IPI Post

This moderated forum is to support the needs of patients with stage IV melanoma, as well as to answer questions about treatment options and what to expect.
Post Reply
gemini1957
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:07 am
Contact:

IPI Post

Post by gemini1957 » Tue May 06, 2008 8:48 pm

hi Catherine:
 
I just read your post on the MPIP regarding ipi being more successful for regional disease.  I listened on 4/28 to Dr. Jeff Weber's talk regarding ipi and he made no mention of that.  In fact, he made a point of saying that their theory is, if it works in one area it should work in all areas of the body.He did indicate that FDA approval may take longer.
I am just wondering if there is a new publication out there that I could review regarding your comment?  I had a complete response to ipi in my groin area, but now I am wondering if I should be worrried about other areas which haven't been scanned for awhile.
 
Thanks
 
Debbie 

Catherine Poole
Posts: 11265
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am

Re: IPI Post

Post by Catherine Poole » Tue May 06, 2008 10:44 pm

The mdx 010 drug has had some problems lately. Pfizer pulled its trials completely. So I would say we are all cautious about the drug.  My comments are purely conjecture from what patients and oncologists are telling me.  It seems to work regionally better than in widespread disease, but again this is anecdotal..what folks are telling me.  That's great it worked for you!  I apologize for making a statement that hasn't been proved by the numbers yet.  I get excited when therapies work for people and cautiously optimistic!Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation
Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation

johnlanie
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:39 am
Contact:

Re: IPI Post

Post by johnlanie » Fri May 09, 2008 12:13 pm

Dear Catherine!
"Pfizer (nyse: PFE - news - people ) terminated its Phase III trial on the use of tremelimumab to treat patients with advanced melanoma skin cancer after an initial review of the data showed the drug wasn't much different from standard chemotherapy."
http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/02/pfizer ... r=yahootix

Pfizer pulled out the trials because of what reason: effectiveness, safety, or financial issue? I don't think neither of us know.
However, this is the statement from Dr.Jedd Wolchok, whom you might be familiar with.
""We are desperate for new tools to treat this disease," said Jedd Wolchok, an oncologist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in Manhattan and a lead researcher of the drug.

"It doesn't help everybody and it does have side effects, but for the people who benefit, it's been so important, and it's important to have a variety of treatments available to have hope."

I think his words is well said, especially there are so few available treatments for this disease.
I am a supporter of Melanoma Research. But I am really disappointed with your statement. Even if Ipilimumab does not work better than the standard chemo, but what percentage of response does the standard chemo give to the patients? and what Ipilimumab does for those who fail the standard chemo?
I think the words of Dr.Jedd Wolchok speak for myself.

redvixen
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:35 am
Contact:

Re: IPI Post

Post by redvixen » Fri May 09, 2008 11:44 pm

Hi Debbie and Catherine,

My husband is stage IV and we looked at a clinical trial they have at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance for the MDX10 and I tell you the side effects scared us away. They also have a compassionate trial but you have have to have measurable disease. We felt that the side effects were up there with IL2 and they had a higher possibility of being permanent. My husband already has a paralyzed vocal chord and completely dead salivary glands on one side of his mouth from radiation. So to us making a decision based on least toxic and low side effects is where we are at. Quality of life is huge for us.

Thus we are going after the Leukine GM-CSF.

I am glad it worked for you Debbie! How was it for you? What side effects did you have are any permanent?

Thanks
Jennifer

Catherine Poole
Posts: 11265
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am

Re: IPI Post

Post by Catherine Poole » Sat May 10, 2008 1:57 am

Johnlanie,
  I'm not sure what words of mine disappointed you, but I apologize. I daily pray for a treatment for melanoma and especially one that has an effective rate higher than the others and isn't as toxic as the usual regiment.  I keep an updated list of IPI trial locations by my desk to help patients find the closest IPI trials, esp. the compassionate use. So of course I support the words of Jedd Wolchak, who I has collaborated with in the past, i.e. navigating patients to his trials.  So I may have spoken too soon without the data being in.  I was just reporting some excellent results in patients I work with who had regional disease. I had one oncologist that is quite notable agree with my conjecture that it may prove to be a great stage III treatment. I've also dealt with many failures at stage IV as with other therapies. I hope the day comes where all of the pharma and NCI will make melanoma a priority!! I work consistently in expressing that message to them in meetings.  Thanks for your post and please let me know what disappointed you..Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation
Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation

johnlanie
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:39 am
Contact:

Re: IPI Post

Post by johnlanie » Thu May 15, 2008 3:06 pm

Dear Catherine! I know that you dedicate your time and your life helping people with this disease. In one of your post "The mdx 010 drug has had some problems lately." Do you have any data to support your statement? I guess there are about 2000 people have been taking the mdx 010 drug so far. Thus, how do they feel when they read your post... Do they have enough medical background like you to understand the "problem". The only thing they feel is the panic. The day when Pfizer pulled its trials, on the MPIP, some of patients were so panic because they took mdx 010 ( Judy was one of them.) As you know that Melanoma is a customized disease, some respond with IL-2, some respond with DTIC, and some respond with IFN, or IPI. What if those biologically respond with IPI but turn away IPI treatment when they are visiting your website? Those are the things I said " I'm disappointed with your statement"
I wish for every cancer, there is a drug to cure 100%. But there isn't. However, if there are 100 of the drugs that can contribute 5% of curing magic, patients will have much much chance to be cured.
The data of IPI is availabe at ASCO now. Is it good or bad? I am not an oncologist to understand fully. But there is an interesting abstract from Pfize about its anti-CTLA4 version ( Tremelimumab).
It states that patients who took IL-2 prior anti-CTLA4, the response rate is only 5%. However, if no prior IL-2 is taken, the response rate is 15%.
http://www.abstract.asco.org/AbstView_55_33877.html

Catherine Poole
Posts: 11265
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am

Re: IPI Post

Post by Catherine Poole » Thu May 15, 2008 8:47 pm

Johnlanie,
   Your point is well taken and I should be careful when I make blanket statements.  Not enough is known yet about IPI.  I hope to learn more at ASCO late this month and will report back.  That study you cited is truly interesting, thanks for sharing.  I haven't lost faith in IPI and still help people find the compassionate use trials daily.  I've only heard anecdotal information so far, some of it good some of it not good.  One oncologist that I respect is not so hopeful about it. I'm on your side if something works for a small percentage and doesn't compromise their quality of life I'll help them find it. But I will always be honest if something is not working I will report that as I don't like false hope. But you are correct that I should stick to the facts if/when we can find some.. Stay tuned.Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation
Catherine M. Poole, President/Founder
Melanoma International Foundation

tensecun
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed May 08, 2019 1:46 am
Contact:

Re: IPI Post

Post by tensecun » Wed May 08, 2019 1:55 am

johnlanie wrote:
Thu May 15, 2008 3:06 pm
Dear Catherine! I know that you dedicate your time and your life helping people with this disease. In one of your post "The mdx 010 drug has had some problems lately." Do you have any data to support your statement? I guess there are about 2000 people have been taking the mdx 010 drug so far. Thus, how do they feel when they read your post... Do they have enough medical background like you to understand the "problem". The only thing they feel is the panic. The day when Pfizer pulled its trials, on the MPIP, some of patients were so panic because they took mdx 010 ( Judy was one of them.) As you know that Melanoma is a customized disease, some respond with IL-2, some respond with DTIC, and some respond with IFN, or IPI. What if those biologically respond with IPI but turn away IPI treatment when they are visiting your website? Those are the things I said " I'm disappointed with your statement"
I wish for every cancer, there is a drug to cure 100%. But there isn't. However, if there are 100 of the drugs that can contribute 5% of curing magic, patients will have much much chance to be cured.
The data of IPI is availabe at ASCO now. Is it good or bad? I am not an oncologist to understand fully. But there is an interesting abstract from Pfize about its anti-CTLA4 version ( Tremelimumab).
It states that patients who took IL-2 prior anti-CTLA4, the response rate is only 5%. However, if no prior IL-2 is taken, the response rate is 15%.
electronic signature in lucknow sign documents online in lucknow
Hi,

I am reached here so lately. But hey can you update this link i cant able to open this read more about.

Thanks

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests