Is RFS2000 more effective than the other
As of now, one can make only "historical"
comparisons, as there are no comparative clinical studies
There are two CPTs on the market: topotecan and
irinotecan. These have quite different properties.
Topotecan is aproved in ovarian cancer and small cell lung.
Topotecan is inactive in colorectal, PANCREAS and lung (non
Irinotecan is approved in colon,
has MINIMAL activity in PANCREAS, and has some
activity in lung.
Toxicity is mainly
myelosuppression for topotecan, while it is severe-life
threatening diarrhea with Irinotecan.
So, CPTs can be
very different. There are three others in clinical
studies, one by Glaxo, one by Idec. So far, they have very
limited efficacy. One other compound from Daiichi is just
finishing phase I so it is too early to know the level of
activity. Many other compounds are being investigated,
including those from BMY. I have not yet seen that BMY has
a compound selected for the clinic yes, so they may
have some promising early data, but still fairly far
away from the clinic.
RFS2000 has manageable,
mild toxicities. I hear it is rare that they are
seeing other, life threatening
RFS2000 is certainly more active than Topotecan in
PANCREAS. Topotecan had two trials, both completely
negative. RFS2000 is more active in PANCREAS than
irinotecan. The irinotecan trial was samll, and therefore
difficult to know how inactive it is.
quite reasonably better than Camptothecins with higher
activity in PANCREAS ca. Anyone with an understanding of
the disease and the lack of effective drugs near FDA
approval, should understand the potential of RFS2000.
Yes you are right that is too early to
tell how effective a treatment MGI-114 is going too
be. It is in PII trials with the NCI and the company,
at total of 8 PII trials and one Pediatric PI.
MGI-114 has shown responses in pancreatic and prostate
cancers (news items). As far as toxicity, yes there is
toxicity but it is controlled with other drugs.
I have been in this for 21/2 years saying the
same thing you are saying. You gave me encouragement
though. You want it to go down a little more. If I stay
in it, don't worry it will go down some more. Let me
know when you want it to go up and I will sell. It
works every time. I have lost a ton of money on this
one. I bought it at 18 one time. I will help you if I
As you know, I am quite new to this stock and
have at this point just dangled my toe in the water
(enough that I won't be sad that I missed out if it takes
a big jump). I don't see that there is any urgency
however and am hoping that the stock will continue to
slid down a little and perhaps make the warrants a
little more attractive. Otherwise, money permitting of
course, I too may add to my stock holdings over the next
Todays news was also encouraging,
although it was not clear to me what kind of timeline we
are looking at for the mentioned expansions in use to
take effect. Any thoughts?
For whatever its worth (no pun) I increased my
holdings. The past week of posts and the references that I
was given helped re-assure me of this company. May
the patients first and then the stockholders profit.
Check it out.
SAN RAMON, Calif., Feb. 17
/PRNewswire/ -- SuperGen Inc. (Nasdaq: SUPG, SUPGW) announced
today that renowned oncologists from leading medical
institutions across the United States and Europe gathered in
San Juan, Puerto Rico, on February 12th and 13th to
discuss clinical findings and future developmental
strategies related to SuperGen's proprietary drug Nipent(R)
"Clinical data from more than 25 centers presented at the
symposium clearly demonstrates the breadth of Nipent's
efficacy in a variety of hematologic malignancies,
including chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), cutaneous
T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) and low-grade non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma (NHL), as well as autoimmune diseases," said
conference co-chairman Michael Grever, M.D., Professor and
Director of the Division of Hematologic Malignancies,
Johns Hopkins Oncology Center.
"Nipent also may
play a significant role in hematopoetic cell
transplantation and graft vs. host disease," Grever added. "The
greatest potential in the future will involve Nipent in
combination with other agents."
"The conference was a
resounding scientific success with far-reaching implications
for SuperGen," said Dr. Joseph Rubinfeld, president,
chief executive officer and chairman of SuperGen. "The
new indications, including various leukemias, bone
marrow transplantation and graft vs. host disease,
cumulatively address markets with a potential of over $500
I have two critical questions which
I would value your input ...based upon your
knowledge do you feel that RFS2000 is very likely to be
more effective than Lilly's rather ineffectual drug?
Would you hazard to guess whether the efficacy is
likely to be sufficient so as to result in early
termination of phase 3 trials with rapid progression to fast
Thank you in advance for your imput.
I am optimistic, but to be sure we will all have
to wait for the Phase III randomized study comparing
RFS2000 to Gemcitabine. BTW Gemcitabine is not
ineffective. It has been shown to prolong survival.
the results of the RFS2000 Phase II study, presented
at ASCO, are confirmed in the Phase III then there
will be SIGNIFICANT superiority to Gemcitabine.
Agreed? And everybody, including patients, will be happy,
As for early termination of a Phase
III trial, IMO, I'm sure the experts there will
consider interim evaluation. They have a lot of experience
in clinical trials and I really have to defer
judgement to them. I have the utmost faith.
worried one way or the other though, SUPG is legitimate
and so is RFS2000, whether they are able to terminate
Phase III early or if they complete Phase III.