On another thread Deirdre commented on the use of the phrase “significant improvement” used often to describe results in trials.
In fact when one examines the results they often only show tiny incremental improvement. For example, follwoing the ASCO conference there has been a lot of hype about a PARP inhibitor trial for triple negative breast cancer of a drug code named BS1-201. Reuters, for example, reported that it showed “improved survival by 60%” compared with the arm which just took chemotherapy.
Sound wonderful? A drug to go to the barricades for? In fact when you look at the trial results this far what it did was increase median survial from 5.7 months to 9.2 months…by survival here we’re talking time till you’re dead.
Now, sitting where I’m sitting getting 3 extra well time months does matter, but in the scheme of things I simply cannot get excited by these results.
More than this: it strikes me that among people with advanced bc there is rarely (on forums like this) discussion of the median time till death or progression of any of the drugs we take. Women with primary breast cancer talk a lot about the percentage improvement having chemo and other treatment will or won’t have. But strangely there is silence among those with secondaries. We each tell our own anecdotal stories and pass on the good news of x who took xeloda for 2 years or y whose cancer disappeared for ages after weekly taxol. (And the stories sometimes get repeated long after the women are dead.) But we don’t look at the averages. We probbaly don’t because they are depressing. Indeed it s very depressing that average survival with mets is around 2-3 and a half years after diagnosis.
Now I know that passing on good anecdotal stories may lift us and newly diagnosed women often get bombarded with the anecdotes rather than shown empathy with the terrible news they must come to terms with that they’re going to be dead long before they should be, perhaps pretty soon …but if we never talk the truth, talk the stats, talk the reality that we are dying then I reckon we collude in the collective failure to find drugs which really work…to have drugs which will cure.
Wasn’t sure where to post this…it should perhaps be in current issues but I wanted particularly to know what people with mets think.
Deirdre…you wrote about getting cynical about trials. I don’t think you’re cynical…but ‘significant improvment’ indeed is misleading.
Jane