IPI vs. NIVO Trial opening in March first in Europe!

[Catherine Poole]

And it requires the PDL-1 expression which could really narrow down the numbers. The more we pick it apart the more I am thinking there will be few who qualify.

[Jupke]

Catherine Poole wrote:

And it requires the PDL-1 expression which could really narrow down the numbers. The more we pick it apart the more I am thinking there will be few who qualify.

Correct me if I’m wrong (Please be patient with me. English is not my native language so I’m aware I could miss some nuances) but the PD L-1 status only has to be established . Wether it’s positive, negative or intermediate doesn’t exclude anyone from the trial.

[Catherine Poole]

No it is not your English, but my brain not engaging! Yes, it is any PDL expression result. I misread and wondered about that as it wouldn’t tell us much if we only had the PDL positive folks in the trial. Thanks for catching my mistake.

[Mikers]

Can you please explain me what is “PDL positive”? Are there any tests like for BRAF mutation which can evaluate if you are “PDL positive” and can react for PDL-therapy (Nivo?)? That means doctors already can predict if you will have positive results with immunomedicine?

[Catherine Poole]

Althought the test for PDL-1 in the tumor isn’t standardized as a biomarker test quite yet, it has shown some interesting results that are predictive of response to the PD1 drug. Here is a good article summing it up: http://www.ascopost.com/issues/may-1,-2014/pd-l1-studied-as-biomarker-for-anti%E2%80%93pd-1-immunotherapy.aspx

PDL-1 neg and positive patients do respond to PD1 though.

[Steven]

I thought it was clear that PD1 has better stats than Ipi, no?

[Catherine Poole]

That is clear that PD1 has better stats and less side effects, but it is good to see them scientifically tested in trial. I would like to see the two PD1 agents against each other since that isn’t as clear.

[Author]

Posts