Biotech Strategy Blog

Commentary on Science, Innovation & New Products with a focus on Oncology, Hematology & Cancer Immunotherapy

Posts tagged ‘Ipilimumab’

Science drives oncology new product development and the AACR special conferences are always a good place to look for insights into where the field is both emerging and also going in the future.

At the recent AACR Tumor Immunology and Immunotherapy conference, several presentations stood out for us as being noteworthy for either building on an existing story or the new perspectives they offered, some of which involved new targets we’d not heard before.

In this post, we take a take at some of the data presented, how it builds upon what we already know, and possible directions it may take us in.  After all, the best way to predict the future is to invent it.

It’s time to shine some light on novel targets, biomarkers, and emerging combination approaches…

To learn more from our oncology analysis and get a heads up on the latest insights and commentary, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

One thing I really miss from attending live conferences – aside from catching up with people in person – is “the living like a local” experience. Last time I was in Madrid, for example, there was this fishmonger (pescaderia) just a block down from the rented apartment. They were only open in the mornings, so you could dash down the hill, quickly nab some fresh produce, refrigerate it and have something nice to look forward to for dinner with a glass of wine at the end of a tiring day while writing up the highlights…

The image also offers another analogy – do some data presented at a meeting end up, well, a bit fishy on closer examination or reflection despite much of the hype enthused or extolled by others?

At the ESMO20 virtual Congress, we covered a tremendous amount of details from the data during both the daily highlights as well as the previews exploring what to watch out in the run-up to the event.  You can find all those reviews here.

There are always some surprises in store, however, both good and bad.  There’s also layers of obfuscation going on to consider in the form of cheerleading from companies, investigators, or stock holders, which may add positive spin on what is essentially so-so data, cases where great data goes largely ignored for whatever reason, or important lessons to be learned from failure.

In this wrap-up post, we take a sharp look at the ESMO20 winners, losers, and risers from a contrarian’s perspective…

To learn more from our oncology analysis and get a heads up on the latest insights and commentary pertaining to ESMO20 virtual congress, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Not in Madrid: Unlike the Tour de France, which finishes with the peloton procession in Paris today, we’re not yet at the ESMO20 finish line and there’s plenty of the data at Congress yet to come.

Macarons anyone?

As you can see, we’re hoping ESMO21 will actually take place in Paris next year, but it’s definitely too early to make travel plans the way COVID-19 infection rates are increasing in Europe.

If we think of cancer drugs as like macarons that come in many versions – which ones do you like at #ESMO20 so far? There are are also subtle gradations in colour and flavour, reflective of a few trial differences to consider.

In this latest post we’re continuing our coverage of highlights from Saturday at ESMO20 with the second part of our commentary and analysis around some of the oral presentations involving numerous solid tumours, excluding breast cancer (see separate highlights of the day post), which caught our attention.

To learn more from our oncology analysis and obtain insights and commentary around data being presented at ESMO20, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

The annual ASCO-SITC meeting (#ImmunoOnc19) was held in San Francisco this year and has come a long way from the inaugural event we attended in Orlando.

Finding the signals amongst the noise

In the original 2017 event, I vividly recall as stirring presentation from Dr Limo Chen on targeting CD38 in solid tumours, last year we wrote an update on GU cancers including the STING pathway.

What’s in store from San Francisco and how do we go about finding key signals from the noise?

Over the next two posts I’m going to focus on new findings in various approaches that either look interesting and worth watching, or where there are lessons that can be learned for future developments.

This time around, some of the highlights surprised even me…

To learn more from our latest conference coverage and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

In the third part of our ASCO GU coverage from San Francisco, which includes previews and post-match commentary, it’s time to turn our attention to renal cancer. This isn’t one disease, but a broad tumour type with multiple subtypes, some based on histology, with perhaps others to emerge down the road as we learn more about the disease and immune profiling.

There’s quite a bit to discuss this year, some of it quite complex and nuanced.

In the old days, much of the focus was on sequencing single agent TKIs in clear cell carcinoma, now it’s getting much more complex as scientists and researchers figure out combinations and regimen approaches, never mind what to do with the various histologies.

We walk readers through the latest information as we await the data presentations coming out tomorrow…

 

To learn more from our latest cancer conference coverage and get a heads up on our oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

SITC Phase 1 Review Part 1 – It’s time for a two-part mini-series on recent phase 1 clinical trials and how to interpret the findings.

Are we at a crosswords with IO combos?

As a former new products development professional, this is something that I’m particularly enthusiastic about.

While it is fascinating to see other people’s reactions to early oncology trials, these should often be taken with a very large pinch of salt, in my view.

In Part 1, it’s time to take a step back and understand not only what companies are doing, but also how they set the trials up and what they are looking for. We highlight some examples of data readouts to illustrate the points.

In Part 2 on Monday we take a rock around the clock at some of the other recent phase 1 readouts and explain what we can learn from what was presented. The devil is often in the small details that many observers miss at first glance.

Subscribers can log-in to read our latest insights or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

We’ll have “boots on the ground” for the 2018 Congress of the European Society for Medical Oncology (Twitter: #ESMO18) that starts out of the gate on Friday in Munich.

The Fall cancer conference season is in swing…

Our conference coverage is not only about what data we think matters, particularly in the fast-moving world of immuno-oncology, but more importantly, why it matters.

Next up in our ESMO18 Previews, we take a closer look at renal cancer, an area that received some attention in Madrid last year and is likely to receive renewed focus again.

We also include a look at the broader RCC landscape in terms of US physician prescribing habits (i.e. KOL and Community oncologists), including some trend data to explore the impact of the nivo/ipi combination and cabozantinib data, as well as excerpts from an expert interview we conducted with Dr Awny Farajallah, Head of U.S. Medical at Bristol Myers Squibb.

Finally, we also highlight some key abstracts to watch out for in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) that are expected to be presented at ESMO18 and explore their relevance.

To learn more from our latest assessment and get a heads up on our oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

It is always a pleasure to talk with experts who have a clear vision of not just what the current treatment landscape looks like, but where the field is going.

Dr Stephen Liu at ASCO18

Dr Stephen Liu is a medical oncologist and assistant professor at Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington DC, where he specializes in thoracic oncology.  He’s also actively involved in clinical trials and developmental therapeutics.

We last interviewed him at ASCO 2016 – you can also hear him on Episode 13 of the Novel Targets Podcast – where he shared his thoughts on some of the early lung cancer immunotherapy combination trials underway.

As regular readers know, we like to follow stories over time and also catch up with thoughtful, intelligent people we’ve talked to in the past whose opinions we value.

Dr Liu kindly shared his highlights of ASCO 2018 in lung cancer, and in a wide ranging discussion, also offered some thoughts on what the future may hold and where we may be going next.

There was a lot to learn from Chicago this year, with plenty of nuances and subtleties to consider. If you read only one post on lung cancer from ASCO18, this interview tells you all you need to know!

To learn more and get a heads up on our latest expert interview and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

At AACR last week we had the long awaited initial readouts for three key phase 3 studies in lung cancer, namely CheckMate–227, IMpower150, and KEYNOTE–189 in the same session on the same day.

This had me thinking about how it might end up being, “a killer and a chiller and a thriller when I get the (PD–1) gorilla in Manila,” with sincere apologies to Muhammed Ali and Dr Jean-Charles Soria for (mis)appropriating their past themes 😉

Chicago River Bridge at #AACR18

For those attending the event, you might well be forgiven for thinking from the first two adjectives that I’m referring to the weather, as it was certainly cold enough (!), or even the results this week from AstraZeneca’s unfortunately named ARCTIC study exploring the IO-IO combo of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the third line setting with a miss in both PFS and OS endpoints.

In reality, we should be warmed and heartened to see three positive immunotheraopy trials appear at once and presented in the same session at the same meeting.  It isn’t always the case as regular attendees at ASCO well know.

When all is said and done, what do thought leaders specialising in lung cancer really think about the data that was presented in Chicago, and what were the convergence and discord on the various key issues under consideration?  There is, after all, a lot of subtlety and nuance to consider in 1L NSCLC.

To find out more, we interviewed not one, but four, lung cancer specialists in Chicago for their personal perspectives.  What they had to say as a group was both candid and absolutely fascinating, so it made sense to curate their insights around various key topics together into one detailed post for easy reading… 

To learn more and get a heads up on our latest thought leader interviews and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Chicago!

One of the key topics arising out of probably the hottest session (lung cancer clinical trials plenary) at AACR last week was tumour mutation burden (TMB).

An important question to be addressed was whether or not the nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination from the CheckMate–227 study will be useful in previously untreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with a high TMB?

There are a number of questions that occurred to us that need careful consideration:

  • Is TMB ready for prime time?
  • What are the challenges and issues involved?
  • How useful are the data from CheckMate–227 and CheckMate–568?
  • Where are we going next?

To find out more, we had some fascination discussions at AACR with two up and coming young researchers from industry (Dr David Fabrizio of Foundation Medicine) and academia (Dr Nicky McGranahan from UCL in London), who are both experts intimately involved in measuring TMB.

What did they had to say and what does it all mean?

Their candid answers may well surprise a few people…

To learn more and get a heads up on our latest thought leader interviews and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Free Email Updates
Subscribe to new post alerts, offers, and additional content!
We respect your privacy and do not sell emails. Unsubscribe at any time.
error: Content is protected !!