Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Oncothyreon -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (2276)	8/25/2013 8:11:04 PM
From: Nonos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2344

Dr. Butts is convinced that the c-CRT results are not false (but of course he would feel that way for his baby!) I will see if we can get an answer on the CPA "booster" concept. Irradiating the prostate seems to be a good thing immunologically per Dr. Madan and can be according to Butts but Rick I think you have the answer...it is in the timing of it all! research suggests localized radiation enhances the immune response and blp-25's effects Dr. Butts, "...A number of these stage III patients did get radiation, and that is where we see the survival signal. There is some potential for an enhancement to the immune response because when you get tumor kill, you get release of new antigens and so there is antigen spreading within the immune system. So, if you stimulate response to MUC1, you may actually get cross-stimulation to other antigens that are released after you treat the tumor." “30% to 35% of the BLP patients really obtain very little benefit of BLP. I could see a couple of reasons for this, for some reason they didn't obtain a immune response, they didn't obtain the immune response fast enough or their bodies were healed from the RT. We probably don't understand enough about the role RT plays in the use of BLP but I'd sure be interested to see BLP dosed PRIOR to RT so that BLP will be in high gear as the body performs its normal immune response to the RT damage.” >There are a number of possible explanations for why the survival advantage with L-BLP25 appears to be substan- tially less in patients with stage IIIB MPE/IV as compared with stage IIIB LR disease. First, rapid disease progression and short survival times in patients with stage IIIB MPE/IV may not allow sufficient time for development of a robust immunologic response following vaccination. Secondly, while the majority (85%) of patients with LR disease had received radiotherapy prior to study entry (Butts et al. 2005), it is not indicated for metastatic disease. Radio- therapy of tumors can induce a cascade of pro-immunogenic effects involving both the innate and adaptive immune responses (Formenti and Demaria 2009; Roses et al. 2008). Therefore, prior radiotherapy in the patients with LR disease may have contributed to the effects of immunotherapy with L-BLP25. Finally, the extent of immunosuppression in patients with stage IV disease may negatively impact on the development of an adequate immune response after vaccination.< clincancerres.aacrjournals.org. Dr. Madan’s study “Previous studies have demonstrated the ability of non-lethal doses of radiation to alter the phenotype of tumor cells to facilitate immune mediated killing.” ncbi.nlm.nih.gov