How does your tumer markers react to meds

[TRIPLE THE LOVE]

Hi
I have been on here before but not so much th last couple of years
I recently have been re- dx with her+ er+ one small met on my liver less than a naometer I am told. real lucky I have a aggressive dr. the radiologist wanted to wait 3 months to see if it changed. Thank god she insisted.

I had my ova out right away- went well ...
I started taking herceptin (again) and tykerb
I was on 2 tab in am and 3 tab pm for six weeks and then my dr. dropped down the dose to 1 tab in am and 1 tab in pm
The reason for the quick response was that my dr. reacted to a jump in my cea and ca markers

42.5 ca and 9.5 cea

after the six weeks my makers went down slightly to
38.7 ca and 3.5 cea I felt great . I recently had a blood test ( 12 weeks of treatment ) I had a 42.6 and cea 5.5
my dr explained that this can happen when you are on treatment .( That when the cells die they realease everything ) I am going for my 3 month cat scan tommorrow

I am so nervous !!!!!!


Did anyone have the same happen to them -up and down of markers?? should I be concerned

I know this is how it going to be . six weeks panic six weeks panic -

I need to work on my fear levels


the kicker is that my dr. put me on this no meat,no chicken,no egg, no dairy I think you might call me a vegan - so and after the shock to my system ( a month
or so) I feel great!!!! I never had so much energy

I guess what I am asking is -does the fact that the marker went down and then up mean it is getting worse and the herciptin and tykerb is not working ?

please let me know what you experience


thank you so much

[chrisy]

Hi,

The possible answers to your question (about the markers) are many, ranging from it depends, to yes, no, maybe and everything in between.

I'm not making light of the panic at all, I can feel it in your post. My point is, markers do bounce up and down for many reasons, and for some people are not too useful at all.

If you get a history that this or that marker is meaningful for you, then what is important to look at is a trend, not one movement up or down.

As your oncologist pointed out, sometimes effective treatments can make the markers rise as those cancer cells die.

I have only in the past year found markers that are significant for us to follow, and the one that is most useful isn't even a breast cancer marker. Go figure. But even tho I know and believe what I just told you, I am feeling crazed myself and asking how often should I get these done? I think if I got them weekly my brains would explode but still I'm asking at!

So , time will tell what your markers mean and as my onc says "the proof is in the pudding" so having the scan will probably be most useful.

Easy to say, hard to do I know, but remember you are dealing with tiny tiny met, and it sounds like you have a GREAT oncologist who is both on the ball, but working with you, against the cancer on multiple fronts. You seem to bein very good hands.

They to remember to breathe, and good luck on you scans!

[TRIPLE THE LOVE]

thank you
I will post back my scan results
thank you again you made me feel better

[Jackie07]

Below is an abstract of a meta-analysis about tumor markers:

Clin Nucl Med. 2012 May;37(5):467-74.
Tumor Marker-Guided PET in Breast Cancer Patients-A Recipe for a Perfect Wedding: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

Evangelista L, Cervino AR, Ghiotto C, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D, Muzzio PC.
Source

From the *Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOV-IRCCS), Padova, Italy; â€*Second Medical Oncology Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOV-IRCCS), Padova, Italy; ‡Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom; §Department of Nuclear Medicine, Radiology, Medical Physics, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy; and ¶Department of Radiology Oncology, Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOV-IRCCS), Padova, Italy.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

: Early detection of breast cancer (BC) recurrence is a fundamental issue during follow-up. Although the utilization of new therapeutic protocols aimed at reducing the recurrence risk is defined, the diagnostic approach for early detection remains to be clarified. We aim to provide a critical overview of recently published reports and perform a meta-analysis on the use of tumor markers in BC patients as a guide for fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
METHODS:

: Medline and Google Scholar were used for searching English and non-English articles that evaluate the role of PET in BC recurrence when an increase in tumor markers is found. All complete studies were reviewed; thus, quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed.
RESULTS:

: From 2001 to May 2011, we found 19 complete articles that critically evaluated the role of PET in BC recurrence detection in the presence of elevated tumor markers. The meta-analysis of the 13 studies provided the following results: pooled sensitivity 0.878 (95% CI: 0.838-0.909), pooled specificity 0.693 (95% CI: 0.553-0.805), and pooled accuracy 0.828 (95% CI: 0.762-0.878).
CONCLUSIONS:

: The current experience confirms the potential of fluorodeoxyglucose PET, and in particular of PET/CT, in detecting occult soft tissue and bone metastases in the presence of a progressive increase of serum tumor markers in BC patients, but this should be better defined in the current practical recommendations.