- This topic is empty.
November 17, 2013 at 11:16 pm #21675
This is the Society for Melanoma Research, an international group. The meeting will possibly disclose further data by Merck and others on PD1. I will be there to bring back anything I feel is of value to you. Here’s the link: http://www.melanomacongress.com/November 18, 2013 at 3:01 pm #63002erinmay22Participant Excited to hear what they may be presenting! Just had dose #15 on Thursday! Next set of scans will be Dec 27th! eek!
Hope all is well!
Thanks for the updates!
ErinNovember 18, 2013 at 5:41 pm #63003Shirley ZParticipant
How have you been? I have really fallen behind on things. Hope you are doing well. Think of you often.
Shirley ZNovember 18, 2013 at 8:41 pm #63004
Two things of interest I thought: Chapman from MSK showed that in a small sample it was best to leave the BRAF agent before progression and move to another agent rather than wait. Also, Caroline Robert from Paris (one of Pati’s doctors) mentioned data on the Merck PD1 raised its response from 38% to 41%. Also had some higher numbers of long term survival. Here are some details: http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20131118-907722.html?dsk=y
I read a lot of posters and listened to a lot of speakers, It didn’t appear that PDL was as promising as initially thought from Sossman. more…laterNovember 18, 2013 at 9:14 pm #63005erinmay22Participant
Shirley – I’ve been doing well! Hope you are doing well also!! Scans end of Sept continue to show shrinkage! So all good news. Started the Merck PD1 trial Jan of this year.
Catherine – thanks for the info!
ErinNovember 18, 2013 at 10:08 pm #63006
Also, it was mentioned this Phase III trial will be pivotal with Merck Pd1 up against IPI, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01866319
I can’t see why an earlier approval isn’t in the works!
And there was a bit of discussion about radiation and IPI togetherNovember 19, 2013 at 1:40 am #63007
Catherine, thank you for the information. Did you catch the report late in the day on the GSK combo? It was on the conference agenda for sometime around 5pm.November 19, 2013 at 11:59 am #63008Maureen038Participant Catherine,
Thanks for all the information! I am very interested in the ipi/ radiation combo if my husband’s trial doesn’t give him good results. He has lung mets. Was it talked about favorably? Thanks!
MaureenNovember 19, 2013 at 3:00 pm #63009
It definitely was spoken of in positive terms, they spoke of using stereotactic radiation on liver and lung mets and then adding PD1 or IPI. Nothing concrete to report, I’m searching for studies to cite more. But I do believe there won’t be just one agent in this therapy for melanoma but a progression and combination for best results.
Did not hear any late breaking news on the braf/mek combo but will look for this. I do think it is important that trials are showing that patients should not stay on these drugs until progression of disease. Makes sense to move to Pd1 once the disease burden is low for better long term regression.November 19, 2013 at 3:45 pm #63010VioletaParticipant
All of these are very interesting news for me, for us! Previously most of the doctors advised Braf inhibitor until progression. Looking back I am sorry I was not aware about a lot of things. Thanks Catherine. I am also interested in the latest news on GSK Braf/MEk combo..I will keep reading and checking the link you posted it.November 19, 2013 at 5:31 pm #63011 Catherine,
Chapman’s statement regarding BRAF treatment is interesting. Perhaps you could impress upon him and others that the “wording” of trials will need to be revised so as to not require prior treatment failure or disease progression–or at least to exclude BRAF inhibitor-treated patients from such requirements. (In addition, the folks who run the trials would need to be educated on this point.) This would permit one to voluntarily stop taking a BRAF inhibitor in order to move to a trial. Thanks again.November 19, 2013 at 7:01 pm #63012
Absolutely! The wording of trials is so important and not easy to understand. My understanding of the PD1 trial is that it requires prior BRAF therapy for BRAF positive, but not progression. I will ask my contact to clear that up.November 19, 2013 at 7:31 pm #63013 Merck’s Phase III trial does not have the wording regarding treatment failure/disease progression. However, when I contacted a site, and they in turn contacted Merck, the consensus seemed to be that they wouldn’t support voluntarily stoppage. I didn’t press the point because I personally needed additional reduction in my tumor burden before considering a move.November 19, 2013 at 11:38 pm #63014Maureen038Participant Thanks Catherine for the important information. I appreciate it very much! I’m so hoping that my husband won’t need this treatment and the study he’s on now will work. He will have scans in the beginning of January.
MaureenNovember 19, 2013 at 11:52 pm #63015
I am still waiting to hear back on the Merck trial re: stoppage of braf drugs, reached out to many! Also if there were any interesting disclosures at the SMR meeting I missed. I’ll let you know.
- The forum ‘Melanoma Diagnosis: Stage IV’ is closed to new topics and replies.