New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Forum rules
- Comments must be civil and on topic
- Back up claims with evidence/reasoning/sources (posting links is allowed)
- No commercials/harassment/spam
Post Reply
biopearl123
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm

New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Post by biopearl123 » Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:52 am

Here's the reference: No mention of Imetelstat in article or references. Mainly describes possible increased risk of lymphoma (B-cell) and JAK inhibition.

http://www.bloodjournal.org/content/132 ... ecked=true

Dogonenuts
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 6:13 pm

Re: New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Post by Dogonenuts » Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:51 pm

BP, this is a pretty strong arguement for an alternative Tx for MF, MDS and would open the door for first line Tx once approved in the r/r setting. The authors’ demanding further investigation of Jak inhibitors being related to a 16 fold increase in likelihood of developing an aggressive lymphoma is an aggressive statement.

Thx for the link.

Nuts

Dogonenuts
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 6:13 pm

Re: New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Post by Dogonenuts » Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:52 pm

BP, this is a pretty strong arguement for an alternative Tx for MF, MDS and would open the door for first line Tx once approved in the r/r setting. The authors’ demanding further investigation of Jak inhibitors being related to a 16 fold increase in likelihood of developing an aggressive lymphoma is an aggressive statement.

Thx for the link.

Nuts

biopearl123
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm

Re: New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Post by biopearl123 » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:53 am

Nuts, agreed, you will get no argument from me. JAK inhibitors reduce spleen size but do not appear to prolong life once one gets to the R/R stage, in fact by definition, therapy with JAK inhibitors does not help this group. So as with many therapies, symptom improvement comes with a price, including an increased risk of some malignancies. So far I have not seen much about JAK inhibitors affecting the malignant clone in a selective fashion, not improving MOS the way Imetelstat appears to, and not being associated with remissions. Its not hard to envision Imetelstat finding its way to front line, the problem of "clonal drift" remains but we have only started to see where combination therapy will go. (But first the FDA needs to approve for R/R). bp

Dogonenuts
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 6:13 pm

Re: New article in Blood re Jak inhibitors and lymphoid malignancy

Post by Dogonenuts » Sun Aug 19, 2018 3:10 am

When I see articles like this and then consider the revenues the likes of Incyte and Celgene are bringing in for tx that is of very limited value, I have to believe someone was paid off at the FDA for the clinical hold on imet that almost ruined the company and greatly devalued GERN’s market cap. I wish someone in our circle had the means or connections to look deeply into that. The LFT elevations that were cited were very small considering the range of AE’s seen in the oncology drug world. I sincerely hope JNJ can get a makeup call by the FDA with a couple of AA’s to start with.

Nuts

Post Reply