TRIPLE POSITIVE GROUP
Comments
-
WBC=white blood count.
I had a MUGA before herceptin and then it was never tested again. I was always asked about shortness of breath etc. but that's it.
All of us early stages with no mets are considered NED after surgery. If we get chemo/herceptin after surgery it can be looked at as "insurance" but that stats do show that women do better getting it than not. Granted earlier stage has lower stat for mets but even with my stats there was a 40% chance I didn't need it.
All treatment has risk. The chances of your heart repairing is good but not 100%. When an oncologist looks at what treatment you get it is balanced with the risk. I do believe this is why my rad onc gave me a pass on RADS. I was in a gray area but given the amount of treatment & surgery, no nodes and the location of my tumor I'm willing to bet heart damage was a big consideration. I don't think the heart repairs after RAD damage.
You can die of HER2+++ breast cancer so this is about choices and risk management.
0 -
I posted this question before....
Is there a difference between HER2+...HER2+++ .
I never understood this part.
My Oncologist says my HER2+ was 2.2 ?????????
♥
0 -
Sheila: My onc says there is no difference.
0 -
Thanks Arlene........I still see some posters have HER2+++ in the DX area.
Well it won't really change anything now but i was just curious.
0 -
That's what I did...took my signature stats right off the lab report.
0 -
My onc said that HER2+++, means you are highly positive. I would have to dig out my path report to see the cutoff. He said that oftentimes people that are her2+++ respond better to herceptin. Not sure if I am buying that or not.
0 -
Does anyone know how high the HER2+ goes and what's considered really high? My HER2+ ratio was 4.2
0 -
From the her2+ support website:
The scoring for an IHC test is from 0 to 3+.
* Zero is HER2 negative
* 1+ is considered HER2 negative
* 2+ is considered a borderline or equivocal result
* 3+ is HER2 positiveFluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH)
Tumor samples with an average HER2 gene/chromosome 17 ratio of greater than or equal to 2 to 1 (2.5 to 1, 3.2 to 1, etc.) are reported as HER2 positive
0 -
chacha,
I am trying to find it, but my path says
Ratio of HER2 to D17Z1 is 10.3 (average count: HER2: 24.7,D17Z1: 2.4)
Onc said that is high.0 -
Oh, and for those of you who have been reading this thread for a long time, and laughed at my story about halvsies when I got my tatoos, turns out that wasn't the areola area at all. It as his procedure for creating the nipple. I still have to go back and have tattoos for the outer part AGAIN! LOL.
Talk about not doing my research.0 -
Fluff my path stated my ratio was approximately 15! Anything greater than 2.2 is amplified (HER2+)
BTW it is just a theory about the higher the more likely herceptin works. I don't think they know enough about HER2+ really to know for sure.
0 -
Mine was high as well at 9.1. According to this Mayo site, FISH > 4.0 is considered high. However, they don't know if the degree of amplification makes any difference.
The degree of HER2 amplification varies in tumors. Some exhibit high levels of amplification (HER2:CEP17 ratio >4.0), whereas others exhibit low-level amplification (HER2:CEP17 ratio of 2.2-4.0). It is not currently known if patients with different levels of amplification have the same prognosis and response to therapy.
0 -
Thank You all. When I was DX didn't have a computer now I know more about my BC than before.
you are all great.
What is the difference between fish test ........ 2.2 HER2+
0 -
Sorry kayb
They do 2 different tests for HER2+ right?
One is Fish and i don't know what the other one is called.
What I meant was my result 2.2 meant the fish test or the other test?
0 -
sheila - 2.2 is most likely the FISH test.0
-
Thanks Omaz.
Good Night All.
♥
0 -
The FISH score is more accurate.
I used to think triple positive was less common but it seems it could be close to an even split or something like 45/55 split... but I don't have the data to back this up. What's not common is being HER2+ and highly hormone positive. There are a few of us here that are.
0 -
I didn't know that Lago (that being highly positive is uncommon). I think I'm around 90% ER+.
0 -
Yes I remember a women who went to my onc for a 2nd opinion wanted to test her again for HER2+ because she was highly positive and maybe even grade 2. HER2+ tends to be grade 3. It also tends to be in t he nodes but as you can see some of us are node free.
0 -
kayb - Interesting article, thanks. My takeaway from first reading is that those of us with high ER+ (H-score >=200, I looked this up at one time, if I remember correctly it is a combination of the % of cells stainging ER+ and the intensity of the staining (ER density on the cell surface)) are luminal A hybrid, that sounds like a good thing....since women who had luminal A tumors tend have a good prognosis.0
-
I was 90% ER+ 10% PR+ Tumor 1.2cm
So High ER+ & HER2+ ........means what?
Thank You to all my DR Sisters here.
♥
0 -
Sheila you are the anomaly with High ER, Grade 2 and no nodes. I would think that's a good thing since the hormone therapy should work well but I don't know. What does your onc say.0
-
Lago......My Oncologist gave me path results when he was asked.
7 years ago i didn't know any better.
I'm switching DR because of Insurance issues.....This time I will ask more questions....
Don't misunderstand I really liked my Onco but he wasn't very talkative.
Thanks
0 -
sheila - Beats me what it means! My tumor was also highly ER+ and HER2+.0
-
Count me in for high ER, 98%, fish her2 was 2.3 . Just reread my path report yesterday, understand a bit more every time I look at it.
0 -
My report says: Grade III with foci of Grade II (what does that mean?)
Estrogen +3 (90%)
Progesterone +2 (60%)
Herneu : +3
Ki67 +30%
I had one positive node. Lump was 1.8/1.7/1.2
I never really asked details as to what everything was. He just said I was a classic case for the whole 9 yards. ( AC, Taxol, Herceptin, tamifoxin and rad
0 -
I was 30% ER+ 5%PR+ They didn't give a specific for MIB-1 (Ki67) other than >20% which is considered unfavorable. The guide on had >20%, 10%-20%, or <10%
My BS considered my PR ad being negative but my ONC referred to it as being positive.
0 -
This is an interesting discussion. lago - my Ki67 said the same as yours, 20-30% as high.0
-
Sheila and Lago, I'm one of those anomalies too! ...but mine is smaller .3 cm
ER "strong and diffuse in 95% of tumor cells" and PR "moderate and patchy in 15% of tumor cells"
My Onc says hormone therapy only but I'm post-meapausal. (57) and I think that has something to do with the treatment plan as well. I'm getting a second opinion on the 2nd and CT and bone scans due to an elevated CA27-29 level in my blood test.0 -
Sheila and Lago, I'm one of those anomalies too! ...but mine is smaller .3 cm
ER "strong and diffuse in 95% of tumor cells" and PR "moderate and patchy in 15% of tumor cells"
My Onc says hormone therapy only but I'm post-meapausal. (57) and I think that has something to do with the treatment plan as well. I'm getting a second opinion on the 2nd and CT and bone scans due to an elevated CA27-29 level in my blood test.0
