iwCLL 2013: Dr. Michael Hallek Discusses Clinical Trials in Germany versus the USA and BR versus FCR
Happy New Year.
I am in Alameda, enjoying babysitting my 7 month old and 2 1/2 year old granddaughters. Needless to say, finding a second to get any work done is tough, but the joy of being with them makes my inefficiency a small price to pay.
Today, I am returning to share additional relevant interviews from iwCLL a few months ago.
In the first part of my interview on September 11, the last day of iwCLL 2013, Professor Hallek first discusses some of the differences in clinical trials on either side of the pond.
One subject Prof. Hallek does not mention is the greater willingness of European patients to be randomized in a trial. Canadians and Americans prefer more control in deciding their therapy, and that helps explain the generally lower accrual in North American studies that have two or more randomized arms. I admit that one reason I was drawn to my trial, the official title being, An Open-label, Phase 1b/2, Safety and Efficacy Study of the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (Btk) Inhibitor, PCI-32765, and Ofatumumab in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma and Prolymphocytic Leukemia, was that I was assured that I would be getting PCI-32765, AKA, ibrutinib, AKA, Imbruvica. Phase 3 trials rarely offer that certainty, unless there is a cross-over and that is a big ongoing issue.
Keep in mind that the calculus of accrual is entirely different when we are looking at the new non-chemo agents, where trials offering some of the exciting new drugs have filled at record rates.
Also don't miss the professor's definition of young.
I like it.
Next, Prof. Hallek, presages with great accuracy what was going to be announced a few months later in at an abstract presented in New Orleans at ASH 2013, namely that BR is gentler on the marrow, but less effective than FCR. His take on what to do with that data is the real gem in our conversation. Listen to how he describes tailoring of the therapy to the individual patient.
Dr. Jeff Sharman whose interviews have and will continue to pop up here, has a nice review of the ASH data on his excellent blog.
Here is Professor Hallek, who was very busy chairing iwCLL, so I very much appreciate his time. Sadly when my flight to New Orleans was canceled, I had to also cancel my follow-up interview at ASH, but we get the full story here and from the abstract.
Many, myself included, wonder if the whole question of BR versus FCR is moot as the era of chemo-immunotherapy may be ending in CLL. We have spent many blog posts discussing this issue, and we aren't finished yet.
Here is Professor Hallek:
More soon.
I am in Alameda, enjoying babysitting my 7 month old and 2 1/2 year old granddaughters. Needless to say, finding a second to get any work done is tough, but the joy of being with them makes my inefficiency a small price to pay.
Today, I am returning to share additional relevant interviews from iwCLL a few months ago.
In the first part of my interview on September 11, the last day of iwCLL 2013, Professor Hallek first discusses some of the differences in clinical trials on either side of the pond.
One subject Prof. Hallek does not mention is the greater willingness of European patients to be randomized in a trial. Canadians and Americans prefer more control in deciding their therapy, and that helps explain the generally lower accrual in North American studies that have two or more randomized arms. I admit that one reason I was drawn to my trial, the official title being, An Open-label, Phase 1b/2, Safety and Efficacy Study of the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (Btk) Inhibitor, PCI-32765, and Ofatumumab in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma and Prolymphocytic Leukemia, was that I was assured that I would be getting PCI-32765, AKA, ibrutinib, AKA, Imbruvica. Phase 3 trials rarely offer that certainty, unless there is a cross-over and that is a big ongoing issue.
Keep in mind that the calculus of accrual is entirely different when we are looking at the new non-chemo agents, where trials offering some of the exciting new drugs have filled at record rates.
Also don't miss the professor's definition of young.
I like it.
Next, Prof. Hallek, presages with great accuracy what was going to be announced a few months later in at an abstract presented in New Orleans at ASH 2013, namely that BR is gentler on the marrow, but less effective than FCR. His take on what to do with that data is the real gem in our conversation. Listen to how he describes tailoring of the therapy to the individual patient.
Dr. Jeff Sharman whose interviews have and will continue to pop up here, has a nice review of the ASH data on his excellent blog.
Here is Professor Hallek, who was very busy chairing iwCLL, so I very much appreciate his time. Sadly when my flight to New Orleans was canceled, I had to also cancel my follow-up interview at ASH, but we get the full story here and from the abstract.
Many, myself included, wonder if the whole question of BR versus FCR is moot as the era of chemo-immunotherapy may be ending in CLL. We have spent many blog posts discussing this issue, and we aren't finished yet.
Here is Professor Hallek:
More soon.
Labels: age, bendamustine, BR, Chronic lymphocytic leukemia, Clinical Trial NCT01217749, Clinical trials, CLL, FCR, ibrutinib, Imbruvica, interviews, iwCLL 2013, PCI-32765, Professor Hallek, Video
posted by Brian Koffman at
1:31 PM
2 Comments:
Happy New Year Brian! Thanks for the update... I went through withdrawals over the holidays. : ) Hope you are getting to spend some quality time with those little ones. They grow up so fast.
Put the kids to bed and put up part 2 !!!!
Happy New Year! Enjoy each day and thanks for your travels, questions and postings!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home