1 reply to this topic

[Sneezy12]

It is my understanding, that some CML experts including some of those  at MD Anderson, are all but ignoring the bcr/abl values, and merely concentrating on the CCyR value. The feeling apparently is that this is the only valid prognostic indicator.If correct, this should relieve much anxiety waiting for the bcr/abl results, which bounce around a great deal, causing needless worry. Any comments? Apart from the article in "Blood", I have been told by a very reliable source ( I assume it is accurate ), that Dr. Kartajian from MD Anderdon conveyed the above information to the Hematologists at The Mayo Clinic in Rochester, when he visited there recently.  cf. Blood,10-27-11,Vol. 118,No. 17,pages 4541-4546 Thanks, Frank

[Trey]

I do not think it says that.  To me it shows that early CCyR on Gleevec predicts that a patient will be able to remain on Gleevec over the long term (something I think we already knew).  Otherwise the patient may need to switch to another drug at some point.

"The aims of this study were to assess the correlation between the achievement of an early CCyR and event-free survival (EFS as defined by the IRIS trial) and OS in sequential phase 2 trials run at our institution in patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP treated with imatinib and the second-generation TKI."

http://bloodjournal....1.full.pdf html