We’re overdue a roundup and discussion on various key topics of interest to BSB readers, so here goes…
Today’s topics include an in-depth look at the impact of some negative events:
- Kite and the cerebral oedema death with axi-cel
- Genentech’s atezolizumab OS miss in urothelial cancer
Subscribers can login to read our latest expert interview or you can gain assess to the insights via the blue box below….
Long time attendees at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) know that there are usually interesting posters and sessions buried on the last day of the meeting.
This year was no exception, with a major symposium on “CAR T Cell Cancer Immunotherapy” chaired by Michael Jensen MD (pictured right).
BSB readers will recall we interviewed him at the 2016 BMT Tandem meeting in Honolulu (See post: Optimizing CD19 CAR T cell therapy). Excerpts from this interview also featured in Episode 14 – Cell Therapy Pioneers of the Novel Targets Podcast.
The CAR T symposium on the last day of AACR was one of my highlights of the meeting. The three speakers were:
- Michael Jensen, MD (Seattle Children’s) Engineering Next Generation CAR T cells using Synthetic Biology-Inspired Technologies
- Terry J. Fry, MD (National Cancer Institute) Defining and overcoming limitations of CD19 CAR immunotherapy in pediatric ALL
- Christine E. Brown, PhD (City of Hope) Progress and Challenge in CAR T Cell Therapy for Brain Tumors
Each of these presentations would merit a full blog post in their own right, but in this particular post we’re focusing on CAR T cell therapy targeting glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).
GBM is the most common primary malignant brain tumor, and one with a dismal prognosis – the 5-year survival rate is only around 5%, so there is also a high unmet medical need for new effective treatment options. This devastating disease has proven to be a miserable graveyard for Pharma over the last decade, with many agents unfortunately ending up in dog drug heaven.
After her AACR17 presentation, Dr Brown kindly spoke to BSB.
This post is part of our series of thouight leader interviews from AACR17. It also continues our ongoing posts on the adoptive cellular therapy landscape, and in particular, CAR modified T cells.
Subscribers with an interest in the CAR T cell competitive landscape can login to read more or you can gain access via the blue box below…
It’s finally time…
US Capitol Building, DC
By popular request from BSB readers, we have a CAR T cell therapy preview of the main abstracts to watch out for, including talks and posters, and what emerging themes to expect are likely to be.
If you are registered on the AACR site and signed in, then clicking on any of the abstracts highlighted in this review will enable you to add any interesting ones you fancy to your conference itinerary.
There’s a surprising amount to cover this year, especially when we consider the incredible work that’s ongoing to address a number of suboptimal aspects in the construct developments. It’s continuing to progress at warp speed, so hold onto your hats and buckle down for our latest rock around the AACR clock.
Subscribers can log in or you can sign up via the blue box below to learn more…
Two of the most intriguing developments in cancer research over the last 5 years have been checkpoint blockade and CAR T cell therapies. There’s no doubt that they work – in some patients – or that toxicities can be challenging to manage at times, but what has been very interesting to me has been physician reactions to the rise of immunotherapies.
There has been much noise about biomarkers, including whether they work or not in this niche, as well as how do we go about selecting patients for therapies and combinations?
Ultimately, immunotherapies will be no different from targeted therapies in that we need to better understand the underlying biology in order to move forward beyond the low hanging fruit and figure out how we can best select appropriate therapy for each individual based on their particular characteristics.
The worry that many researchers have is that we could end up making the same mistakes with immunotherapies as targeted therapies, i.e. treat them in a broad fashion akin to throwing mud at the wall. Indeed, some companies are already doing this, much to the consternation of the research community.
So how do we go about doing things better and thinking more strategically about what needs to be done?
Up next is the first in a two-part interview series with a global thought leader who is a scientist-clinician with expertise in both immunology and oncogenic pathways. What does he have to say about where we are now and importantly, what does the future hold?
This is the penultimate article in our coverage from the Triple meeting in Munich, held in November 2016.
To learn more about the expert insights, subscribers can log-in or you can sign up to gain access via the blue box below…
Targeted therapy and Chemo-Immunotherapy in CLL
At last December’s 2016 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, one of the areas that attracted attention was the latest clinical data on the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
ASH 2016 in San Diego
In recent years, we’ve seen tremendous advances in the field with several new agents approved such as obintuzumab, ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax. There are also new treatment options available for CLL patients with high risk disease such as 17p deletions (Del17p).
Other new targeted therapies such as acalabrutinib are now in clinical development, plus we have CAR T cell therapies and combination strategies also being evaluated in the clinic.
So what was the hot news from #ASH16 in CLL?
- Does chemotherapy still have a role or is it a targeted therapy world?
- Are we further forward towards a cure?
- Have we worked out how to identify those at risk of relapse?
- Will CAR T cell therapy be a game changer in CLL?
- Is financial toxicity going to be an issue with combination strategies?
BSB interviewed two experts in CLL while in San Diego who kindly shared their thoughts on which CLL data impressed them at the ASH annual meeting and discussed some of the big strategic issues facing the field right now. These interviews are being posted in a two-part series.
Part 1 today answers some of the questions highlighted above and explores the changing face of the broader CLL landscape.
Subscribers can login to learn more or you can access the article via the blue button below…
The Future of our (cancer research) Business
Happy New Year! No one really wants to spend too much time in the past dwelling on the negatives, what didn’t work, and in some spectacular cases, who’s to blame for it.
What we do want to know is what are the learnings from such endeavours and where are we going next.
Let’s look forward rather than backwards then and see what the Maverick’s crystal ball is showing in terms of fresh clarity and new trends we can learn from …
In today’s post I want to take a moment to look at some of the trends we can expect to see occuring in cancer research in 2017.
Subscribers can log in to read more about our insights or you can sign up via the blue button below:
John P. Leonard, MD is the Richard T. Silver Distinguished Professor of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Weill Cornell in New York. He’s a Lymphoma specialist.
Dr John Leonard at ASH16
Like many hematologists, he’s embraced Twitter as way to share his expertise with others in the hematology community. You can follow him at @JohnPLeonardMD.
Over the last couple of years prior to the ASH annual meeting, Dr Leonard has highlighted 10 lymphoma abstracts that caught his attention. You can tell he gets excellent social media pickup by the fact he’s even generated a hashtag to make them easy to find: #Leonardlist and other hematologists generate conversations around his eagerly awaited picks:
In case you missed them on Twitter, and in the spirit of David Letterman, Dr Leonard took me through this year’s #LeonardList and thoughtfully explained in detail why each selection made the cut… for oncology watchers, the why is often more important than the what.
Subscribers can login to read more or you can purchase access via the blue box below…
San Diego – Monday at the 2016 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (#ASH16) is typically a day of multiple oral sessions in parallel.
This year it was a major challenge doing a mad dash between sessions as the meeting is now so big that in San Diego it’s being held, not only at the vast convention center, but is also using the meeting rooms of three nearby three hotels – it’s literally a mile walk to go from one end of the convention to the other, so you have to factor that time into your crazed schedule with multiple clashes.
On the positive side, there’s even courtesy pedicabs – cycle rickshaws (great idea & fun) – I caught one at 7am the other day to save my toes from at least one #blisterwalk…
Following on from our ASH Highlights 2016 Part 1, this post answers critical BSB Reader questions that have come in thick and fast and require more than 140 characters on Twitter to answer.
Predictably, the majority of the first tranche of questions have been CAR T cell therapy related, so if you have a keen interest in this area, this is the post for you. We tackle 5 critical questions and offer some insights.
Subscribers can login to read more or you can purchase access below via the blue box.
San Diego – after “Flying Friday” where I flew from Munich to San Diego, Biotech Strategy Blog coverage of the 2016 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) is now done for another year.
With over 27,000 attendees – it’s the largest ASH annual meeting I’ve seen in 20 years of coming here! ASH is definitely the pre-eminent global meeting for hematology and blood cancers.
As you might expect, the thought leaders at this event are super-busy, but we’ve already managed to catch up with a few, and we’ll be rolling out interviews in the “post-game show.”
Subscribers have been asking what’s really hot at ASH this weekend, so reflecting my interests and the sessions I went to, here are my seven highlights/learnings of ASH 2016 (so far). There’s a lot more data to come!
Subscribers can login to read more or you can purchase access below…
This is an important and necessary follow-up to the ongoing Juno JCAR015 story in July after three patients had died due to complications associated with cerebral oedema. At that time, the company attributed the deaths to the inclusion of fludarabine in the lymphodepletion given prior to CAR T cell therapy infusion, leading to severe neurotoxicity, and clinical hold was lifted by FDA after the protocol was subsequently amended.
This morning came the dramatic announcement that following the protocol amendment, Juno has voluntarily placed the ROCKET trial on clinical hold again following another two deaths from cerebral oedema.
What gives and what are the consequences here?
We take a joint look at some of the issues that arise from this situation in terms of the CAR T cell therapy market and also pen thoughts from the analyst call this morning.
Subscribers can log-in below or you can learn more about our insights by clicking on the blue box…