HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - drugs already approved indirectly attack breast cancer stem cells (responsible for bc

AlaskaAngel · 02-06-2011, 11:29 AM

As long as we are speculating... (DebbieL, where are you?)

I have long wondered whether the supposedly beneficial effects of chemotherapy had more to do with the support drugs given during chemotherapy than they did with the chemotherapy, since trials do not separate those effects out. Is the torture of chemotherapy getting the "credit" for beneficial effects that are in reality provided by other drugs? Is the chemo essential, or not?

Is it the anti-inflammatory effects of steroids (that are given in order for the body to better tolerate such toxic therapy) the real workhorses that provide the initial magic of nonrecurrence, for example? And at the same time, do they start a chain of events that encourage recurrence farther down the road, such as from slower metabolism and greater weight gain? And how dependent are they on one's stage of development for their results -- favorable or unfavorable?

Maybe if endocrinologists were more involved in the understanding and application of our treatment we would have a more disciplined scientific approach to it.

AlaskaAngel

02-06-2011, 11:29 AM	#16
AlaskaAngel Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 2,018	Re: drugs already approved indirectly attack breast cancer stem cells (responsible fo As long as we are speculating... (DebbieL, where are you?) I have long wondered whether the supposedly beneficial effects of chemotherapy had more to do with the support drugs given during chemotherapy than they did with the chemotherapy, since trials do not separate those effects out. Is the torture of chemotherapy getting the "credit" for beneficial effects that are in reality provided by other drugs? Is the chemo essential, or not? Is it the anti-inflammatory effects of steroids (that are given in order for the body to better tolerate such toxic therapy) the real workhorses that provide the initial magic of nonrecurrence, for example? And at the same time, do they start a chain of events that encourage recurrence farther down the road, such as from slower metabolism and greater weight gain? And how dependent are they on one's stage of development for their results -- favorable or unfavorable? Maybe if endocrinologists were more involved in the understanding and application of our treatment we would have a more disciplined scientific approach to it. AlaskaAngel __________________ Dx 2002 age 51 bc for granny, aunt, cousin, sister, mother. ER+/PR+/HER2+++, grade 3 IDC 1.9 cm, some DCIS, Stage 1, Grade 3 Lumpectomy, CAFx6 (no blood boosters), IMRT rads, 1 3/4 yr tamoxifen Rads necrosis BRCA 1 & 2 negative Trials: Early detection OVCA; 2004 low-dose testosterone for bc survivors Diet: Primarily vegetarian organic; metformin (no diabetes), vitamin D3 Exercise: 7 days a week, 1 hr/day No trastuzumab, no taxane, no AI NED