IDPH--Positive preliminary results for pivotal trial of ID Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : IDPH--Positive preliminary results for pivotal trial of ID

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (1453)	1/27/1998 7:25:00 PM
From: Gregory Rasp	Read Replies (3) of 1762

OFF TOPIC Maurice Thanks for the response! I see what you meant. B cells are from the lymphocyte lineage as opposed to neutrophils which are another type of cell altogether. Yes definitely you want to use adjuvant therapy when the presumed residual burden is at its lowest, that is soon after maximum response. Rituxan is FDA approved in the States but that is a distant step from general acceptance and large sales. In general the drug has shown promising response rates but no clear cut survival advantage. This is a critical distinction for three reasons. 1. If there are other therapies with proven survival advantages, it is considered 'unethical' by many to offer unproven therapies in place of that. 2. Insurance companies will rarely pay for unproven therapies in the States. By that I mean therapies that do not clearly improve survival duration or symptoms. 3. Cancer literature is filled with once promising drugs that turn out to be useless. For unknown reasons, response rates are almost always much lower when a drug's use is widespread than when it is in Phase II trials in single institution trials. Thus, oncologists are always skeptical about new drugs. - Incidentally part of the problem with investing in drug/biotech stocks based on preliminary data. So, I agree that if Rituxan improves survival rates it is going to be a fantastic advance, but if it only improves response rates or delays progression a short while, its use will likely be limited. One possible advance is to use a CD20 specific monoclonal antibody attached to a radioactive Iodine-131 isotope. This has the potential advantage of better radiation delivery and the ability to use the decay of the isotope to "image" the body looking for deposits of CD20 positive cells. Probably more specific than CT scans (which can be used with 0.5cm cuts by the way). Another imaging option used in lymphoma treatment (often Hodgkin's disease) is the Gallium scan. Lastly, I agree that in a 2cm node the use of Radiation (XRT) is probably not indicated in most cases. Greg

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next