Clinical trial of new drug for metastatic breast cancer patient shows 'unheard of' survival rates

A new clinical breast cancer drug trial has resulted in "unheard of" survival rates.

According to a recent story by Gina Kolata in The New York Times, for some patients with metastatic tumors that were not significantly affected by other forms of chemotherapy, the treatment halted their cancer's growth.

The findings of a new study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, might "change how medicine [is] practiced," the article indicates.

Dr. Eric Winer, who was not involved in the study but who is director of the Yale Cancer Center and head of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, is quoted as saying that "this is a new standard of care. It affects a huge number of patients."

The Times piece notes that the new treatment, using an experimental drug (trastuzumab deruxtecan, sold as Enhehru) "that targeted cancer cells with laser like precision" was "stunningly successful, slowing tumor growth and extending life to an extent rarely seen with advanced cancers."

The trial, which focused on a mutant protein known as HER2, involved 557 patients. Tumors in those who took the experimental drug stopped growing for about 10 months, twice the length of those who took only standard chemotherapy. Those patients survived for almost two years, compared to less than a year and a half for those who received standard chemo.

Dr. Halle Moore

"It is unheard of for chemotherapy trials in metastatic breast cancer to improve survival in patients by six months," the story quotes Dr. Halle Moore, director of breast cancer oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, as saying.

Dr. Susan Domchek, a breast cancer specialist at the University of Pennsylvania's Abramson Cancer Center, also is quoted to the effect that she plans to see — even before the Food and Drug Administration approves the drug, which has a wholesale price of about $14,000 every three weeks — if the data from the study will be sufficient to convince insurers to approve it.

More information about successful clinical trials can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Expert contends that collective voices could cut socio-economic disparities hiking cancer deaths

The ability of cancer patients to overcome inequities in insurance coverage and acquire access to the appropriate clinical care has grown quite a bit lately.

In a recent op ed by Elizabeth Helms in the Marin Independent Journal, the cancer care expert promotes advocate and collective voices to achieve those and other results for patients and their families who "live daily with chronic conditions"

Elizabeth Helms

Helms, president and CEO of the California Chronic Care Coalition, an alliance of nonprofit, social consumer and provider organizations, writes that "access to innovative, clinically appropriate cancer treatments will not only improve survival outcomes for cancer patients, but actualize a future where many cancer types can be viewed as a chronic condition to be managed in consultation with a care team."

Noting that "our collective voices are always stronger than just one advocate, " she quotes an African proverb that says, "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together."

For Helms, "together" — at least in California — means supporting the mission of the Cancer Patients Bill of Rights, a resolution unanimously passed by the state's legislature in 2021. 

California, it should be noted, is the first state to adopt such a bill of rights, one that lays out six rights that every cancer patient should be entitled, including access to promising innovations and experts specializing in various cancer types.

In her op ed, Helms maintains that while biomedical research has produced life-saving innovations, cancer patients still face socioeconomic disparities that if eliminated could prevent "34% of cancer deaths among all U.S. adults ages 25 to 74."

The bottom line, she contends, is that "when patients receive early access to the treatments and expertise tailored to treat their cancer subtype, lives are saved and the quality of life remains higher during and after treatment."

In California, she write, patients insured through the Medical program "often must navigate confusing layers of subcontracted care, who managed-care plans…outsource responsibility for patients. In many cases, the heavy use of subcontracted care adds a knot of red tape on top of an already stressful time for Medical patients trying to access specialized cancer care."

She adds that cancer patients in that program "who have breast, colon, lung and rectal cancer are more likely to be diagnosed at an advanced stage of disease and have less favorable five-year survival rates."

"Our current one-size-fits-most system prevents many California cancer patients from accessing optimal care," she insists, "and the lack of access has translated into needless suffering and lives lost."

The cancer community, Helms says, "has a moral imperative to break down these barriers to access." 

Access that eliminates disparities can make a difference for the more than 187,000 Californians who are diagnosed with cancer every year and the thousands who "will be misdiagnosed or placed on inappropriate or ineffective treatment."

More information about care can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers. 

Survival rates jump 80% with new treatment

Clinical trial finds drug combination that might stop metastasized prostate cancer from worsening

A new study shows that an experimental drug combo that controls hormones may halt the progression of prostate cancer.

Dr. Chris Sweeney

A clinical trial led by Dr. Christopher Sweeney at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, according to a story in the October-November issue of AARP Magazine, determined that survival rates could jump as much as 80 percent when the combination is used.

Sweeney's study, the AARP article notes, focused on what can happen when enzalutamide, an oral drug that blocks hormone reception, is combined with testosterone-suppressing medication. 

That study, like other research, was based on the notion that "testosterone and other male hormones can fuel the growth of cancer cells." 

What was being sought were ways "to either suppress the production of hormones or stop cells from receiving them."

Sweeney's study, the story asserts, did both.

The AARP article centered on one particular participant in the study, Dr. John Hammel, a psychiatrist who was diagnosed in 2016 with late-stage prostate cancer that had already begun to metastasize.

Hammel's quoted as saying "I was despondent — I didn't think I'd live a year."

That attitude made him, after initial skepticism, jump at the chance when his oncologist told him about the "real treatment" that was available, "not just palliative care." 

During the study, Hammel reportedly saw his PSA test numbers "drop from 2,000 to 450 to four and then to undetectable for six months" — and then stay there.

The trial, the story says, helped him start living again, "instead of focusing on his prognosis." 

For more information about clinical trials and their results, check out "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

African-American health care being undermined

Breast cancer mortality rate remains higher for whites than blacks, new study shows

Despite strides in meds and treatments, black women are still at a much greater risk of dying from breast cancer.

A recent story on the Huffington Post website by Suzy Strutner points out that while total survival rates for the disease are improving, a new study shows a huge gap remains. 

The new report, from the American Cancer Society, finds that "breast cancer death rates declined 39 percent between 1989 and 2015" but whites have a 39 percent greater chance of survival than blacks."

The gap, the study says, "emerged in the early '80s, widened through 2015 and has remained steady since."

Why the gap?

Because of "biological differences in breast cancer tumors, along with health care policy."

Regarding the latter, Strutner's story indicates that "unequal access to preventive screenings and treatment" includes black women getting mammograms "slightly more often than white women nowadays, but they had lower screening rates in the past, which 'may be one possible reason for the difference in survival rates today,' according to the Susan G. Komen website."

Not to mention "access to follow-up care [possibly differing] among the races."

Beth Glenn, Ph.D.

The HuffPost story goes on to explain that "less screening means black women might wait longer between  mammograms, be diagnosed late or be unable to follow up altogether when a mammogram comes back abnormal," according to Beth Glenn, Ph.D. associate director for the UCLA Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Equity.

Besides, "for black women who live in poverty, clinics might be too far away," the story adds. 

Christine Ambrosone, Ph.d.

The story also quotes Christine Ambrosone, cancer prevention chair at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, about poverty blocking black women from care: "Things like transportation for cancer treatment can be a barrier, particularly for women who need radiation therapy, a treatment that needs to be given daily, and who cannot get that time off from work."

Strutner also cites "racial discrimination in health care settings."

As to the biological differences, her HuffPost story says "black women are twice as likely to be diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer, an aggressive form that's harder to treat. And tamoxifen, a drug that's hugely responsible for the overall improvement in death rates, treats another type of breast cancer, called hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer, that black women are less likely to get."

At the same time, Strutner's story indicates, Native American, Latina and Asian women all have lower rates of breast cancer and death from the disease than white women.

It also cites the report mentioning the states of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Delaware as managing to "close the gap, likely by widening health care access so it's easier for everyone to get treatment when they need it" — including Massachusetts passing "a health care reform that requires all residents to have health insurance and offering free health insurance to poor residents who qualify."

The story quotes Glenn as saying that "in general, states with more coverage for low-income women tend to have better outcomes."

Further information on different situations for different races can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.