HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - resection of bc mets to liver prolongs survival in ER+ chemosensitive patients

chrisy · 01-30-2011, 02:19 PM

Exactly, Lani! I wonder, since it was a retrospective study, if they would have the data needed to tease out the her2+ vs. her2+ question. And what the curve actually looks like. Although both questions would be difficult, as it was not a lot of patients (looks like 22 of the 86 were ER/PR-). Still, it is an important question and it's unsettling that Her2 status is not even mentioned as that is an important factor in survival - used to be bad, now its better.

These findings state that a "subset" of patients get substantial benefit (ER+). But is there a "subset" of ER-/HEr2+ that also responded well? What if only 3 of the 22 were HER2+ but all responded well?

It's really important to get that information looked at - otherwise we may be throwing out the Her2babies with the bathwater. It's likely to become even more difficult in the future to get that data if the findings from this study become standard of care and ONLY ER+ people are offered this option - most Her2+ are also ER-.

Intuitively, I think that having targeted systemic treatment (hormonal in the case of ER+, /Herceptin etc. for Her2) would be an important factor. But I want to know the facts - positive or negative - on how Her2 plays into this.

01-30-2011, 02:19 PM	#2
chrisy Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Central Coast, CA Posts: 3,207	Re: resection of bc mets to liver prolongs survival in ER+ chemosensitive patients Exactly, Lani! I wonder, since it was a retrospective study, if they would have the data needed to tease out the her2+ vs. her2+ question. And what the curve actually looks like. Although both questions would be difficult, as it was not a lot of patients (looks like 22 of the 86 were ER/PR-). Still, it is an important question and it's unsettling that Her2 status is not even mentioned as that is an important factor in survival - used to be bad, now its better. These findings state that a "subset" of patients get substantial benefit (ER+). But is there a "subset" of ER-/HEr2+ that also responded well? What if only 3 of the 22 were HER2+ but all responded well? It's really important to get that information looked at - otherwise we may be throwing out the Her2babies with the bathwater. It's likely to become even more difficult in the future to get that data if the findings from this study become standard of care and ONLY ER+ people are offered this option - most Her2+ are also ER-. Intuitively, I think that having targeted systemic treatment (hormonal in the case of ER+, /Herceptin etc. for Her2) would be an important factor. But I want to know the facts - positive or negative - on how Her2 plays into this. __________________ Chris in Scotts Valley June 2002 extensive hi grade DCIS (pre-cancer-stage 0, clean sentinal node) Mastectomy/implant - no chemo, rads. "cured?" 9/2004 Diag: Stage IV extensive liver mets (!) ER/PR- Her2+++ 10/04-3/05 Weekly Taxol/Carboplatin/Herceptin , complete response! 04/05 - 4/07 Herception every 3 wks, Continue NED 04/07 - recurrence to liver - 2 spots, starting tykerb/avastin trial 06/07 8/07 10/07 Scans show stable, continue on Tykerb/Avastin 01/08 Progression in liver 02/08 Begin (TDM1) trial 08/08 NED! It's Working! Continue on TDM1 02/09 Continue NED 02/10 Continue NED. 5/10 9/10 Scans NED 10/10 Scans NED 12/10 Scans not clear....4/11 Scans suggest progression 6/11 progression confirmed in liver 07/11 - 11/11 Herceptin/Xeloda -not working:( 12/11 Begin MM302 Phase I trial - bust:( 03/12 3rd times the charm? AKT trial 5/12 Scan shows reduction! 7/12 More reduction!!!! 8/12 Whoops...progression...trying for Perjeta/Herceptin (plus some more nasty chemo!) 9/12 Start Perjeta/Herceptin, chemo on hold due to infection/wound in leg, added on cycle 2 &3 11/12 Poops! progression in liver, Stop Perjeta/Taxo/Herc 11/12 Navelbine/Herce[ptin - try for a 3 cycles, no go. 2/13 Gemzar/Carbo/Herceptin - no go. 3/13 TACE procedure