Odds of Recurrence

I didn't even know until recently that being HER 2 positive was such a bad thing. How bad is it though? How much more often does recurrence occur? I had a 1.9cm tumor that was 6 on the nottingham scale (3 tubes, 2 nuclear, 1 mitotic). I was also ER 50% and PR 5%. One node affected with 3 points of foci each less than 2mm. I had 4 AC followed by 4 taxol every 2 weeks with Leukine as my WBC booster instead of neulasta. Had 7 weeks of rads.

Do all HER 2 positive with positive nodes recur?

Thank you in advance. I am glad I found this site.

Best regards,

Becky

Becky,

Its not as frightening as you think, see the article below:

HER2 Recurrance Study

You may also wish to enroll in a long term Genentech Study for HER2 Positive BC patients:

Genentech Study

Regards
Joe

Dear Becky, when I asked my onc the very same questions that you are asking, he said in his experience the Her2+ added around a 10% higher chance that the cancer would reoccur, if other factors, ie-size of tumor, lymp node involvement, etc. were similar. This discussion did take place before the success of Herceptin had been announced for early stage
breast cancer. I would have to think that Herceptin would make that 10% gap even smaller. Take care,
Laurie s

Hello Becky,

More likely to recur in no way means that always recurs. Susan Love has an interesting piece on her website about HER2 BC receptors not always being active.

If you are concerned, you might ask your oncologist if the results of the HERA trial would apply to you. The interim results of this trial show that a year of herceptin significantly increased disease free survival, with a 46% decrease in recurrences. Although this trial is still ongoing, my oncologist, who is on the HERA board, was positive enough about the trial to support my request for herceptin. I finished treatment nine months ago. The main risk of herceptin is a 1 in 200 chance of heart problems, which I think may usually be reversible.

Joe, the trial you directed Becky to was for stage IV BC!

Best wishes,

Christine MH

I try to understand this info but I'm confused. Because the study was mostly about local recurrence, I have to question what the difference is when it comes to mets for HER2 positives. Also, the overwhelming majority of the subjects studied were not HER2 positive, so wouldn't a smaller sampling of HER2's reduce accuracy?

I had to have Adriamycin not because of any of the other negative characteristics of my cancer but because I was HER2+++. So it seems to me that being HER2+++ is probably somewhat worse; how MUCH worse is the question nobody is clear about.