Jim,
Thanks for the note.
"It is actually critical “patient advocates” which obviously includes patients, as well as those who are motivated to advocate on behalf of patients get involved in this process. One of the very reasons why I thought that a consortium was important to form, so that there could at least a body of researchers to point to as a group jointly focused on this direction. You see, companies find it very easy to say no to individual investigators when it comes to “difficult” requests. We need to make it harder for them when it involves losing time that our patients don’t have."
A very obvious combination that we are trying to move forward now is PLX4032 with ipilimumab. There is unanimity among the academic researchers that this must be investigated. Both companies see the logic, but are reluctant with neither of their drugs yet being FDA approved. As you know ipilimumab (and tremelimumab) have not overwhelmed the FDA yet as they were told to show a response rate greater than 10% and neither drug could do so. Most melanoma researchers believe that there are additional patients who get real and long-term benefit without having their tumors shrink significantly in size, but the randomized trials are needed to show that. The worrying sign is the outcome of the tremelimumab randomized trial. So, now we are down to waiting for the results of the dacarbazine vs. dacarbazine plus ipilimumab phase III trial. If this is negative, we are in trouble as ipilimumab will have no clear path forward with the FDA. If it’s positive, then the idea of moving ahead with combinations becomes much, much easier. But, even it that trial is negative, we know that CTLA-4 blockade can induce phenomenal responses in some. So, in that case, we have to figure out (1) who those patients are and, (2) how to make those responses happen in more patients. The other way of thinking of #2 is that PLX4032 doesn’t work for as long as we would like and that making those responses more durable would be desirable.
The companies need to hear it from patients and all patient-advocates that fairly obvious directions need to be pursued to find multiplicative effects. For the first time in melanoma, we have the building blocks in front of us and scientific rationale to guide us for the next steps.
Best regards, Keith
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Keith,
Base on my research, Ipi doesn’t work well is because it is lacking the tumor-specific antigens. DTIC+ Patrin-2, Irradiation, Oblimersen and others. We need the tumors to shed antigenic protein. To get the immune response into motion.
By using PLX-4032, my guess it will shed the protein needed. Then Anti-CTLA-4 Blockage comes in. It leaves the cd4+ T-cell activated and at the same time suppresses the Treg function allowing the CD8+ T-cells to get crossed primed and have them break though the tumor microenvironment. The HD IL-2 is added at the peak expansion of the CD8+ T-cells ( 50 days after Ipi is introduced into the host.). IL-2 is essential in the survival and function of the CTLs.
The above is my take on this combinatorial therapy. If you want, I can send you all the supporting papers of this theory.
Also, Can I get your permission to post your reply on my Blog?
Best Regards
Jim
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What If you Combine three Therapies? PLX-4032 after remission, to let the tumor burden be low, Than add one dose of Anti-CTLA-4 Blockage. Wait 50 days so the CD8 T-cells would be at their maximum expansion. Then add two cycles of HD IL-2 to help grow and differentiate the CD8 T-cells into Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes (CTL's). You use the PLX-4032 to lower the tumor burden and shed the antigenic protein from the tumor.
For the patients that have the Braf mutation, use PLX-4032 to shed the antigenic protein and lower the tumor burden.
If you don't have the mutation, use radiation, chemo DTIC+ Patrin-2, Oblimersen and other small molecules to shed the antigenic protein.
Take Care,
Jimmy B
No comments:
Post a Comment