V1 and Max (Max, do you prefer being called PB or Max or do you care?),
read the PB post you refer to and felt it was worth reposting a portion over here:
>>Twenty-eight patients received radioimmunotherapeutic doses of 34 to 161 mCi, resulting in complete remission in 14 patients and a partial response in eight. All 13 patients with low-grade lymphoma responded, and 10 achieved a complete remission. Six of eight patients with transformed lymphoma responded. Thirteen of 19 patients whose disease was resistant to their last course of chemotherapy and all patients with chemotherapy-sensitive disease responded. The median duration of complete remission exceeds 16.5 months. Six patients remain in complete remission 16 to 31 months after treatment. CONCLUSION: Nonmyeloablative radioimmunotherapy with 131I-anti-B1 is associated with a high rate of durable remissions in patients with B-cell lymphoma refractory to chemotherapy.<<
Now, what I find interesting about this information is the following: (a) these figures seem to confirm the later Bexxar results of virtually a 100% response rate for low grade NHL. So this pony can repeat the same trick on demand;
(b) the "complete remission" rate was considerably higher than in the second Bexxar study, 10 of 13 or 77% vs. 7 of 17 or 41% (for low grade). That's a big difference, so it appears the average complete remissions rate may be greater than 50%, actually 59 % if one averages the 2 figures. I wonder what would account for the difference in rates. Perhaps chance, perhaps a higher dosage was used in more patients, in which case they might not want to limit the dose as 75 mCi, since it is a life or death matter. Perhaps they have have to limit the dosage, however:
(c) 6 of 10 remain in complete remission 16 to 31 months after treatment--would be interesting to be able to compare other long term remission stats;
(d) since all patients with chemo sensitive disease responded and 13 of 19 whose disease had failed chemo responded, it seems likely that not only will the treatment be used as a quick initial knockout punch for low grade, but also as a treatment for virtually all low grade disease that has failed other treatments including the combo C2B8/CHOP treatment.
Does anyone know if there is a reason why this treatment cannot be used a second or third time if several months or more are allowed between treatments? Would the immune response be a problem with such lengthy intervals? That way relapses from remissions and partial responses might be treated a second or even 3rd time.
BTW, V1, eagerly awaiting the results of your research regarding Ms. Lynne Baron, the new CYTO hire. |
