Guest guest Posted December 12, 2008 Report Posted December 12, 2008 In further to earlier posts, Abstract No. 781 from the ASH 50th Annual Meeting & Exposition titled " Genomic Aberrations, VH Mutation Status and Outcome after Fludarabine and Cyclophosphamide (FC) or FC Plus Rituximab (FCR) in the CLL8 Trial " does hone in somewhat on genomic aberrations & mutational status. It can be accessed at (link within quotes): " http://ash.confex.com/ash/2008/webprogram/Paper7815.html " Therein is a table that matrix odds and hazard ratios for typical response & survival categories against mutational status and the more common genomic aberrations. There is also the statement: " VH was unmutated in 63.4% and V3-21 was rearranged in 4.9% " . However, this leads me to question whether or not they discerned other IgVH families, such as, VH-4, VH-6, et cetera through VH-7; which, in turn, goes back to & brings into consideration the works of Dr. Hamblin - - published in 1999, as well as that of others around that time (if memory serves, I believe the seed was Jeanne Orchard). Further, what about " mutation " outside the germinal center. As to the " new standard " I just take it that, while in the U.S. Rituxan as marketed by Genentech - Biogen Idec as part of the so called " gold standard " in combination with FC is old hat, Roche who sponsored the clinical trials is just getting the most " bang for their mark " in marketing MabThera in Europe via its largest economy. Nevertheless, I hope to integrate their stats within the table I've been working on. On a lighter note, we can repeat it all again with a human antibody. As Yogi would say it'll be de je vue all over again. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.