Wow, that second link in House's post does not do
Post# of 153860
(Total Views: 1133)
Posted On: 07/18/2024 8:03:01 AM
Re: HouseofCards #145194
Wow, that second link in House's post does not do justice to Leron.
They write (bolding mine):
But the actual study they are citing WENT ON to say (bolding mine):
"However, pts treated with 525-700 mg doses (n = 19) had a > 75% improved mPFS = 6.1 mos (95%CI 2.3-7.5) and mOS 12+ mos (95%CI 5.5-12+ ). Further, a drop in circulating TACs was identified in 75% (n = 21/28) pts and predicted for significantly better clinical outcomes, mPFS = 6.2 and mOS > 12 mos. Conclusions: These studies suggest that mTNBC pts dosed with leronlimab had high clinical benefit, i.e. longer PFS & OS with few TEAEs, and leronlimab resulted in a drop in circulating TACs in the majority of pts correlating with early therapy response."
From https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.e13062
They write (bolding mine):
Quote:
Leronlimab is a humanized IgG4κ antibody that blocks the CCR5 receptor. In a pooled analysis of three clinical drug studies (phase Ib/II dose escalation (NCT03838367), compassionate use (NCT04313075), and basket study (NCT04504942)), metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) patients were treated with Leronlimab. The results showed that at 12 months, the mPFS was 3.8 months (95% CI, 2.3–6.2), and the mOS was 6.6 months (95% CI, 4.9%–12% )
But the actual study they are citing WENT ON to say (bolding mine):
"However, pts treated with 525-700 mg doses (n = 19) had a > 75% improved mPFS = 6.1 mos (95%CI 2.3-7.5) and mOS 12+ mos (95%CI 5.5-12+ ). Further, a drop in circulating TACs was identified in 75% (n = 21/28) pts and predicted for significantly better clinical outcomes, mPFS = 6.2 and mOS > 12 mos. Conclusions: These studies suggest that mTNBC pts dosed with leronlimab had high clinical benefit, i.e. longer PFS & OS with few TEAEs, and leronlimab resulted in a drop in circulating TACs in the majority of pts correlating with early therapy response."
From https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.e13062
(24)
(0)