We have selected five key strategic trends that are emerging that will be critical to follow, understand, and even implement if you are on the coal-face of clinical research and new product development.
We aren’t talking about financial things such as cost toxicity, or even how doctors should be paid, but meaty scientific aspects that we need to watch out for. If we are going to improve on cancer research and R&D in the future, these issues will be important.
For companies and academic researchers alike, there is much to learn from the tsunami of data that hit this week if you have a keen interest in the field and a bent for making sense of patterns out of an amorphous mass of data.
Not paying attention to evolution in clinical development can mean the difference between being in the winners circle, on the outside looking in, or falling way behind your competitors. Playing catch up is never anyone’s idea of fun in this market – oncology moves at a lightning fast pace compared to many other therapy areas.
Intrigued? To find out what these strategic trends are, subscribers can log-in to read the analysis or you can sign-up by clicking on the Blue Box below.
Honolulu: Yesterday we learnt the sad news that Dr Holbrook Kohrt (pictured) had died.
He was a Stanford hematologist/oncologist and rising star in the cancer immunotherapy field. Our thoughts go out to his family and friends.
I had the privilege to interview him last May at the Immunology 2015 meeting in New Orleans. His voice lives on in Episode 6 of the Novel Targets Podcast. One area of Dr Kohrt’s research was in combination immunotherapies, and how we can optimize efficacy, while avoiding significant immune adverse events.
So are checkpoints playing with fire when given in combination?
That was one of the provocative questions to come out of a scientific session entitled, “Fast Cars and No Brakes: Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation as a platform for Novel Immunotherapies” at the BMT Tandem meeting in Hawaii last weekend. The session, chaired by Miguel-Angel Perales (@DrMiguelPerales) from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, was both informative and interesting.
All the presentations were excellent, but one by Philippe Armand from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, “Checkpoint Blockade in SCT, Data & Hope, Promise & Peril” stood out for me. Dr Armand discussed checkpoint data pre and post stem cell transplantation and offered a perspective I had not heard before.
One of the provocative questions it raised was could checkpoints be playing with fire in some patients? Dr Armand kindly spoke with BSB after his talk.
Subscribers can login to read more or you can purchase access below.
Over the last couple of years we have heard much about targeting various checkpoints that exert an inhibitory effect on the immune system and the T cells, in particular. The main targets where we have a growing body of evidence to date are CTLA-4, PD-1 and PD-L1, but there are others including LAG-3, TIM-3, ICOS etc.
Earlier this year at AACR, we saw new evidence that combining two checkpoints (anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1) was superior to monotherapy in metastatic melanoma, albeit with a concomitant increase in toxicities.
What about the other inhibitory signals though? Are they bystanders, much like passenger mutations that have little effect, or do they matter, at least in some tumor types? If so, which ones?
We took a look at some of the emerging data associated with targeting TIM-3 – the results may well surprise some observers.