New hope for patients with less common breast cancer
WASHINGTON - A new treatment nearly halves the risk of disease progression or death from a less common form of breast cancer that hasn't seen major drug advances in over a decade, researchers reported recently.
Results from the study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology, are expected to be submitted to regulators and could soon establish a new first-line therapy for people with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer -- the advanced stage of a form that comprises 15-20 per cent of all breast cancer cases. Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer that has spread to other parts of the body live around five years. - 123RF file photo
HER2-positive cancers are fueled by an overactive HER2 gene, which makes too much of a protein called human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 that helps cancer cells grow and spread.
Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer that has spread to other parts of the body live around five years.
"Seeing such a striking improvement was really impressive to us -- we were taking a standard and almost doubling how long patients could have their cancer controlled for," oncologist Sara Tolaney, chief of the breast oncology division at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, told AFP.
The current standard of care, known as THP, combines chemotherapy with two antibodies that block growth signals from the HER2 protein. The new approach uses a drug called trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), an antibody attached to a chemotherapy drug.
'Smart bomb'
This "smart bomb" strategy allows the drug to target cancer cells directly. "You can bind to the cancer cell and dump all that chemo right into the cancer cells," explained Tolaney.
"Some people call them smart bombs because they're delivering chemo in a targeted fashion -- which is how I think we're able to really increase efficacy so much."
Common side effects included nausea, diarrhea and a low white blood cell count, with a less common effect involving lung scarring.
T-DXd is already approved as a "second-line" option -- used when first-line treatments stop working. But in the new trial, it was given earlier, paired with another antibody, pertuzumab.
In a global trial led by Tolaney, just under 400 patients were randomly assigned to receive T-DXd in combination with pertuzumab, thought to enhance its effects.
A similar number received the standard THP regimen. A third group, who received T-DXd without pertuzumab, was also enrolled -- but those results haven't yet been reported.
44 per cent risk reduction
At a follow-up of 2.5 years, the T-DXd and pertuzumab combination reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 44 per cent compared to standard care.
Fifteen per cent of patients in the T-DXd group saw their cancer disappear entirely, compared to 8.5 per cent in the THP group.
Because this was an interim analysis, the median progression-free survival -- meaning the point at which half the patients had seen their cancer return or worsen -- was 40.7 months with the new treatment, compared to 26.9 months with the standard, and could rise further as more data come in.
Tolaney said the results would be submitted to regulators around the world, including the US Food and Drug Administration, and that future work would focus on optimising how long patients remain on the treatment, particularly those showing complete remission.
"This represents a new first-line standard treatment option for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer," said Dr. Rebecca Dent, a breast cancer specialist at the National Cancer Center Singapore who was not involved in the study. - AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sinar Daily
a day ago
- Sinar Daily
Japanese startup test kit shows promise in early cancer detection
The kit can be used to detect microRNA, a biomarker known for its link to early cancer biology, in a small amount of urine and help screen the risks of cancer in the lungs, colon and pancreas, among others. 28 Jun 2025 07:00pm The test kit from Craif Inc., a spin-off from Nagoya University founded in 2018, can also be used to assess simultaneously whether a person is at risk from any of up to seven types of cancer. - 123RF photo TOKYO - A urine-based cancer risk screening kit developed by a Japanese startup is showing promise in detecting cancer at the earliest stage using non-invasive means, Kyodo News Agency reported. The test kit from Craif Inc., a spin-off from Nagoya University founded in 2018, can also be used to assess simultaneously whether a person is at risk from any of up to seven types of cancer. The test kit from Craif Inc., a spin-off from Nagoya University founded in 2018, can also be used to assess simultaneously whether a person is at risk from any of up to seven types of cancer. - 123RF photo The product, which does not require a blood test, was able to detect changes in pre-malignant cells among residents of Hokkaido towns in northern Japan to whom the company distributed 100 sets of the "miSignal" test kit free of charge in the year through March 2025. "We were able to detect and treat cancer that was difficult to find by X-ray," said Tatsuya Kato, a professor at the Hokkaido University Hospital, adding the kits would be vital in places such as Hokkaido, where medical resources are sparse. The kit can be used to detect microRNA, a biomarker known for its link to early cancer biology, in a small amount of urine and help screen the risks of cancer in the lungs, colon and pancreas, among others. Results of the survey using the test kits were announced at an annual meeting of the Japanese Association for Chest Surgery in May. Among those aged 60 or older who had not taken a lung cancer test for five years or more, a tumour was detected in the lungs of a woman in her 60s that led to a detailed examination and successful surgery. The tumour was diagnosed as a "Stage 0" adenocarcinoma in situ. Precancerous cells in the colon and pancreas were also detected among six people in the survey, according to the company. In Japan, it is estimated that one in two people would develop cancer in their lifetime, while one in four men and one in six women will die from the disease, according to statistics of the National Cancer Centre Japan. - BERNAMA-KYODO More Like This
The Sun
4 days ago
- The Sun
BBC's Walking with Dinosaurs returns with second season
HOLLYWOOD has a long history of making villains out of dinosaurs for dramatic and entertainment purposes. Given their immense size and reputation for danger, dinosaurs have been frequently depicted as fearsome monsters. A new BBC Studios documentary, however, shows a gentler side of them. Returning after 25 years, BBC classic documentary series Walking with Dinosaurs follows the lives of six dinosaurs, including the famous T-Rex and Triceratops. It can be watched on BBC Earth via Unifi TV channel 501 or Astro channel 554 on Sundays at 8pm. Each episode interweaves scenes of CGI dinosaur life with the work of scientists uncovering their fossilised remains. BBC head of development Thomas Scott and Dr Nizar Ibrahim, a scientist who worked on the series, spoke to theSun on bringing the documentary to life. How does it feel to bring back the series after 25 years? Scott: It has been a huge honour and a privilege to get the opportunity to do it. We were on the 25th anniversary of the first series and there have been many extraordinary scientific breakthroughs since then. So, between the opportunity to use new visuals and tell new stories, it was the perfect time to do it. The new series has since been watched by millions of people and it is still being watched as it launches in all the different territories. So, it has been an honour and a privilege. Nizar: I grew up watching the first season, which is such an iconic title and series. So, to work on the second series as an established scientist now feels very exciting. It feels surreal because it is something that you experienced as a child. To contribute and write the new chapter for the series was a special experience. Fortunately, the people working on the series felt the same as they were extremely passionate about the project. Everyone wanted to do science justice. Did you feel pressure to live up to or outdo the original series? Scott: I was 14 when the first series came out. I remember watching it with my parents and was inspired to do the degree I did at university and the career I have been doing from watching it. I know the same is true for lots of people in the field. So, you do feel a huge responsibility because you are not just making an amazing piece of television, you are also creating the start of a lifelong passion for palaeontology and science. That is one of the things I love about the series. Nizar: Definitely because the original series set the bar very high. It was this amazing spectacle as many people watched it. But with nostalgia tinting things a little, we tend to forget that there were a few inaccuracies pointed out by palaeontologists and scientists. It is difficult for people to distinguish between things that are directly based on fossils and things that are not. People who do not have background knowledge of palaeontology and natural history, may believe that 90% of what they are watching is made up. All they hear is an authoritative narrator telling them things but do they really know these things? So, with the new series, we are taking it one step further and ensuring viewers are not only entertained but also learn something new. What were some sources you referred to during pre-production? Scott: There is science running through every element of this. Just in terms of the scientists we work with, every episode has a key palaeontologist who is excavating the bones of the individual dinosaur. We work with those experts in the field to tell the stories of what is coming out of the ground. We also work with them to combine our knowledge of science and natural history storytelling to create the story for our individual dinosaurs. In terms of designing the dinosaurs, we work with our scientists, using their academic publications and others. Additionally, we have another layer of experts who are our series consultants who sit across the whole series. Was it easier to re-imagine the legendary creatures with the new visual effects and updated scientific knowledge? Scott: It did not make it easier because it was a different challenge. In the first series, they used a combination of CGI when it was wide shots, long lenses and close-ups. The models were anatomically correct as they could be back then. With pure CGI, you can create more dramatic sequences to build a sense of character. For instance, it enables you to have features and expressions, allowing you to build an emotional bond with the dinosaurs. But some of the CGI made things harder such as putting more feathers on dinosaurs. There is a lot more texture, lighting, colours, shading and complexities going on. But that is a challenge we are happy to embrace. Nizar: It is interesting how some of the movements of the dinosaurs look alien and surprising to some people. It is the first time that many actually see what a T-Rex or an Albertosaurus would actually look like when it is walking. It is supposed to look weird and alien-looking when you actually do it right. If you look at a T-Rex walking in Jurassic Park, it looks more like your typical Hollywood monster and it roars like a lion. But the reality is these animals are like aliens. There is nothing like a T-Rex or a Spinosaurus around today. So, it is interesting to be able to capture the alien nature of these creatures with new CGI. Will this series provide a warmer perception of dinosaurs, given the many violent portrayals of them? Scott: Certainly because we are spending so much time with an individual dinosaur. There is the chance to tell a more complex story of their social structure, their relationship with their offspring or with other members of their pack. You, as a result, get a more rounded sense of what these animals would have been like. You will get to see a Spinosaurus looking after his babies. You will see two Albertosaurs comforting each other after a failed hunt. We want people to walk away thinking that these are not monsters. Nizar: There will be a stark difference. In Hollywood movies, dinosaurs are one-dimensional creatures. They are out to destroy and eat you. Whereas with Walking with Dinosaurs, you see a palette of behaviours such as protecting their offspring, feeding and going on long journeys. You have a richer picture of an animal and not a monster. This rich palette of behaviours is something you only see in Walking with Dinosaurs. Do you think dinosaurs will ever walk this earth again through regenerative cloning? Nizar: No, but we are very fortunate that we still live in an age of dinosaurs. Birds are living dinosaurs and they carry some old fossil genes, which allowed them to switch from their dinosaurian ancestors. So, if you tweak some of those genes, you can make a chicken grow some tooth buds, a long tail and grasping arms. But it still would not be a velociraptor. Instead, it would be a very scary-looking chicken. The genetic material is far too degraded and essentially non-existent in almost all chickens. You might be able to do it one day with extinct mammals such as thylacine and mammoth. It would still be hugely challenging but we might be able to pull that off, but not a T-Rex. Dinosaurs are thousands of times older than most of us. Even if we could, it would not be a good idea as I am sure they will suffer from our human activities. It is probably better for them to be extinct.
The Sun
4 days ago
- The Sun
Reimagining prehistoric villains
HOLLYWOOD has a long history of making villains out of dinosaurs for dramatic and entertainment purposes. Given their immense size and reputation for danger, dinosaurs have been frequently depicted as fearsome monsters. A new BBC Studios documentary, however, shows a gentler side of them. Returning after 25 years, BBC classic documentary series Walking with Dinosaurs follows the lives of six dinosaurs, including the famous T-Rex and Triceratops. It can be watched on BBC Earth via Unifi TV channel 501 or Astro channel 554 on Sundays at 8pm. Each episode interweaves scenes of CGI dinosaur life with the work of scientists uncovering their fossilised remains. BBC head of development Thomas Scott and Dr Nizar Ibrahim, a scientist who worked on the series, spoke to theSun on bringing the documentary to life. How does it feel to bring back the series after 25 years? Scott: It has been a huge honour and a privilege to get the opportunity to do it. We were on the 25th anniversary of the first series and there have been many extraordinary scientific breakthroughs since then. So, between the opportunity to use new visuals and tell new stories, it was the perfect time to do it. The new series has since been watched by millions of people and it is still being watched as it launches in all the different territories. So, it has been an honour and a privilege. Nizar: I grew up watching the first season, which is such an iconic title and series. So, to work on the second series as an established scientist now feels very exciting. It feels surreal because it is something that you experienced as a child. To contribute and write the new chapter for the series was a special experience. Fortunately, the people working on the series felt the same as they were extremely passionate about the project. Everyone wanted to do science justice. Did you feel pressure to live up to or outdo the original series? Scott: I was 14 when the first series came out. I remember watching it with my parents and was inspired to do the degree I did at university and the career I have been doing from watching it. I know the same is true for lots of people in the field. So, you do feel a huge responsibility because you are not just making an amazing piece of television, you are also creating the start of a lifelong passion for palaeontology and science. That is one of the things I love about the series. Nizar: Definitely because the original series set the bar very high. It was this amazing spectacle as many people watched it. But with nostalgia tinting things a little, we tend to forget that there were a few inaccuracies pointed out by palaeontologists and scientists. It is difficult for people to distinguish between things that are directly based on fossils and things that are not. People who do not have background knowledge of palaeontology and natural history, may believe that 90% of what they are watching is made up. All they hear is an authoritative narrator telling them things but do they really know these things? So, with the new series, we are taking it one step further and ensuring viewers are not only entertained but also learn something new. What were some sources you referred to during pre-production? Scott: There is science running through every element of this. Just in terms of the scientists we work with, every episode has a key palaeontologist who is excavating the bones of the individual dinosaur. We work with those experts in the field to tell the stories of what is coming out of the ground. We also work with them to combine our knowledge of science and natural history storytelling to create the story for our individual dinosaurs. In terms of designing the dinosaurs, we work with our scientists, using their academic publications and others. Additionally, we have another layer of experts who are our series consultants who sit across the whole series. Was it easier to re-imagine the legendary creatures with the new visual effects and updated scientific knowledge? Scott: It did not make it easier because it was a different challenge. In the first series, they used a combination of CGI when it was wide shots, long lenses and close-ups. The models were anatomically correct as they could be back then. With pure CGI, you can create more dramatic sequences to build a sense of character. For instance, it enables you to have features and expressions, allowing you to build an emotional bond with the dinosaurs. But some of the CGI made things harder such as putting more feathers on dinosaurs. There is a lot more texture, lighting, colours, shading and complexities going on. But that is a challenge we are happy to embrace. Nizar: It is interesting how some of the movements of the dinosaurs look alien and surprising to some people. It is the first time that many actually see what a T-Rex or an Albertosaurus would actually look like when it is walking. It is supposed to look weird and alien-looking when you actually do it right. If you look at a T-Rex walking in Jurassic Park, it looks more like your typical Hollywood monster and it roars like a lion. But the reality is these animals are like aliens. There is nothing like a T-Rex or a Spinosaurus around today. So, it is interesting to be able to capture the alien nature of these creatures with new CGI. Will this series provide a warmer perception of dinosaurs, given the many violent portrayals of them? Scott: Certainly because we are spending so much time with an individual dinosaur. There is the chance to tell a more complex story of their social structure, their relationship with their offspring or with other members of their pack. You, as a result, get a more rounded sense of what these animals would have been like. You will get to see a Spinosaurus looking after his babies. You will see two Albertosaurs comforting each other after a failed hunt. We want people to walk away thinking that these are not monsters. Nizar: There will be a stark difference. In Hollywood movies, dinosaurs are one-dimensional creatures. They are out to destroy and eat you. Whereas with Walking with Dinosaurs, you see a palette of behaviours such as protecting their offspring, feeding and going on long journeys. You have a richer picture of an animal and not a monster. This rich palette of behaviours is something you only see in Walking with Dinosaurs. Do you think dinosaurs will ever walk this earth again through regenerative cloning? Nizar: No, but we are very fortunate that we still live in an age of dinosaurs. Birds are living dinosaurs and they carry some old fossil genes, which allowed them to switch from their dinosaurian ancestors. So, if you tweak some of those genes, you can make a chicken grow some tooth buds, a long tail and grasping arms. But it still would not be a velociraptor. Instead, it would be a very scary-looking chicken. The genetic material is far too degraded and essentially non-existent in almost all chickens. You might be able to do it one day with extinct mammals such as thylacine and mammoth. It would still be hugely challenging but we might be able to pull that off, but not a T-Rex. Dinosaurs are thousands of times older than most of us. Even if we could, it would not be a good idea as I am sure they will suffer from our human activities. It is probably better for them to be extinct.
