Thus, while it is technically in the antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) classes, no one should draw any inference about ADCs, more generally -- there are (by far!) just way too many moving parts, here.
And so, Merck's efforts (and big ticket spending) on ADCs will move forward, and will likely see other successes -- and even Gilead's sacituzumab govitecan (the chemical name for Trodelvy®) is doing well, in certain breast cancers, and is running other trials in head and neck cancers.
Here's a fine analysis -- as ever -- from FiercePharma, and a bit of it:
. . .The company’s phase 3 EVOKE-1 trial showed that Trodelvy didn't significantly extend the lives of patients with previously treated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) when pitted against the chemotherapy docetaxel. With that, the trial failed to meet its primary endpoint, Gilead said Monday.
Despite the fail, the “totality of our data” gives the company “continued confidence” in Trodelvy’s potential in the population, chief medical officer Merdad Parsey, M.D., Ph.D. said in the company’s press release. . . .
. . .[T]he NSCLC miss could spell trouble for Trodelvy. As it stands, the ADC’s breast cancer market share is limited to previously treated HR-positive, HER2-negative as well as triple-negative breast cancer. But Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca’s rival HER2-directed ADC Enhertu and its groundbreaking approval in new breast cancer category HER2-low puts pressure on Gilead’s offering. . . .
Onward, smiling -- but Merck's Daiichi Sankyo ADC deal looks. . . pretty smart here (again!). Grin.
नमस्ते
4 comments:
meanwhile: https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/22/politics/supreme-court-texas-razor-wire/index.html. but how is it really 5-4? C'mon.
Thanks so much!
I'd say. . . "winning ugly is STILL. . . winning!"
New one in a minute.
It means Chief Justice Roberts voted that razor wires by Texas violate our treaties.
Not sure who might have been the fifth vote, but the Chief is certainly among the five.
And while some people still believe each Justice decides these matters utterly. . . independently (in some ivory tower -- that is not remotely the reality. . . these folks more than occasionally eat lunch together; go to the theater or opera together and function like any other social group), I'm gonna' bet the once Gorsuch saw Roberts was moving to dissolve the injunction (previously in favor of Texas). . . he likely didn't want to be on the wrong side of history.
So. . . the holdouts were most likely Thomas (of course!), Alito Kavanaugh and Barrett.
Namaste!
from the link in the article:
Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would deny the application to vacate injunction
Wild. So. Barrett decided to join the Chief?!
Cool.
But I am surprised. I've tended to think of her as very-doctrinaire. . . cool.
Post a Comment