I posted this because it pertains to AE. Sellas is currently perusing NeuVax with Herceptin in a study of triple negative patients. So, that’s a pretty close competitor besides Marker Therapeutics. But, to me it’s always of interest how the NeuVax data is spun.
“We wish to thank our patients and their families for their participation in this trial. Based on data demonstrating that this combination therapy has the potential to become an important therapeutic option for TNBC patients facing a life-threatening disease and for whom current options in the adjuvant setting are extremely limited, we have determined, in consensus with SELLAS, to close out the current study,” stated COL (ret) George E. Peoples, MD, FACS, Founder and Director of Cancer Insight, LLC and study Principal Investigator.
https://www.sellaslifesciences.com/investors/...fault.aspx
That’s not why they closed the study down, and I doubt consensus was offered to Sellas. We just saw- “Use of mandated annual scans and image-detected recurrence events hastened the interim analysis contributing to early trial termination.” There were too many recurrences for NeuVax vs. placebo.
If anyone is interested look at this new ASCO Post article about NeuVax+Herceptin:
“For this phase IIb trial, Dr. Clifton and colleagues evaluated adjuvant nelipepimut-S (from rjs that’s NeuVax) with trastuzumab compared with trastuzumab with GM-CSF alone in patients with HER2–low-expressing, high-risk breast cancer to prevent recurrence. Following publication of data from the NSABP B-47 trial in December of 2017, which confirmed that adjuvant trastuzumab had no benefit in patients with HER2–low-expressing tumors,2 the decision was made to stop the trial for safety and ethical reasons. At the 2019 ASCO–Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium, Dr. Clifton reported the final analysis of the trial with 7 months of added follow-up.”
https://www.ascopost.com/issues/april-10-2019...st-cancer/
Wrong. Yes, the NSABP B-47 study did show Herceptin isn’t clinically beneficial to low her2. But that has nothing to do with the NeuVax study which wasn’t run by NSABP. Nor did Dr. Peoples halt or rather end the NeuVax study based on info gleaned from B-47 (reminds me of Love Shack). He ended his study do to the amount of events reached (recurrence) on the NeuVax pts.
NSABP B-47 illustrated unfortunately that her2 1+ and 2+ pts don’t benefit from Herceptin. The NSABP B-31 trial shows a level of benefit for triple negative pts. (Since Herceptin is basically a cure for Her2 3+ pts, researchers were hopeful for benefit to 1+ and 2+ as well since benefit was seen in negative-“0”.) So, Dr Peoples and Sellas are looking that triple negative way, as they say they saw benefit in a triple negative subset of the terminated study, but the way they falsely spin EVERYTHING about that study who knows or can believe them? Well, obviously the expert at the ASCO post believes press releases without digging into actual abstracts. Imo, there’s no way MRK or anyone would partner with this competitor over AE. And AE is actually working with the NSABP, the leaders in this research design, while Sellas is inappropriately mentioned with them in an ASCO Post article.
I wish Striater would stop by this site. He would dig in to this (he’s actually a scientist at a known university), and like me not really worry about if someone is positive or negative. On yahoo my favorite guy to debate was infoinosightexchanger. He put anyone at yahoo now to shame. Joe- if some of these silly posters bother you, he was way smarter than them all (who are boring.) Anyone recall Info?
Anyway, I see Sellas getting press for triple negative around recent ASCO etc events, but I see cotton candy (no substance.).
“We wish to thank our patients and their families for their participation in this trial. Based on data demonstrating that this combination therapy has the potential to become an important therapeutic option for TNBC patients facing a life-threatening disease and for whom current options in the adjuvant setting are extremely limited, we have determined, in consensus with SELLAS, to close out the current study,” stated COL (ret) George E. Peoples, MD, FACS, Founder and Director of Cancer Insight, LLC and study Principal Investigator.
https://www.sellaslifesciences.com/investors/...fault.aspx
That’s not why they closed the study down, and I doubt consensus was offered to Sellas. We just saw- “Use of mandated annual scans and image-detected recurrence events hastened the interim analysis contributing to early trial termination.” There were too many recurrences for NeuVax vs. placebo.
If anyone is interested look at this new ASCO Post article about NeuVax+Herceptin:
“For this phase IIb trial, Dr. Clifton and colleagues evaluated adjuvant nelipepimut-S (from rjs that’s NeuVax) with trastuzumab compared with trastuzumab with GM-CSF alone in patients with HER2–low-expressing, high-risk breast cancer to prevent recurrence. Following publication of data from the NSABP B-47 trial in December of 2017, which confirmed that adjuvant trastuzumab had no benefit in patients with HER2–low-expressing tumors,2 the decision was made to stop the trial for safety and ethical reasons. At the 2019 ASCO–Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium, Dr. Clifton reported the final analysis of the trial with 7 months of added follow-up.”
https://www.ascopost.com/issues/april-10-2019...st-cancer/
Wrong. Yes, the NSABP B-47 study did show Herceptin isn’t clinically beneficial to low her2. But that has nothing to do with the NeuVax study which wasn’t run by NSABP. Nor did Dr. Peoples halt or rather end the NeuVax study based on info gleaned from B-47 (reminds me of Love Shack). He ended his study do to the amount of events reached (recurrence) on the NeuVax pts.
NSABP B-47 illustrated unfortunately that her2 1+ and 2+ pts don’t benefit from Herceptin. The NSABP B-31 trial shows a level of benefit for triple negative pts. (Since Herceptin is basically a cure for Her2 3+ pts, researchers were hopeful for benefit to 1+ and 2+ as well since benefit was seen in negative-“0”.) So, Dr Peoples and Sellas are looking that triple negative way, as they say they saw benefit in a triple negative subset of the terminated study, but the way they falsely spin EVERYTHING about that study who knows or can believe them? Well, obviously the expert at the ASCO post believes press releases without digging into actual abstracts. Imo, there’s no way MRK or anyone would partner with this competitor over AE. And AE is actually working with the NSABP, the leaders in this research design, while Sellas is inappropriately mentioned with them in an ASCO Post article.
I wish Striater would stop by this site. He would dig in to this (he’s actually a scientist at a known university), and like me not really worry about if someone is positive or negative. On yahoo my favorite guy to debate was infoinosightexchanger. He put anyone at yahoo now to shame. Joe- if some of these silly posters bother you, he was way smarter than them all (who are boring.) Anyone recall Info?
Anyway, I see Sellas getting press for triple negative around recent ASCO etc events, but I see cotton candy (no substance.).
