possible explanation of why some her+breast cancers are er+ but pr- and what it means

[Hopeful]

Lani, I have read the article from Arpino that you referred to, thanks for mentioning it.

From what I have read, researchers seem to think the triple negatives are in a league of their own - that a form of bc that has no type of endocrine signaling going on is a very basal and different type of cancer. I am not sure if I read the article on this board or found it on my own that talks about the type of cancer being related to the cells from which it arises in the breast. If it wasn't posted here, I can dig it up and provide the link.

The data from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group poses some provacative questions, IMO. It seems that the prognosticators of ER/PR and nodal status lose their effectiveness the further out from diagnosis you get. I believe that the article I quoted in the DCIS thread is correct, that a number of additional changes take place as the disease progresses which renders these early indicators much less valuable over time.

It fascinates me how complex and truly efficient our bodies are, even when they go about doing the wrong thing. It is unrealistic to expect "fixes" to be as simple as finding an agent that works on only one aspect of a complex, multiple-signaling system with tons of failsafes built in. The approach is analagous to trying to fix the space shuttle with an Allen wrench. On the other hand, the therapies we have today are a whole lot better than leeches!

I always look forward to the research you uncover. Thanks so much for all the time you put into this forum.

Hopeful