View Single Post
Old 03-31-2012, 02:59 PM   #3
Becky
Senior Member
 
Becky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Stockton, NJ
Posts: 4,179
Re: Adjuvant herceptin 6 months vs 12 months?

There is no data to say anything since one year is standard of care and who would enter a trial where they might only get 6 months not knowing if it is adequate or not?

One thing that has been asked of the breast cancer guru rock star doctors is to track and report what has happened (recurrence wise etc) from women who had to stop Herceptin early because of heart problems (and could never resume). There is a population of women with that criteria. Those women could be compared to women who had the standard year. If things look good, then a trial could be initiated where at least the women getting the 6 months would feel secure.

Personally, I believe that less Herceptin would work just as well as a year but there is no data to say so except for the FinHer study where women were given neo-adjuvant chemo with 9 weeks of Herceptin and that worked well.

Right now - no data except for the FinHer Study
__________________
Kind regards

Becky

Found lump via BSE
Diagnosed 8/04 at age 45
1.9cm tumor, ER+PR-, Her2 3+(rt side)
2 micromets to sentinel node
Stage 2A
left 3mm DCIS - low grade ER+PR+Her2 neg
lumpectomies 9/7/04
4DD AC followed by 4 DD taxol
Used Leukine instead of Neulasta
35 rads on right side only
4/05 started Tamoxifen
Started Herceptin 4 months after last Taxol due to
trial results and 2005 ASCO meeting & recommendations
Oophorectomy 8/05
Started Arimidex 9/05
Finished Herceptin (16 months) 9/06
Arimidex Only
Prolia every 6 months for osteopenia

NED 18 years!

Said Christopher Robin to Pooh: "You must remember this: You're braver than you believe and stronger than you seem and smarter than you think"
Becky is offline   Reply With Quote