Replies to post #12508 on Biotech Values

[randychub]

ymi - "surely with a strong survival benefit, the combo will immediately rival taxotere"

Excellent point. The survival benefit in this group of patients, if it lives up to the first phase 3 trial, will be well beyond any other treatment available for these patients. So why not use this combination for all of the patients in this catagory?

R

[cooldrinkh2o]

Boy, did I stir up a hornets nest.

<"Avastin is easier to give than Tes">

Yes, oncologists are used to giving Avastin and are aware of its side effects (Lung bleeding occurred in squamous cell NSCLC patients and Avastin is not used there because of it). Tes on the other hand requires a six hour infusion (this does not include the time to give the other meds) which will hurt uptake in busy practices that don't have much chair time to spare as it is and it remains to be seen if oncologists are comfortable with the cns toxicity. Ifex was not widely adopted in the community because of cns toxicity (the cns toxicity is different from that of tes). It was used extensively in hospitals.

<Question: supposing tesmilifene + chemo efficacy is confirmed by the trial, the label will reflect in part the earlier phase II success - even as a sub-group - surely with a strong survival benefit, the combo will immediately rival taxotere ?>

The taxotere trial is not spa and there is no guarantee it will be included in the label.