Find a Drug
Advanced Search

Professional

Herceptin

Clinical Pharmacology
font size

Clinical Pharmacology

The results for DFS for the integrated analysis of Studies 1 and 2 (Figure 3) and the analysis of DFS results in Studies 1 and 2, and Study 3 are presented in Table 7. Across studies 1 and 2, there were insufficient numbers of patients within each of the following subgroups to determine if the treatment effect was different from that of the overall patient population: patients with node negative disease, patients with low tumor grade, and patients within specific ethnic/racial subgroups (Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander patients). In Study 3, there were insufficient numbers of patients within each of the following subgroups to determine if the treatment effect was different from that of the overall patient population: patients with low tumor grade, within specific ethnic/racial subgroups (Black or Hispanic patients), or > 65 years of age.

Table 6: Efficacy Results from Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer (Studies 1 + 2 and Study 3)


  Study 1 + 2 Study 3
  AC→
Herceptin + T
(n =1872)
AC→
T
(n = 1880)
Chemo→
Herceptin
(n =1693 )
Chemo→
Observation
(n = 1693)

Primary Endpoint

  DFS events 133 261 127 219
  Hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.48a
(0.39, 0.59)
0.54
(0.44, 0.67)
  p-value < 0.0001b < 0.0001c
Secondary Endpoints
  Deaths 62 92 31 40
  Hazard ratio 95% CI 0.67 0.75
  p-value NSd NSd
CI = confidence interval.
a Hazard ratio estimated by Cox regression stratified by clinical trial,intended paclitaxel schedule, number of positive nodes, and hormonereceptor status.
b stratified log-rank test.
c log-rank test.
d NS= non-significant.

Figure 3: Duration of Disease-Free Survival in Patients with Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer (Studies 1 and 2)


Duration of Disease-Free Survival in Patients with Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer (Studies 1 and 2) - illustration

Exploratory analyses of DFS as a function of HER2 overexpression or gene amplification were conducted for patients in Studies 2 and 3, where central laboratory testing data were available. The results are shown in Table 7. The number of events in Study 2 was small with the exception of the IHC 3+/FISH+ subgroup, which constituted 81% of those with data. Definitive conclusions cannot be drawn regarding efficacy within other subgroups due to the small number of events. The number of events in Study 3 was adequate to demonstrate significant effects on DFS in the IHC 3+/FISH unknown and the FISH +/IHC unknown subgroups.

Table 7 : Treatment Outcomes in Studies 2 and 3 as a Function of HER2 Overexpression or Amplification


1 Study 2 Study 3
HER2 Assay Result* Number
of
Patients
Hazard Ratio
DFS
(95% CI)
Number
of Patients
Hazard Ratio
DFS
(95% CI)
IHC 3+        
  FISH (+) 1170 0.42 (0.27, 0.64) 91 0.56 (0.13, 2.50)
  FISH (-) 51 0.71 (0.04, 11.79) 8 ----
  FISH Unknown 51 0.69 (0.09, 5.14) 2258 0.53 (0.41, 0.69)
IHC < 3+ / FISH (+) 174 1.01 (0.18, 5.65) 299 ^ 0.53 (0.20, 1.42)
IHC unknown / FISH (+) ---- ------ 724 0.59 (0.38, 0.93)
* IHC by HercepTest, FISH by PathVysion as performed at a central laboratory.
^ All cases in this category in study 3 were IHC 2+ .
Metastatic Breast Cancer
Brand Name: Herceptin
Generic Name: Trastuzumab
Bookmark this page:

Breast Cancer

Find support and advances in treatment.

WebMD Symptom Checker - Start Here Ringworm Slideshow: Watch and Learn

Cancer and ExerciseCancer and Exercise
Resting to conserve energy may not be the best remedy for fatigue during radiation therapy. See more WebMD Videos »