Dabrafenib – A new melanoma drug

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are tooo many diferent oncoprotiens, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoima can use to attackn our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatmenat for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases and a paartial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

**********************

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are too many different oncoproteins, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoma can use to attack our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatment for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 (An immunotherapy) in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases (Some people with IL-2 currently have a complete response length of over 20 years with IL-2 being their only Stage IV treatment.) and a partial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

Ipi is another step forward in that it helps in some cases where IL-2 doesn't, it also doesn't work in some cases where IL-2 does. Some people find Ipi much easier to tolerate than IL-2. Some people have a rougher time with Ipi than IL-2. Being new the Ipi long term success rate isn't fully known yet. The short term response rate appears to be at a similar rate for Ipi, but may take longer to begin working.
Some combination of treatment using both in the correct timing appears to offer increased success for certain individuals. The problem is to identify which individuals will respond to which treatments and which combination of treatments. Both Ipi and IL-2 can be very tough treatments to endure.

The anti-BRAF targeted chemotherapy are a success in that they have low side effects and currently provide the highest rate of positive response against one class of melanoma (albeit general for a short term). Will a treatment be a success if it blocks another signaling path and extends survival for a subset of those that relapse to just the BRAF treatment? Yes, to the ones it helps. To the rest, only in that it will help provide knowledge of other things to look at.

So what is success?  What is a success is so very individual.

Lest you forget Anti PD-1 ( MDX 1106) which appears to have a higher rate of success of durable and partial  than those you mentioned with less side effects..albeit early in the game….

Lest you forget Anti PD-1 ( MDX 1106) which appears to have a higher rate of success of durable and partial  than those you mentioned with less side effects..albeit early in the game….

Lynn, I was just referring to what the FDA has called successful treatments.  Among  the current clinical trials, I find the PD-1 trials to be the most interesting.  The one question I have yet to receive aresponse to is does one have to be HLA-02 to get into a trial to use it?  This is the trial I most often reccommend that people try to get into now days.

Lynn, I was just referring to what the FDA has called successful treatments.  Among  the current clinical trials, I find the PD-1 trials to be the most interesting.  The one question I have yet to receive aresponse to is does one have to be HLA-02 to get into a trial to use it?  This is the trial I most often reccommend that people try to get into now days.

In the sister trial of mine at Moffitt there is an arm that does not require the HLA type…the HLA for Moffitt trial was due to the antigens ( peptide injections)…that arm of the trial does not use the peptide injections.

In the sister trial of mine at Moffitt there is an arm that does not require the HLA type…the HLA for Moffitt trial was due to the antigens ( peptide injections)…that arm of the trial does not use the peptide injections.

Thanks Lynn, I knew that the UVA PD-1 trial required HLA–2 because of the peptide injections. I thought there might be a chance that there would be other trials that did not require peptide injections and would not require HLA-02. Currently the PD-1 is what I am looking toward if the Gleevec stops working.

Thanks Lynn, I knew that the UVA PD-1 trial required HLA–2 because of the peptide injections. I thought there might be a chance that there would be other trials that did not require peptide injections and would not require HLA-02. Currently the PD-1 is what I am looking toward if the Gleevec stops working.

Thanks Lynn, I knew that the UVA PD-1 trial required HLA–2 because of the peptide injections. I thought there might be a chance that there would be other trials that did not require peptide injections and would not require HLA-02. Currently the PD-1 is what I am looking toward if the Gleevec stops working.

In the sister trial of mine at Moffitt there is an arm that does not require the HLA type…the HLA for Moffitt trial was due to the antigens ( peptide injections)…that arm of the trial does not use the peptide injections.

Lynn, I was just referring to what the FDA has called successful treatments.  Among  the current clinical trials, I find the PD-1 trials to be the most interesting.  The one question I have yet to receive aresponse to is does one have to be HLA-02 to get into a trial to use it?  This is the trial I most often reccommend that people try to get into now days.

Lest you forget Anti PD-1 ( MDX 1106) which appears to have a higher rate of success of durable and partial  than those you mentioned with less side effects..albeit early in the game….

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are tooo many diferent oncoprotiens, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoima can use to attackn our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatmenat for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases and a paartial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

**********************

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are too many different oncoproteins, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoma can use to attack our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatment for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 (An immunotherapy) in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases (Some people with IL-2 currently have a complete response length of over 20 years with IL-2 being their only Stage IV treatment.) and a partial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

Ipi is another step forward in that it helps in some cases where IL-2 doesn't, it also doesn't work in some cases where IL-2 does. Some people find Ipi much easier to tolerate than IL-2. Some people have a rougher time with Ipi than IL-2. Being new the Ipi long term success rate isn't fully known yet. The short term response rate appears to be at a similar rate for Ipi, but may take longer to begin working.
Some combination of treatment using both in the correct timing appears to offer increased success for certain individuals. The problem is to identify which individuals will respond to which treatments and which combination of treatments. Both Ipi and IL-2 can be very tough treatments to endure.

The anti-BRAF targeted chemotherapy are a success in that they have low side effects and currently provide the highest rate of positive response against one class of melanoma (albeit general for a short term). Will a treatment be a success if it blocks another signaling path and extends survival for a subset of those that relapse to just the BRAF treatment? Yes, to the ones it helps. To the rest, only in that it will help provide knowledge of other things to look at.

So what is success?  What is a success is so very individual.

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are tooo many diferent oncoprotiens, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoima can use to attackn our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatmenat for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases and a paartial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

**********************

"Success" for a treatment is basically any step forward against any of the numerous oncoproteins and DNA mutations that appear in the different Melanoma cases.  There may well never be one complete treatment that will even affect all cases of melanoma.  There are too many different oncoproteins, DNA mutations, and signaling paths that melanoma can use to attack our systems.  Many of us do not look at any current trials as an end success, they are just steps forward in our fight for survival.  Currently the most successful treatment for stage IV has been the approval of IL-2 (An immunotherapy) in the late 1990's.  It has provided a complete remission in around 5-6% of general melanoma cases (Some people with IL-2 currently have a complete response length of over 20 years with IL-2 being their only Stage IV treatment.) and a partial response in another 13-15% of across the board melanoma cases at stage IV.

Ipi is another step forward in that it helps in some cases where IL-2 doesn't, it also doesn't work in some cases where IL-2 does. Some people find Ipi much easier to tolerate than IL-2. Some people have a rougher time with Ipi than IL-2. Being new the Ipi long term success rate isn't fully known yet. The short term response rate appears to be at a similar rate for Ipi, but may take longer to begin working.
Some combination of treatment using both in the correct timing appears to offer increased success for certain individuals. The problem is to identify which individuals will respond to which treatments and which combination of treatments. Both Ipi and IL-2 can be very tough treatments to endure.

The anti-BRAF targeted chemotherapy are a success in that they have low side effects and currently provide the highest rate of positive response against one class of melanoma (albeit general for a short term). Will a treatment be a success if it blocks another signaling path and extends survival for a subset of those that relapse to just the BRAF treatment? Yes, to the ones it helps. To the rest, only in that it will help provide knowledge of other things to look at.

So what is success?  What is a success is so very individual.