HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - patients in clinical trial overwhelmingly prefer subcutaneous herceptin administratn

'lizbeth · 09-18-2013, 11:26 AM

However, more patients had serious adverse events in the subcutaneous group (21%) than in the intravenous group (12%). Ismael attributed the difference to more infections at the injection site in the SC group—8.1% vs. 4.4% in the intravenous group.

This is what I had been chewing on, the 21 vs 12 seemed large, but when they show the numbers it came from 8.1% vs. 4.4%.

Hmmm . . . I wonder why the increase in febrile neutropenia with the subcutaneous. But as studies go this number could be skewed by the smaller study number. In a large study it could calculate differently.

@Lani,

Okay dead is dead. Treatment related deaths are not acceptable. I don't care how the medical community or pharmaceutical industry or doctors try and spin it. As a patient I'm following a treatment plan because I want to live. So the deaths many be in line percentage wise with all the studies out there. I see the justification and it just doesn't fly with me.

That is a tremendous amount of chemo, 8 treatments.
Clearly the subH is more convenient, ah, but not for everyone. Dying is very inconvenient.

09-18-2013, 11:26 AM	#10
'lizbeth Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Sunny San Diego Posts: 2,214	Re: patients in clinical trial overwhelmingly prefer subcutaneous herceptin administr However, more patients had serious adverse events in the subcutaneous group (21%) than in the intravenous group (12%). Ismael attributed the difference to more infections at the injection site in the SC group—8.1% vs. 4.4% in the intravenous group. This is what I had been chewing on, the 21 vs 12 seemed large, but when they show the numbers it came from 8.1% vs. 4.4%. Hmmm . . . I wonder why the increase in febrile neutropenia with the subcutaneous. But as studies go this number could be skewed by the smaller study number. In a large study it could calculate differently. @Lani, Okay dead is dead. Treatment related deaths are not acceptable. I don't care how the medical community or pharmaceutical industry or doctors try and spin it. As a patient I'm following a treatment plan because I want to live. So the deaths many be in line percentage wise with all the studies out there. I see the justification and it just doesn't fly with me. That is a tremendous amount of chemo, 8 treatments. Clearly the subH is more convenient, ah, but not for everyone. Dying is very inconvenient.