Well I'm not sure, Maurice. If we look at all the targeted antibody research going on (not just for NHL), I guess we could say many of the points of weakness in cancer cells are being attacked. As you say, it might be better to attack them all at once. But since each treatment is usually administered at or near the the maximum that is likely to be tolerated, using a cocktail might mean having to use lower doses. Would this be better than applying the treatments sequentially? Only double-blind studies could say for sure, and these take time. I'll bet most of the chemo treatments were developed in the Balkanized manner, but that didn't stop other researchers from trying them together.
Right now, the cutting edge for treatment of low-grade NHL seems to be Bexxar followed by more Bexxar if your bone marrow can take it. Or Bexxar followed by Rituxan if Bexxar laid you low. Or maybe in the other order. Would it be better to do them at the same time? Good question. (Dear thread: yes, I know this will all change as soon as Oncolym hits the market. You betcha.)
This research all takes money. Either we pay more in taxes to support more/faster research, or hope that more investors plow money into risky biotech companies, or both. I've talked to some of the researchers. They really couldn't be working much harder. We need to hire more of them.
Yahoo hint: Just scan the message list for messages by golfdad or berblady, and you are not likely to miss much of importance. There are other good posters, but usually one of these two are drawn to reply to the valuable posts. |
