ImetelChat

lacour_98, Let me take a shot at trying to address the questions you raised on July 2nd. I will just tell you how I am thinking about the very issues you raised and freely admit to being very far from any kind of authority in this regard. Regarding your first issue, that being the relationship ...

lacour, just back tonight. Will try to post in the next few days.

MG, don't be so modest. The numbers are up because of your analysis. Word gets around.

STA, I have to respectfully disagree. The less the CEO and management have to say about the study at this point with interim analysis looming, the better. Let the data speak for itself. Anything else begs for litigation.

Lacour, back in civilization for a few hours for 4th celebrations so I have internet. You are not alone. You have the support of the board to help address the areas of confusion. When I return next week, we can walk together through those areas and see if that helps. bp

Seriously. Iffy internet. Back in about a week. Asking the regulars to keep the board active if anything of note comes up. Regards, bp

MG, STA and Ryan correct me if I am wrong but we have covered the specific studies that support the idea that patients enrolled in formal studies have an advantage over their counterparts. Moffett is certainly first class and these findings would apply to patients enrolled in most academic centers ...

Ryan, I can’t agree and I don’t see it that way. What I see is trying to use every available tool at our disposal to try to understand the value of Imetelstat. AI is one of those tools. The out put of the AI thinking machines are only as good as the quality of the inputs and the depth of the ...

Seedylemon, I can assure you that I am just finding my way with this along with the rest of us. It's definitely a work in progress. My favorite saying:
"Surround yourself with those who search for the truth and run like hell from those who have found it." I think we are all still searching. "Scio me ...

1. The prolongation of mOS in the post 2019 Moffett data is not related to anything directly related to Imetelstat.
2. Imetelstat (or BAT Impact data) is not included in the mOS numbers, except as they relate to the updated 2016 data. The mOS numbers post 2019 are in no way contaminated by Imet ...

the key sentence from the ASCO coverage of that abstract is:

“earlier switch to next-line JAKi or clinical trial enrollment”

A possible explanation for the prolonged post-2019 Kuykendall/Moffitt survival plateau. I tried to see of there was a consistant approach to patients leaving registry for another study that could explain the plateau and tick marks by looking at earlier Moffett studies. Here is Chat GPT. MG maybe if ...

Seedylemon, no, I am not saying that at all. I think the study BAT is as insulated at it can be. But it may be affected by treatments that preceded enrollment into Impact e.g. newer JAKi's, changes in pre randomization use of Rux, (or randomization into a study). I think Geron has acknowledged the ...

Given the Moffett is a major center for MF and clearly contributing to IMpact, the recent EHA presentation created some consternation re “new era” OS which we analyzed like crazy I just want to re pose the question: where are post 2019 Imetelstat patients? Here is Claude: (and yes we have discussed ...

The answer, after reviewing the official 2025 protocol, is that the entry criteria are more rigorous than the simple "≥3 months" summary implies. IMpactMF uses three specific tracks:

Track 1: ≥6 months of JAKi including ≥2 months at an optimal dose, with no meaningful spleen or symptom response ...

Dang, you asked a good question. Geron has always served up the thesis that JAKi’s were “just” symptom treaters but we have been dancing around the fact that they also seem to improve OS pointing toward disease modification as well. Most studies seem to suggest at least a “modest” effect in this ...

MrG thanks for verifying. The interim and final data have been pushed out a few time :

IMpact-MF Interim Analysis Timeline

Based on publicly disclosed Geron guidance, the projected timing of the IMpact-MF interim analysis has been moved several times:

Original Projection (2020–2021)
• Interim ...

MrG, more layers pealed. I was just re checking enrollment time and came in what might be a discrepancy. For 50% enrollment I think I mistakenly thought the 50% date was Feb of 2023 but I see (with confirmation) it was the following:

“ The 50% enrollment milestone was publicly announced on December ...

RC, let’s hope! Now we need a definitive connection that links fibrosis regression with unequivocal significant OS improvement which so far (there have been hints, even with Rux) has only been seen with bone marrow transplant.