Replies to post #53524 on Cytodyn Inc (CYDY)

[Amatuer17]

If Lero does 4 out of 4 - I would like NP to take a break from issuing PR for each patient and give a surprise with next 4 patients together. At least once we can get some big positive surprise.

[MrGuru]

0 out of 10 will be a miracle and I don’t believe that miracles happen in science.

I have always said that a substancial and sustained diminution of CTC's will already make a great drug. I agree that expecting 10 patients with less than 5 CTC's is probably unrealistic. However, I expect a substancial number of patients benefiting. More when techniques as occupancy tests are incorporated in the possible optimal dosage.

The CCR5 existence and impact in different types of cancer will be different. So in basket trial, the results are likely to be mixed and most likely to be inferior.

Absolutely, but, having said that, the niche for some indications will be rapidly "confirmed". Hell if only mTNBC works I will be a very "happy camper".

Milk the mTNBC results as much as possible, move it further and then start enrollment in basket trial.

This is probably what will end up happening due to the limited resources ($). I suspect most of the basket trial patients will be initially BC patients.

[sjacobs26]

“The CCR5 existence and impact in different types of cancer will be different. So in basket trial, the results are likely to be mixed and most likely to be inferior.”

Please explain why the results would be any different? To qualify for the trial patients would have to express CCR5 on the tumor or around the tumor on the macrophages. Sure there will be varying expression of CCR5, tumor sizes and progression of the cancer / metastasis, but based on my research, there is quite a bit of external data that suggest CCR5 is what drives the metastasis. Blocking CCR5 will improve for all these patients that qualify based on the entry criteria and the results would only vary as they do in every trial based on the individual patient’s CCR5 expressed which would be directly correlated to their progression/advancement of cancer and metastasis.....which BTW metastasis is generally what kills 90% of cancer patients.

CTC levels have also been proven PFS as referenced in the SA article posted today. If leronlimab can significantly reduce CTC levels to any level this bodes very well for CYDY’s future and cancer victims. I’m sure the advanced stage 4 patients have much higher CTC levels so I don’t expect these patients (NP MiL) to be zero or even close to it yet like the naive TNBC patient, but if they test this and it continues to decrease that further supports success and the basket trial.

[misiu143]

I don't believe that basket trial is to big of the gamble looking at the results...
looks that Dr Patterson is right , is not CCR5 on the tumor cells ( specific to particular cancer ) , but CCR5 on macrophages around tumors what is important..

According to today presentation our first 2 patients had . 0. CCR5 on the tumor cells , but very high CCR5 on macrophages around the tumors , and we know how they doing..

I still feel very bad for our very first emergency patient when hospital refused to treat her because her CCR5 was on macrophages around the tumor but not on tumor cells .. , even when Dr Patterson want them to continue , but our first protocol was not allowing that ...

So because CCR5 on macrophages around the tumors are the most important , we should be working not for few but many cancers , and Dr NP said about 22 , this is probably right.
And he stressed also today that Leronlimab inhibits angiogenesis , as very important , and it is...


IMO as always ..

[ohm20]

There is also downside - he is showing great confidence to over confidence by going in basket trial. That is a gamble.
The CCR5 existence and impact in different types of cancer will be different. So in basket trial, the results are likely to be mixed and most likely to be inferior.

All metastasis in cancers are controlled by the same factors. Those factors in return are mainly controlled by CCR5. The main differences consist of the aggressiveness of metastasis and location where metastasis is more likely to occur. The results should be very similar across all indications.

I remember GALT trial on cancer in Standford - The TLR agonist did show some great results in 100% sample but very small number - as the time increased and sample increased - the results waned and now it is out of trial)

Unlike CCR5, galectin 3 is a fairly minor mediator in cancer