|
Well, that is what I like so much about this forum. It is such a fine place to find somebody who might at least have some clues. I read quite a few of the articles about ditching PR testing too and thought that turned out to be a pretty healthy discussion. Even though I am not ER-/PR+, testing is of benefit to me too.
Endocrine therapy in bc conversations refers to the use of treatments for bc such as the anti-estrogens (SERMs like tamoxifen or raloxifene, or AI's like Arimidex, Femara, and Aromasin). But "endocrine therapy" also is treatment like Synthroid for thyroid problems, insulin for diabetes, and even estrogen replacement. So basically "endocrine therapy" is a broad term and is something that is done to manipulate hormonal glands to do something that doctors want it to do.
(Whatever became of the population of genuine guinea pigs is what I want to know?)
What happened was that some people with bc who tested out as ER-/PR+ were showing some benefit from tamoxifen and scientists were puzzled, since theoretically those who are ER- wouldn't benefit from tamoxifen (and as we know, usually anyone who is ER- is also PR-). According to the source I found, they discovered that if the test for PR isn't strictly done by treating they cytosol with charcoal first as one step of the testing, then it wouldn't be accurate. In that case, tumors that actually do have some amount of estrogen would end up being incorrectly classified as being ER-. So I think that is why anyone who is PR+ is likely to be given endocrine therapy.
I wonder if there are actually any ER-/PR+. I wonder if those who are classified as ER-/PR+ and don't respond to tamoxifen happen to also be HER1-positive or HER2-positive, since being HER2 can not only mean tamoxifen doesn't work, but can work against those who are.
Keep asking questions... I do.
AlaskaAngel
|