You call this a pump?
Here are results from the 771 patient trial in 2006 with genasense...now compare this to the most recent agenda update and tell me whos not paying attention idiot. Read the bold print, simply the data is just not mature yet, and if you look at older information you can see that that genasense showed MUCH better results for the long term picture.
Results: Among 771 patients randomly assigned, the addition of oblimersen to dacarbazine yielded a trend toward <bold>improved survival at 24-month minimum follow-up </bold> (median, 9.0 v 7.8 months; P = .077) and significant increases in progression-free survival (median, 2.6 v 1.6 months; P < .001), overall response (13.5% v 7.5%; P = .007), complete response (2.8% v 0.8%), and durable response (7.3% v 3.6%; P = .03). A significant interaction between baseline serum LDH and treatment was observed; oblimersen significantly increased survival in patients whose baseline serum LDH was not elevated (median overall survival, 11.4 v 9.7 months; P = .02). Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were increased in the oblimersen-dacarbazine group; however, there was no increase in serious infections or bleeding events.
Conclusion: The addition of oblimersen to dacarbazine significantly improved multiple clinical outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma and increased overall survival in patients without an elevated baseline serum LDH.
now compare that to our recent press release.
AGENDA did not show a statistically significant benefit for its co-primary endpoint of progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints of overall response rate and disease control rate (which includes complete and partial responses, plus stable disease ≥ 3 months duration) also did not show a statistically significant benefit. According to the prespecified analysis plan, the statistical significance of durable response – a secondary endpoint that measures the proportion of patients who achieved a complete or partial response that lasts ≥ 6 months – is too early to evaluate. The observed differences in progression-free survival, overall response, disease control and durable response all numerically favored the group that received Genasense®.
Overall survival – the other co-primary endpoint in AGENDA – is too early to evaluate, as prospectively specified. An analysis for futility, which was defined as ≥ 50% conditional power to observe a statistically significant benefit of Genasense under the prospectively assumed hazard ratio of 0.69, has been conducted for the co-primary endpoint of overall survival. AGENDA has passed this futility analysis. The prospectively specified analyses for both overall survival and durable response will be conducted when the data are mature. The safety profile of Genasense in AGENDA was consistent with prior studies.
AI
