SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : ARIAD Pharmaceuticals
ARIA 23.990.0%Feb 17 4:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: jaybe12/12/2016 8:43:18 PM
  Read Replies (1) of 4474
 
Recent comments from KOL on ceritinib data from WCLC...

H. Jack West, MD (Posted: December 08, 2016)

Unfortunately, the ASCEND-4 trial had a trial design that essentially guaranteed a positive result, but also an arguably meaningless one. Crizotinib has already been shown to handily beat standard chemo in the PROFILE 1014 trial published by Shaw and colleagues in NEJM (?2015), making crizotinib a clear standard of care over the inferior option of chemo as first line treatment for ALK-positive NSCLC. Consequently, showing you're better than a known inferior option is really damning with faint praise, especially when ceritinib was associated with very high rates of GI toxicity, including a problematic frequency of grade 3 or higher toxicity. The fact that the median PFS is 16.6 is impressive relative to chemo, but it's also LESS than we could expect to get from first line crizotinib followed by ANY second generation ALK inhibitor, and both alectinib and brigatinib offer at least comparable efficacy with superior tolerability as 2nd gen ALK inhibitors. The ASCEND-4 trial is only enough to distract us momentarily before realizing ceritinib remains a poor choice with so many other ALK inhibitors available.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext