Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / August 2004
Any results yet of Herceptin (Trastuzumab) adjuvant Breast Cancer trials?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
BJ - 26 Aug 2004 01:23 GMT There are some ongoing trials that intend to evaluate the use of Herceptin (Trastuzumab) in the adjuvant setting for women having had breast cancer and who test positive for HER-2. The researchers are looking into whether it would be a good idea to give wimen Herceptin (Trastuzumab) after initial chemo and radiation to decrease the risk for the cancer to return. As I have a long-term girlfriend who have got breast cancer I would be most interested in any interimistic results of these trials, if any are at hand. In my country there is only one trial (the HERA trial) that is possible for her to participate in. In that trial there is a chance of one in three that she will not get any Herceptin.
I would be very interested in knowing if it would be worth the cost and hard work to get her on Herceptin off-protocol if she gets into the arm which has no Herceptin.
My girlfriend had a 18 millimeter tumour in the right breast and 7 out of 7 lymph nodes were contaminated, although on microscopic level. The tumour was tested HER-2 positive by FISH and is ER/Pr++++. The general outlook of the tumour was rated Elston grade III. The treatment so far has been 6 x FEC (Epirubicin was 75 mg/m2, chemococtail given every three weeks).
Due to her HER-2 positivity, she is sheduled for 3 or 4 more chemo treatments but now with Epirubicin and Taxotere (75 mg/m2 of both). Then radiation and thereafter anastrozole (an aromatose inhibitor). No signs of distant metastases yet.
As far as I have been able to conclude from extensive research on the Internet, the above would make her a high-risk candidate for metastases. I have a gut-feeling that there must be something that can be done in addition to the above to decrease the risk that she will eventually develop metastases. Herceptin is the only drug that I come to think about, but then one must have a fair amount of trust that it actually will do some good, hence my keen interest in the interemistic results of these trials.
Thanks in advance
BJ.
To reply by e-mail, please remove the leading X from my e-mailadress Xforestcat@hotmail.com.
ABdikjse - 26 Aug 2004 04:12 GMT Yes, unfortunately, one item on Herceptin is in:
ABSTRACT: Incidence of cerebral metastases in patients treated with trastuzumab for metastatic breast cancer [08/11/2004; British Journal of Cancer] index
Trastuzumab is an effective treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) that overexpresses HER-2. A high incidence of brain metastases (BM) has been noted in patients receiving trastuzumab. A retrospective chart review was conducted of 100 patients commencing trastuzumab for metastatic breast cancer from July 1999 to December 2002, at the Christie Hospital. Seven patients were excluded; five patients developed central nervous system metastases prior to starting trastuzumab, and inadequate data were available for two. Out of the remaining 93 patients, 23 (25%) have developed BM to date. In all, 46 patients have died, and of these 18 (39%) have been diagnosed with BM prior to death. Of the 23 patients developing BM, 18 (78%) were hormone receptor negative and 18 (78%) had visceral disease. Univariate analysis showed a significant association between the development of cerebral disease and both hormone receptor status and the presence of visceral disease. In conclusion, a high proportion of patients with MBC treated with trastuzumab develop symptomatic cerebral metastases. HER-2-positive breast cancer may have a predilection for the brain, or trastuzumab therapy may change the disease pattern by prolonging survival. New strategies to address this problem require investigation in this group of patients.
Lady8
Eva - 26 Aug 2004 12:23 GMT Does this apply to people who are being treated with Herceptin as regular chemo too? I'm supposed to start it in a few weeks and this post has scared the hell out of me. Eva -------------
> Yes, unfortunately, one item on Herceptin is in: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Lady8 Tim Jackson - 27 Aug 2004 22:31 GMT > Does this apply to people who are being treated with Herceptin as regular > chemo too? I'm supposed to start it in a few weeks and this post has scared > the hell out of me. > Eva The abstract does NOT show that Herceptin -causes- brain mets. It shows a correlation between the two, which could for example be simply due to Herceptin being less effective across the blood-brain barrier. In other words it doesn't cause them, but it fails to cure them.
There is no evidence here to scare you, or to support withdrawing from Herceptin treatment.
Tim Jackson
allan grossman - 28 Aug 2004 18:52 GMT On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:31:10 +0100, "Tim Jackson"
>The abstract does NOT show that Herceptin -causes- brain mets. It shows a >correlation between the two, which could for example be simply due to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >There is no evidence here to scare you, or to support withdrawing from >Herceptin treatment. Almost *no* cancer treatment crosses the blood-brain barrier - the only one I can think of is Temodar - which isn't really indicated for breast cancer anyway.
Herceptin is a large-molecule compound - in tests the concentration of Herceptin in CSF is about 300x the concentration in someone's blood. It's not that Herceptin causes brain mets, it's that (as Tim said) it doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier - so if you have a response it'll generally be everywhere *except* your brain.
There have been some tests of Herceptin injected directly into the spine - but I think those tests are ongoing.
allan
 Signature we don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -- Anais Nin
allan grossman - 29 Aug 2004 23:30 GMT >Herceptin is a large-molecule compound - in tests the concentration of >Herceptin in CSF is about 300x the concentration in someone's blood. I got this backwards. In tests, the concentration of Herceptin in blood was ~300x the concentration in CSF. I figure y'all knew what I meant ;-)
hugs to all -
allan
 Signature we don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -- Anais Nin
Eva - 30 Aug 2004 05:33 GMT > >Herceptin is a large-molecule compound - in tests the concentration of > >Herceptin in CSF is about 300x the concentration in someone's blood. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > allan ---------- That's okay, I didn't know what you meant and I still don't! So I'm good. Eva
allan grossman - 30 Aug 2004 15:22 GMT > That's okay, I didn't know what you meant and I still don't! So I'm good. > Eva ;-)
Herceptin doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier easily. There have been a few tests run where they found the concentration of Herceptin in someone's blood is 300 times higher than the concentracion of Herceptin in the same person's spinal fluid.
What this means is that Herceptin does a pretty good job of killing the nasties everywhere *except* in someone's nervous system. IM frequently less than HO this means that the increased incidence of brain metastasis in folks who have received Herceptin is because the drug can't get to that part of your body.
As I mentioned in another post, Herceptin is a large-molecule drug. Your nervous system has a pretty efficient filter to keep stuff that shouldn't get to your brain away from that area, and unfortunately Herceptin doesn't make it through that barrier very well either.
So - it's my opinion that the folks who develop brain metastasis after Herceptin are doing so because they're living longer than they normally would have, not because Herceptin increases the likelihood of brain mets.
There have been some test cases where they injected Herceptin directly into the spine to fight brain mets but this is still being tested and isn't approved for general use.
Being Her2 positive isn't an automatic death sentence and I don't think there's any clinical evidence to support the idea that Her2 positive tumors metastasize quicker than other tumors. It is generally accepted that Her2+ tumors are a bit more aggressive than others, but any oncologist will tell you that *any* breast tumor left unchecked will metastasize at some point - and that some do earlier than others. There's simply no way to tell at what point a tumor will start shedding cells into one's bloodstream.
So - although it's easy for me to sit here and tell someone else not to worry, being Her2+ is *not* an automatic death sentence and does *not* mean that the tumors shed cells faster than others or anything awful like that. There's simply no clinical evidence to support that hypothesis. It *does* mean that on average Her2+ tumors grow faster than others, and that may (or may not) mean they metastasize quicker but there's no clinical evidence to support that. Each tumor is different.
My wife Deborah is Her2+ and was diagnosed with lung metastasis even before she had her mastectomy. Herceptin has saved her life twice - and more than five years out from a Stage IV diagnosis she's healthy and reasonably happy. As a matter of fact, if things continue to progress the way they have been for the past sis months we'll be off chemo again next month.
No one's telling you there's nothing to cling to, Eva - as a matter of fact I'm telling you exactly the opposite. It's not over until your oncologist says it's time to give up - and that may be a long way off - or never.
hugs -
allan
Eva - 31 Aug 2004 00:06 GMT Thank you so much for this kind and thoughtful post. Eva
> > That's okay, I didn't know what you meant and I still don't! So I'm good. > > Eva [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > allan Guess Who - 28 Aug 2004 13:36 GMT This study was not a random study, it is well known that patients who are HER/2 positive are high risk for mets. If you did a chart review of women of 100 women with non invasive breast cancer (DCIS) you would find almost 100% these women didn't have bone mets, therefore could you conclude NOT having chemo prevents bone mets if you used the parameters of her/2 study.
Eva - 28 Aug 2004 20:38 GMT > This study was not a random study, it is well known that patients who are > HER/2 positive are high risk for mets. > If you did a chart review of women of 100 women with non invasive breast > cancer (DCIS) you would find almost 100% these women didn't have bone mets, > therefore could you conclude NOT having chemo prevents bone mets if you used > the parameters of her/2 study. ------------ I think you're being unnecessarily sarcastic with me here, Guess Who. What was posted seemed quite alarming. "In conclusion, a high proportion of patients with MBC treated with trastuzumab develop symptomatic cerebral metastases."
It then went on to say:
"HER-2-positive breast cancer may have a predilection for the brain, or trastuzumab therapy may change the disease pattern by prolonging survival."
I hope it prolongs my survival. I have a lot of stuff left to do in this world. However, brain metastases are particularly horrible to me, since they mean living one's last months in a state of dementia.
Eva
allan grossman - 29 Aug 2004 14:18 GMT >I hope it prolongs my survival. I have a lot of stuff left to do in this >world. However, brain metastases are particularly horrible to me, since >they mean living one's last months in a state of dementia. This is not necessarily true.
I've known a couple of women who died of brain mets - neither was in a particularly demented state when she passed on. I enjoyed corresponding with one of them until about 48 hours before she passed away - then a seizure, coma and she passed peacefully. The other lost her sight about a week before she died - but again, no dementia.
Knowledge is power.
allan
 Signature we don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -- Anais Nin
Eva - 30 Aug 2004 08:36 GMT Basically what I am hearing in this newsgroup is that I am foolish to have any hope of survival, because I am HER2 positive. It is not a matter of whether this this will kill me, it is only a matter of when. It's going to metastasize if it hasn't already, and all of these "weapons" that are making me so sick are ultimately useless. Well, I never was a real upbeat person to begin with so I can't say I'm in the least surprised, but my God, isn't there like a *10%* chance or *something* to cling to?
allan grossman - 30 Aug 2004 10:53 GMT >Basically what I am hearing in this newsgroup is that I am foolish to have >any hope of survival, because I am HER2 positive. It is not a matter of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >to begin with so I can't say I'm in the least surprised, but my God, isn't >there like a *10%* chance or *something* to cling to? I haven't heard anybody say that. It's true that HER2+ cells tend to be more aggressive but no one here said it was time to just hang it up. I haven't heard anyone say things were hopeless.
My wife has been on and off Herceptin for almost five years. There's no doubt the drug is keeping her alive, but she's most certainly alive - and doing quite well, thankyouverymuch ;-)
allan
 Signature we don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -- Anais Nin
Tim Jackson - 30 Aug 2004 19:15 GMT > Basically what I am hearing in this newsgroup is that I am foolish to have > any hope of survival, because I am HER2 positive. It is not a matter of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to begin with so I can't say I'm in the least surprised, but my God, isn't > there like a *10%* chance or *something* to cling to? No-one said that it was hopeless and you have a perfectly good chance of recovery.
I don't know what your history is, but if you have not been diagnosed as stage IV (metastatic or secondary) cancer then the fact that you are HER2 positive does not really much affect your survival chances. HER2+ cancers tend to be more aggressive, but as you are aware, they are also treatable with Herceptin, which somewhat cancels out the increased risk. The best indicators of metastasis risk are tumour size and number of lymph nodes involved.
The survey you were referring to was a survey of patients who's cancer had already metastasised, so that was a whole different picture.
You can look up your metastasis risk on the Imaginis website http://www.imaginis.com/breasthealth/statistics.asp Find "Staging and Survival Rates" near the bottom of the page, if you don't know your stage follow the link to the staging page where it is explained.
What is true is that once it has metastasised, THEN AND ONLY THEN, is it most likely a permanent condition that you would die with, and you would be unlikely to live more than ten years ten years beyond diagnosis of that condition. But right now that isn't you.
Tim Jackson
Eva - 31 Aug 2004 00:32 GMT > No-one said that it was hopeless and you have a perfectly good chance of > recovery. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Find "Staging and Survival Rates" near the bottom of the page, if you don't > know your stage follow the link to the staging page where it is explained. ----------- Thank you, that's a very clear and helpful site.
I'm sorry if I got kind of hysterical there when I posted. I was having a really bad night. Then I read Catharine's biography and freaked out altogether.
Eva
allan grossman - 31 Aug 2004 00:45 GMT >I'm sorry if I got kind of hysterical there when I posted. I was having a >really bad night. Then I read Catharine's biography and freaked out >altogether. There's no need to apologize, Eva. There are more than a few people here who can tell you of me being scared witless on more than one occasion.
Today you can lean on us - six months from now I may need to lean on you. That's the way it works.
I met Catharine in person twice - and took her passing pretty hard. There were a couple of times that she held me up when I didn't know how to stand on my own. She went through life - and through her passing - with style and grace. I was very lucky to know her - we all were.
hugs -
allan
 Signature we don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -- Anais Nin
Tim Jackson - 31 Aug 2004 02:11 GMT > I'm sorry if I got kind of hysterical there when I posted. I was having a > really bad night. Then I read Catharine's biography and freaked out > altogether. Yes I still miss her too.
I never met her in the flesh, but I got to know her well through a lengthy correspondence that maybe I'll publish one day. She was so strong physically and mentally, but she got scared inside too just like the rest of us.
What she was that was different was she was always aware of what was happening to her, emotionally and physically, she could stand outside her body and see the funny side of her fear or pain or embarrassment, and wasn't afraid to talk about it. Like a war reporter or a test pilot. And boy, could she write.
Tim
Guess Who - 30 Aug 2004 22:37 GMT  Signature Well, I never was a real upbeat person
> to begin with so I can't say I'm in the least surprised, but my God, isn't > there like a *10%* chance or *something* to cling to? And there are less toxic 2nd generation of herceptin like drugs in clinical trials. look very promising.PS we are all going to die breast cancer or not.
Eva - 31 Aug 2004 00:05 GMT --------- No sh.t. I work in a nursing home, I've seen plenty of death and I even know there are worse things than cancer.
Eva
Kaye301 - 26 Aug 2004 04:56 GMT Hi BJ, I had adjuvent Herceptin off-protocol. It was given to me because I was at very high risk for recurrence. I only had it for a year though and am very concerned about recurrence--because of my extremely high risk status. There are now trials to give it to women in the neoadjuvent setting. One gal I correspond with got it that way along and is doing exceptionally well. I do wish your girlfriend all the best! She is very fortunate to have such a caring and concerned partner. Take care...
|
|
|