Required Reading

[biopearl123]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41375-022-01637-7

[mistergern]

BP - Thx for posting our Required Reading. My layman's understanding is that MMB (similar to RUX in that both are JAK Inhibitors) was more effective in TI (Transfusion Independence) than RUX and that anemia is a significant indicator of disease progression for MF. This study seemed to indicate that TI was of critical importance, however, the OS did not seem significant between MMB & RUX. Would I be wrong in concluding that Imetelstat's impact on extending TI (especially evidenced in the MDS trial) would have an even greater impact than MMB and that the significant increase in OS for Imetelstat would make it more effective than either MMB or RUX? Thx for any feedback and do you mind if I post this article on Yahoo?

[biopearl123]

Hi mistergeron, permission is not mine to give. The importance to TI is of critical importance (related to decreased transfusion burden and less iron overload? Or other factors.). OS remains the holy grail, (well cure remains the real holy grail). Perhaps Imetelstat will also be tested with MMB or perhaps it will come down to less iron overload, less leukemia transformation. One thing for sure, the current PIII studies are designed to try to get to these issues. Thanks for posting. And Frank would you mind trying to repost so we can be sure there is actually a problem in the system? Other posters are not having similar problems (yet). Thanks