Once again jackasses are spreading lies via PM. Is
Post# of 154537
(Total Views: 700)
Posted On: 02/28/2022 1:14:59 PM
Once again jackasses are spreading lies via PM. Is it just because they will get deleted from the board or is it because they will not get a response that will refute their lies. I doubt I'm the only one to get this PM but it's a well worn trope over at liehub so I will answer it publically.
I like the way you ignore the other trial differences and misstate things.
Trodelvy was for those who have had 2 or more lines of previous therapy. So tell me what percentage were 2 and which were more.
You mischaracterize naive, here is what it actually says.
As you point out the compassionate study was in heavily treated patients. In fact it's in 3 or more failed treatments. Worse than Trodelvy's.
10 patients were from the actual trial, 18 were from the studies.
Trodelvy must have non-progressive brain metastases unlike leronlimab in the trial. Progression in brain metastasis is highly deadly.
Trodelvy excludes those with any other type of cancer except non-melanoma skin cancer or carcinoma in situ of the cervix.
Trodelvy - Note: Other protocol defined Inclusion/Exclusion criteria may apply.
You have to wonder what those undisclosed criteria are.
What are the trial differences between Trodelvy and what it compared itself too? I'm sure they are many. Maybe you should find out and raise a hullabaloo with the FDA over them.
Quote:
SKs mTNBC comparison was deceptive -- he used naïve mTNBC patients from the trials that are far more likely to be responsive to a new treatment and then he added the heavily treated heavily treated R/R compassion use.
Naïve patients have had as much as 100% greater OS than R/R patients that have failed on numerous treatments. SK then compared that to Trodevly's very 100% heavily treated R/R (3rd line therapy). It is deceptive -- apples to oranges.
I like the way you ignore the other trial differences and misstate things.
Trodelvy was for those who have had 2 or more lines of previous therapy. So tell me what percentage were 2 and which were more.
You mischaracterize naive, here is what it actually says.
Quote:
Study population will consist of patients with CCR5-positive, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) who are naïve to chemotherapy in metastatic setting but have been exposed to anthracyclines and taxane in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings (first-line).
As you point out the compassionate study was in heavily treated patients. In fact it's in 3 or more failed treatments. Worse than Trodelvy's.
10 patients were from the actual trial, 18 were from the studies.
Trodelvy must have non-progressive brain metastases unlike leronlimab in the trial. Progression in brain metastasis is highly deadly.
Trodelvy excludes those with any other type of cancer except non-melanoma skin cancer or carcinoma in situ of the cervix.
Trodelvy - Note: Other protocol defined Inclusion/Exclusion criteria may apply.
You have to wonder what those undisclosed criteria are.
What are the trial differences between Trodelvy and what it compared itself too? I'm sure they are many. Maybe you should find out and raise a hullabaloo with the FDA over them.
(15)
(0)