Her-2 Positive and Tumor Grade

twinsmom0606
twinsmom0606 Member Posts: 11
edited June 2014 in HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
Hi - I have been dx'd with Invasive Cancer, 2 Positive Nodes, Tumor Grade 2. How can the tumor be Her2 Positive and not a Grade 3? I thought that Her-2 tumors were the most aggressive - so, why would the tumor grade be grade 2 and not grade 3? Thank you.
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • maryannecb
    maryannecb Member Posts: 1,453
    edited April 2007
    Mine was a grade 2 too. Actually it was good news to me, less is better. Be Happy!

    Fists up!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pnpmary
    pnpmary Member Posts: 14
    edited May 2007
    While HER2 tumors tend to be more aggressive, they don't all need to be grade III. The higher the grade, the more likely for recurrence. Count yourself lucky.

    pnpmary

    age 42. 3.5 cm no nodes HER2+ ER/PR- Grade III
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Caya
    Caya Member Posts: 971
    edited May 2007
    I had two tumours, both ER+PR+HER2+, one was grade 1, the other grade 2- there are other factors they use to determine the grade - mitotic count etc. Mine were both mucinous or colloid, a rare type of tumour (under 3%), but this type apparently is very slow-growing and favourable, if anything can be favourable with BC. Be happy that you're a 2, the lower the better.

    caya
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lkc
    lkc Member Posts: 1,203
    edited May 2007
    Hi ,
    Mine was grade II too!

    Linda
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SheriH
    SheriH Member Posts: 785
    edited May 2007

    Mine was grade 2 to 3, I'm really not sure what that's supposed to mean. The path report had alot of other things that made it sound like it was aggressive, though, so I don't know if the grade really meant anything.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Fitztwins
    Fitztwins Member Posts: 7,969
    edited May 2007
    Mine was grade 2 also. It was the only thing I wasn't an over acheiver on. My understanding is that the cells look less cancerous then grade 3. My oncologist said it wasn't that big of a deal.

    Janis
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cyclepath
    cyclepath Member Posts: 5
    edited May 2007
    I was .9 cm, grade II, ER/PR+ and HER2/neu ++ amplified, 55 years old and post-menopausal. Just decided last night (after varying opinions from Chicago cancer center top docs, local and regional docs) that I will not have chemo or herceptin -- just mammosite radiation and hormonal therapy. I had a lumpectomy with clear margins about three weeks ago. It seems like months ago after all the stress of gathering information and getting other opinions from cancer specialists. I'm glad I've made the decision now and confident that, even if it should come back a few years from now, they'll have even more treatment options. Keep in mind though that mine was very, very small and it was the top breast cancer docs from the big city who advised me not to have the chemo/herceptin...
    These decisions are so difficult!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • simeon
    simeon Member Posts: 14
    edited July 2007

    Just curious - who are considered the top breast cancer docs?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • meadows4
    meadows4 Member Posts: 170
    edited July 2007

    And why did they advise no chemo? Did they give reasons? I would like to know because my tumor is not much bigger than yours altho i am her2/neu negative. i am also postmenopausal.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AlaskaAngel
    AlaskaAngel Member Posts: 1,836
    edited July 2007
    It is only on the last decade that computerization and things like the Human Genome Project results have been available for cancer research. Some of that research is now starting to influence treatment options. Without that advancement, treatment has been quite limited and basically chemotherapy with or without radiation has been the only shot in the dark that was available, even though it often didn't work at all.

    There are indications that hormonal treatment (for those whose cancers are hormone receptor positive) genuinely is likely to be equal to or better than chemotherapy.

    As a culture we tend to believe that it takes something really toxic and strong to handle cancer. That is a mindset and not necessarily a reality. There are some very real indications that the risk/benefit of chemotherapy and radiologic treatment and testing long-term (particularly when added to some of the long-term treatment with hormonal therapy) have worse outcomes. Some oncs are starting to recognize that, and in the case of patients who are unlikely to recur, are simply trying to make sure those patients are not overtreated and ending up at HIGHER risk rather than lower risk.

    AlaskaAngel
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • prayer
    prayer Member Posts: 77
    edited July 2007

    I had chemo and herceptin for a 7mm tumor. Three oncs suggested that I have chemo based on my age at the time 35. I think age and er receptor definately make a difference in the the risk/benefit ratio of chemo. All you can do is go with your gut.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HappyTrisha
    HappyTrisha Member Posts: 614
    edited July 2007

    Mine was grade 3, also ER/PR+. I didn't consider it that big a whoop that it was grade 3 as opposed to 1 or 2, probably because I didn't know enough to! Now that I know the difference I still don't consider it that big a whoop because when I read about HER+ and probability of reoccurence, grade isn't mentioned anywhere. (Unless I'm reading in the wrong places.) Actually it's your response to the herceptin that counts. Mine was great. I had it both before and after surgery. So there you go.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories