|
Sassy
It is well documented that the absolute earliest results of 2 yrs of Herceptin therapy vs one year will be the end of April 2007 but indications are that there will not be a release of data until 2008.
About 6 weeks ago, Eric Winer (of Dana Farber) visited our cancer center. My onc called me beforehand to make sure all the right questions were asked in regard to 2 yrs of therapy vs one year. Preliminary data suggest that 2 yrs gives absolutely no better results than one year. Statistically it is not better and may impact heart function down the road (this is the big fear - what happens to us 10 years down the road. This question is not addressed in the metastatic condition because most women might not survive with mets 10-15 years out and those that do, there is no statistical data).
However, there will be data in the long term on if 2 years of Herceptin delay or eliminate possible mets long term. For example, in the initial Tamoxifen studies, there were lots of trials to determine that 5 years of use gave the best benefit. And this was tested using 1 yr of use, 2 yrs, 5 yrs and 10 yrs (of which 10 yrs actually gave a worse outcome).
In the future, new members to this board will look at us and say "you used adjuvant Herceptin for a year. OMG!!" because I think they will find that less (let's say 3-6 months) works just as well as a year.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to get the funding to do these studies because everyone is awaiting the 2 yrs of Herceptin data. It is rationalized as "what if more is better then why test 3 months vs 6 months vs one year? But I personally think less will be the same as a year and probably have less long and short term side effects.
Kind regards
Becky
|
Hybrid Mode
