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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: manfredhasler who wrote (14558)9/15/2000 11:06:25 AM
From: Bluegreen  Respond to of 17367
 
Manfred, what are you talking about???? There wasn't NEAR enough N to support ANY conclusions on the 30% mortality rate EVEN if you included the 57!!!!!!!!!! In my opinion only a trial of several THOUSAND patients will give the expected outcome. The FDA had a chance to help the kids with Meningococcemia under subpart E designation just on the amputation results and overall outcome but didn't.



To: manfredhasler who wrote (14558)9/15/2000 11:20:40 AM
From: Bluegreen  Respond to of 17367
 
Manfred, this is interesting and from another board>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biostatistics from my wife
by: supernova60609 9/15/00 1:24 am
Msg: 25742 of 25774
My wife reviewed the statistics provided in the Lancet study. The complete article is not available on the Lancet Web page. These are her comments and opinions on the limited information provided in the abstract.
#1 "I wonder what their screening criteria was given that 892 of 1287 patients were excluded from the study."
#2 "This is from a peer reviewed journal and you can be sure that the reviewers hate the scientist who performed the study." (i.e., it is truely a critical review...no favors offered.)
#3 Although she doesn't know which statistical analysis was applied the following conclusions can be made.
a) Given the p-value,morbidity "trended" towards benefit from rBPI but would need to reach a p-value of .05 to be statistically significant.
b) Statistical significant benefit WAS achieved in terms of multiple severe amputations and functional outcome in those children who received rBPI vs. placebo.
A warning to all. This is a third party opinion, albeit from an individual with a PhD from MIT in a basic science. Do your own DD and assume all of the above is in complete error.
In my opinion...
Given her analysis there must be some very strange reason why, under subpart-E designation, the FDA recommended further analysis of the drug. Perhaps Britain's pharmaceutical regulating body will put the health of her nation's children ahead of politics and money. Our FDA obviously answers to another G-d. Saul<<<<<<<<<<<<<



To: manfredhasler who wrote (14558)9/15/2000 12:05:34 PM
From: Bluegreen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 17367
 
Experimental drug may slow spread of sepsis
WASHINGTON, Sept. 14 (UPI) -- An experimental, genetically engineered compound
that mimics the body's immune system somewhat reduced both death and amputations
caused by a rare but aggressive type of infection commonly called
meningococcemia, according to a new study.
The infection, also called meningoccocal sepsis. "cuts down healthy kids and
kills or maims them in 24 hours or less," said researcher Dr. Breff Giroir of
Children's Medical Center in Dallas.
In a multi-center international study, the new drug, called
bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein (BPI) had mixed results, said
Giroir.
"Children who received BPI had a lower incidence of amputations and had a better
overall functional outcome," says Giroir. But compared with placebo, the
mortality rate in the treatment arm was only slightly better -- 7.4 percent
compared to 9.9 percent in the placebo group.
"The mortality difference did not reach statistical significance and that is
disappointing," said Giroir, who will publish the findings in the Sept. 16 issue
of The Lancet.
The bacteria that causes the infection responds well to antibiotics, said
Giroir. But even as the antibiotic attacks and kills the bacteria, blood cells
already are circulating harmful byproducts of the bacteria. Called endotoxins,
these bacterial byproducts in the blood very quickly take over and destroy
healthy tissue, says Giroir.
"This leads to gangrene and amputations. Children who are lucky enough to
survive often leave the hospital without hands and feet," he said.
The experimental drug BPI, also named Neuprex, is actually a copy of a protein
made by the body's white blood cells, the structures that naturally attack
infections.
BPI has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, which ruled in
April that study results were "not sufficient to support the filing."
Manufacturer XOMA Ltd of Berkeley, Calif., and Giroir himself said they plan
both to work in providing further data and in appealing the ruling.
In the study of 393 children treated at 22 centers in the United States and
Britain, patients were randomized to either receive the BPI plus antibiotic
therapy or placebo plus standard antibiotic treatment.
Giroir said one reason for the poor mortality result was "that we excluded those
patients who were facing imminent death. As a result, the mortality in both arms
was much lower than predicted and that may affected the ability to demonstrate a
benefit."
He said expected mortality for severe meningoccocemia is about 20 percent.
He said, too, "the BPI may not have been administered quickly enough. Sixteen
patients who were selected for the study died before we could actually get the
IV going," he said.
In a commentary that accompanies the study, Dr. Marcel van Deurent of University
Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands, agreed that the results would probably be
more impressive if the drug was given sooner.
Cutting the time to treatment is, however, very difficult says Giroir because
the disease progresses so quickly.
"It starts like a flu with mild fever, nausea, vomiting-nothing very specific,"
he said. "But when purple spots appear on the skin-we call these purpura, it
progresses very, very rapidly." Dr. Blaise Congeni, a pediatric infectious
disease specialist at Akron Children's Medical Center in Akron, Ohio, said he
and others in the infectious disease community have been "talking about this
sort of approach -- anti-endotoxins -- for about a decade. We need something to
use within those critical first few hours, something more than an antibiotic,
because even if we can kill the bacteria, those bacteria have been producing
endotoxins for a few hours."
Congeni said meningcoccal sepsis "is rare but an infectious disease, of which a
specialist at a major referral center will see a couple dozen cases a year."
Giroir said the infection tends to "occur in clusters. In the United States
there are about 3,000 cases year. There has been an upsurge since the 1990s and
it is a very significant health problem in the United Kingdom with about 4,000
cases a year."
He said that in the United States there are "clusters in Texas, Oklahoma and
Florida, but the biggest cluster is in the Pacific Northwest -- Washington and
Oregon." (Reported by Peggy Peck in Cleveland.)



To: manfredhasler who wrote (14558)9/15/2000 3:23:39 PM
From: Cacaito  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 17367
 
"I guess the study protocol was however based on this - false - assumption of 30% mortality rate."

I have not had accesss to the full Lancet article (waiting for the print version in the library).

But, the low mortality was a very well known feature and very well considered in the study design.

There were two groups of subjects according to a modified Glasgow score for meningococcal sepsis.

Low G scores has an expected mortality in the 5% to 8% and as per xoma they were recruting about 80% of the subjects in this group. It was clear long ago that the placebo group mortality in this low G was going to be very low and that most probably study will be underpowered unless couple of thousands patients were recruited, boviously a logistical nightmare and a financial imposibility for xoma.

Higs G scores with the "classical" expected mortality of 30% that will again be short unless the drug has a strong effectiveness in the order of 30% to 50% decrease in mortality.

They even has the so called "total mortality" number to stop the study, design for the high G score, but apparently apply to the whole study with the now known tactical miscalculation. Well, it was more lack of $ than anything else that stop the study, not the FDA, not the DSMB.

The DSMB (Data Safety Monitoring Board)never suggested to stop the study for effectiveness, there was no safety problem, and the "trend" was enough not to stop it for futility (well, it is clear now).

The summary is that xoma and only xoma is the responsible party of the design and execution of the study (quite good to tell the truth).



To: manfredhasler who wrote (14558)9/16/2000 11:04:15 AM
From: Robert K.  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 17367
 
Manfred, you are wrong...your comment"My problem is that the placebo group has only 9.9% mortality. The delay in treatment with the study drug does not affect the placebo arm."

My comment> most of kids that "would have " died ,did so BEFORE they could even be admitted to the trial. Therefore
the 9.9% placebo number is very misleading. Unfortunatly
the trial design did not allow for a speedy adminitration of bpi. For the drug to show effectiveness more kids must die. Think about that please. That IMO is sick.