11 replies to this topic

[thatguy]

http://www.cancernet...ponses-imatinib

 

Just found this. Based on these results it looks to yield better efficacy than even Bosutinib if toxicities can be avoided...?

[kat73]

With a toxicity profile like this, I don't see how radotinib got out of Phase I or II trials.  Plus it targets PDGFR, our old nemesis for edema et al.  So it beats imatinib to the punch - so do the others we have right now - and yet still no longterm survival advantage for their speediness.  Jury's still studying whether it (getting to DMR quicker) might help in eventual TFR.

[thatguy]

There's a survival advantage if it works for someone with resistance to the others.

[kat73]

If that's true, yeah.  Not sure they're claiming that.

[AdamJ]

Based on the chart on this page, I don't think there is much of a chance of that. 

[thatguy]

There's still a segment of the cml pop who becomes resistant for unidentified reasons, with out manifested mutations. Not to mention the differing side effects between individuals on the same drugs right? So I wouldn't say it's worthless.

The speed of response is what I based my Bosulif statement on, which was only an example that I used because of a link I had just read. Based on this trial, it's potentially speedier than Gleevec- and Tasigna and Sprycel too, if I'm not mistaken. *******&&&&&&& DISCLAIMER: I haven't researched this recently and may be wrong!******&&&&&&

The guidelines say quick milestones are most important now.

Wasn't trying to change the gospel around here.

[r06ue1]

I think the worthless statement is due to frustration that Big Pharma continues to come out with treatments rather than cures.

[thatguy]

I mean thank God they do! Lol. I don't know, maybe I'm crazy but I'm very grateful that some genius discovered the tki concept. Those before us didn't have a chance. If I can pay off my mortgage and raise my kids to teenagers I'm good. 200%. Yeah I'd like to live to see 50 or 60, but hey, I can't hate a group of people for what they don't know, and I'm certainly in no position to find the cure myself. I think people get way too carried away in conspiracy theories now days, (and not just the righties like myself) I refuse to think that "big Pharma" would prevent a cure for a disease. People are screwy sometimes, but generally good at heart- Especially when motivation would be a one time, large lump sum payout that a cure would surely command. Haha.

[r06ue1]

They have known what a CML stem cell looks like since at least 2002 from my research on the topic, for them not to have made any progress in releasing any type of drug that targets the stem cells in 15+ years indicates to me that they are not focused on cures.  Remember, a cure is a one time shot, a cure for life, while a treatment is lifelong and at $100,000+ a year times all of those new occurrences, that is a huge incentive not to look for one.

[thatguy]

Since I have a seeming affinity for arguing with strangers-

Ok, but if they could charge 5 mil for a cure or even a mil, with all the toxicities, Co-morbidities and accidental deaths that plague the aged, common tki consumer, and ridiculous drug prices that anger many, competing generics, it seems like a risky business motto that you're suggesting. I won't subscribe to that personally. The profits rendered from a quick, one-time pay out like that would exceed those of a "maybe" customer over a period of years.

[r06ue1]

But you have to follow the evidence and it is everywhere; big drug companies are producing treatments while universities (using public and private donations) are researching LSC's and how to kill them.  Every bit of evidence points to this.  

 

I feel free to now release a bit of salacious info from one of the leading CML researchers now that she has passed.  We were in communication for the past year up until this summer and I was just about to write her when I found out about her passing.  In one of our Email exchanges, she wrote this:  

 

 

 

Also as academics we are often thwarted if a drug company does not wish to develop a certain molecule even if we have strong evidence of activity in a "niche" area such as CML - this is frustrating.

 

I do understand that you do not want to believe that those in power could be corrupt, but just looking at the world you live in, you see it everywhere.  There's a really good quote on this I would like to share:  

 

 

"Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." - Michael Rivero

[kat73]

That's a great quote, r06ue1.  I am sore tempted to apply this to another topic, but I am going to practice discretion and restraint in respect for my fellow CMLers' feelings, which may significantly differ from mine.

 

GREAT quote.

 

As to the original point, I have the hope that EVENTUALLY the academics will win out.  I hope it's in time for me.  (I hope that a cure actually can exist, for that matter.)  The competing interests of the different parties definitely affect our here-and-now situation, in the meantime.