The changing face of the SCCHN landscape
It’s been very clear for over four years now that combinations were going to be necessary if we want to a larger number of deeper and more durable responses than can attained with monotherapy. Gradually, we are starting to see early and very preliminary readouts with some of the trials in progress.
We are also learning very quickly that it’s going to be a case of #notalltumours and #notallsubsets.
Another very busy poster session at #ASCO16!
By this, I mean we obviously can’t take a one-combination-fits-all approach for all tumour types.
We need to be able to classify patients into more homogenous subsets and then devise different combinations or even sequences that address the underlying biology of both the cancer itself and also the tumour microenvironment. That’s going to take a while to sort out, perhaps even years.
Let’s not forget though that in the meantime, we can gather information quite a few clues both preclinically, as well as from initial clinical studies. Sometimes, after all, we even learn more from negative trials than positive ones. This is an area that is ripe for combinations with traditional targeted therapies, the question is which ones are promising and why?
We took a look at the landscape in SCCH&N and how this might evolve over time in the medium term, with future opportunities, that can be explored in rational combination approaches.
To learn more, subscribers can log-in or you can sign-up to join the ever-growing BSB club.
This content is restricted to subscribers
