than-one-year direction, Genentech/Roche would be shouting that from the rooftops (it would double their profits, right?). This lack of shouting says to me that it's probably not better. And if that's the case, it takes us back to the only study I know of that did less - FinHER, with only 9 weeks treatment (small study, other issues)and reporting apparently equal-ish benefit. It seems to me that we need a good study looking at 1 year vs. less. But there's no incentive ($$) for doing it. No drug company is going to help with a study to find that we need less of their drug. Although it would be refreshing if they would.

Debbie Laxague, off today and supposed to be cleaning house, not playing on the computer all morning long!

03-13-2009, 11:17 AM	#6
Debbie L. Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 463	Like StephN said in another post, it's hard tell from just the abstract. I think that HERA's best report was 34-36% maybe? So now it's 25% but is that including the cross-over people? I couldn't really tell from the abstract but if they're now doing stats that include the cross-over people in the no-Herceptin group that could account for the apparent decrease in benefit. I don't say this to in any way deny that there is an amazing number of dedicated and brilliant scientists working on the cancer puzzles. But there is also a lot of corporate mentality ($$$) driving the train. My cynical voice says that IF 2 years of Herceptin were even hinting (trending) in a better-than-one-year direction, Genentech/Roche would be shouting that from the rooftops (it would double their profits, right?). This lack of shouting says to me that it's probably not better. And if that's the case, it takes us back to the only study I know of that did less - FinHER, with only 9 weeks treatment (small study, other issues)and reporting apparently equal-ish benefit. It seems to me that we need a good study looking at 1 year vs. less. But there's no incentive ($$) for doing it. No drug company is going to help with a study to find that we need less of their drug. Although it would be refreshing if they would. Debbie Laxague, off today and supposed to be cleaning house, not playing on the computer all morning long!