HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > her2group
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-10-2006, 01:29 PM   #21
kat in the delta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MS Delta in Clarksdale="Home of the Blues" (near Memphis,TN)by Misssissippi River/levee's highest pt.
Posts: 224
Post kat in the delta

Becky, YES it did go away for my sister after the femara got out of her system. Kat in the delta
kat in the delta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 01:50 PM   #22
mts
Senior Member
 
mts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 503
I'm not on A.I.'s (yet) so I found this thread quite interesting. I am also minimally ER pos (< 15%). My onc felt also that the benefits outweighed the side effects to put me on tamoxifen. So, the plan is to eventually put me on A.I.'s.
I was wondering however -of the ladies that have hot flashes, which I KNOW are unbearable, did your onc's put you on anything to counteract them? I have been taking a 1/2 dose of Effexor (37.5 mg) and I have not had a hot flash for over a year. A while back I did not get my refill on time and I missed 2 days of Effexor and I thought I was going to implode. For me it really works. I know we all hate taking this for that and that for this, but at this point, if it helps- I will take it!

I hope that in five years something else is invented that may work as well with even less side effects...

Maria
mts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2006, 05:40 PM   #23
Sheryl Ann
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Waukesha, WI near Milwaukee
Posts: 2
I am taking Femara, at night since June 1st, 2006 and having headaches. About 2 weeks ago I had an episode of double vision. Several times seemed to be dizzie. I am also taking Herceptin every 3 weeks since 12-15-2005.

I went to the opmarthologist and he saw pressure build up behind the eyes - no glucoma yet - after discussion decided to wait until I had another episode of double vision before doing a cat scan for behind the eye.

The brain fog - YES - but I think that is from fatigue, my rad was done 4-28-2006. The ability to concentrate and focus is so hard. Some days are fine but lately it seems to be getting worse especially if you try to skip on sleep or just relaxing. This weekend I took care of my 7 year old nephew - went swimming etc. Talking to people and starting something new is so hard. I have notes everwhere.

So you are not alone, that fatigue creeps up on you and then your brain fails.

Sheryl
Sheryl Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 05:28 AM   #24
DeborahNC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 148
Sheryl Ann

Did the opth say what s/he thought the pressure in your eye was from?

You're not too far from rads, so it's to be expected you still have the fatigue and brain fog. It seemed like it took several months for me to recover from the 33 rads I took in 2003 I actually fared worse with the rads than with chemo as far as the fatigue factor..
DeborahNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 08:56 AM   #25
Sheryl Ann
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Waukesha, WI near Milwaukee
Posts: 2
DeborahNC

No the eye doctor could not say what it came from, just wants to see me in 4 months.
__________________
Take Care
Sheryl
Stg 2B, Grd3, size3.2x3.0, PR/ER+, HER2neu 2.81, ac+t, Herceptin, Femara, rad 30 4-28-06
Sheryl Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 09:29 AM   #26
AlaskaAngel
Senior Member
 
AlaskaAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,018
AI's longterm

A while back, Dr. Susan Love's website had two commentaries (pro and con) about the value of taking AI's. It may still be there somewhere....

AI's are not a perfect answer, and as RB notes, questions about use likely are not limited to bone health long term. Since they do not yet have a really long history of use, plus they are being used now by younger women who achieve menopausal status by unnatural means, there are unknowns about them.

We each have to make our own personal guess about our own personal risk level.

As a personal side note, in trying to address the problem of weight gained during chemo, I have been gradually increasing weightbearing exercise. Over 2 decades ago I had very slight knee damage successfully repaired that has never given me any trouble over a very active life. Recently that knee started falling apart. It "might" have happened with or without the use of AI's -- but my interpretation is that the reason joints hurt so much with use of some AI's is that by reducing the estrogen we also lose not just the lubrication in places like the vagina but in the joints and many other places as well. For example, my eyes are much drier now than they were previously. I don't want to make this a long post but I just raise the question of the need to balance out the likely net effects long-term with any benefit. I happen to be highly ER/PR and that would weigh in favor of using an AI, whereas someone barely positive might not want to take on the early progressive deterioration. I happen to be Stage 1, which might be some reason NOT to take an AI.

It is also known that resistance to AI's often develops. So if someone is low risk in the first place, would it make more sense not to take an AI so as not to allow resistance to it to build?

Lots of questions about AI's, not a lot of answers....

AlaskaAngel
AlaskaAngel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:14 AM   #27
R.B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,843
This is another guess/question.

In the enormous complexity of the body how does oestrogen react with the desaturase pathway that makes the long chain fats DHA and EPA.

PGE2 produced via cox one and cox two control oestrogen according to trials, which pathway is used in AIs.

But does oestrogen somehow influence or control in part DHA production.

Given the rise in DHA production reported in pregancy, and the need for oestrogen in reprodution it would seem a reasonable question.

This trial would suggest that it may be the case that oestrogen controls production of DAH and EPA at least in part.

The consequence of oestrogen blocking would be blocking DHA and EPA production.

The implication of this for AI takers would be a need to take DHA and EPA.

Fish oil which contain DHA and EPA have been associated with dry eye improvement, dry mouth improvement, impovement in arthritis, and combined with a reduction in omega shix should help with weight loss.

This is the first trial I have seen directly suggesting oestorgen as a controller of the FAS pathways. If I find more I will post.

(Why not a cyclical feed back loop - no DHA EPA = upgrades of oestrogen levels to try and make fats required for reproductive / femininty, upgrades Fattty acid synthesis = impacts on growth factors. The counter of which would be supply DHA EPA - no need to make = downgrade oestrogen downgrade FAS etc. Added to this what happens if no omega three raw material and over supply PGE2 to P450 to E2 to growth factors through excess omega six in diet and membranes etc -?????????)

RB






http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ats+desaturase

1: Proc Nutr Soc. 2006 Feb;65(1):42-50. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Long-chain n-3 PUFA: plant v. marine sources.

Williams CM, Burdge G.

Hihj Sinclair Unit Human Nutrition, School of Food Biosciences, University of Reading, UK. c.m.williams@reading.ac.uk

Increasing recognition of the importance of the long-chain n-3 PUFA, EPA and DHA, to cardiovascular health, and in the case of DHA to normal neurological development in the fetus and the newborn, has focused greater attention on the dietary supply of these fatty acids. The reason for low intakes of EPA and DHA in most developed countries (0.1-0.5 g/d) is the low consumption of oily fish, the richest dietary source of these fatty acids. An important question is whether dietary intake of the precursor n-3 fatty acid, alpha-linolenic acid (alphaLNA), can provide sufficient amounts of tissue EPA and DHA by conversion through the n-3 PUFA elongation-desaturation pathway. alphaLNA is present in marked amounts in plant sources, including green leafy vegetables and commonly-consumed oils such as rape-seed and soyabean oils, so that increased intake of this fatty acid would be easier to achieve than via increased fish consumption. However, alphaLNA-feeding studies and stable-isotope studies using alphaLNA, which have addressed the question of bioconversion of alphaLNA to EPA and DHA, have concluded that in adult men conversion to EPA is limited (approximately 8%) and conversion to DHA is extremely low (<0.1%). In women fractional conversion to DHA appears to be greater (9%), which may partly be a result of a lower rate of utilisation of alphaLNA for beta-oxidation in women. However, up-regulation of the conversion of EPA to DHA has also been suggested, as a result of the actions of oestrogen on Delta6-desaturase, and may be of particular importance in maintaining adequate provision of DHA in pregnancy. The effect of oestrogen on DHA concentration in pregnant and lactating women awaits confirmation.

Publication Types:

* Review


PMID: 16441943 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum



1: Hum Reprod. 2006 Jun 23; [Epub ahead of print] Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Urinary estrogen and progesterone metabolite concentrations in menstrual cycles of fertile women with non-conception, early pregnancy loss or clinical pregnancy.

Venners SA, Liu X, Perry MJ, Korrick SA, Li Z, Yang F, Yang J, Lasley BL, Xu X, Wang X.

Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Illinois at Chicago, School of Public Health, Chicago, IL.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge is limited of how estrogen and progesterone variability in fertile women are associated with achieving pregnancy. METHODS: From 1996 to 1998, we enrolled 347 textile workers without hormone treatment in Anhui, China, who provided daily urine and data upon stopping contraception for up to 1 year until clinical pregnancy. Urinary hCG was assayed to detect conception and early pregnancy losses. We compared urinary concentrations of estrone conjugates (E1C) and pregnanediol-3-glucuronide (PdG) in 266 clinical pregnancies, 63 early pregnancy losses and 272 non-conception cycles from 347 women and also in 94 clinical pregnancy and 94 non-conception cycles from the same women. RESULTS: Using generalized estimating equations and relative to 266 clinical pregnancy cycles, log(E1C) was lower in 272 non-conception cycles [beta = -0.3 ng/mg creatinine (Cr); SE = 0.1; P < 0.0001]. On average, daily E1C was 18 ng/mg Cr lower in non-conception cycles than in clinical pregnancy cycles. Relative to 94 clinical pregnancy cycles, log(E1C) was lower in 94 non-conception cycles (beta = -0.4 ng/mg Cr; SE = 0.1; P < 0.0001) from the same women (average difference in daily E1C was 20 ng/mg Cr). The odds of E1C less than the 10th percentile (<30 ng/mg Cr) were higher in early pregnancy loss cycles [odds ratio (OR) = 4.8; P = 0.0027] than in clinical pregnancy cycles in the early luteal phase. Compared with clinical pregnancy cycles, log(PdG) concentrations were lower in non-conception cycles during the follicular phase, but this analysis lacked power for multiple testing. CONCLUSIONS: Estrogen concentrations varied from cycle to cycle, and higher estrogen was associated with achieving clinical pregnancy.

PMID: 16798842 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
R.B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter