Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Celgene Corporation Message Board

shortnstocke 22 posts  |  Last Activity: May 31, 2015 2:55 PM Member since: Feb 22, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • shortnstocke shortnstocke May 31, 2015 2:55 PM Flag

    "Considering that checkpoint inhibitors are still undergoing pivotal clinical evaluation in NSCLC, it is absurd to suggest that Cabo has to paired with one. "

    You may be a little out of touch with reality my friend. Also remeber ECOG study is in wtEGFR pts. Nivo will likly be approved for second line Adeno as quickly as they were approved in squamous. That was weeks not months as many will remeber.

  • shortnstocke shortnstocke May 31, 2015 2:12 PM Flag

    I agree Ernie, there was nothing reported that couldn't have been easily inferred from the abstracts, I assumed the OS for the doublet in the ECOG would come in at about 13 months just based on the HR of 0.50 alone. I was in the audience this morning and don't belive we can move this forward as a doublet with erlotinib, especially given Nivos data presented yesterday morning, Cabo has to be paired with a check point and my concern would be the potential for a checkpoint inhibition to augment the toxicity associated with Cabo. We will have to see but it's not going to be an overly tolerable combo in my opinion. Still the data was strong and we'll see a nice bounce but this imo is no homer run,

  • Reply to

    1512

    by erniewerner May 31, 2015 10:50 AM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 31, 2015 11:14 AM Flag

    Yes this is exactly what I was thinking. They need to look to combine with a Nivo in this setting. Single agent activity is not that higher than docetaxel but there is clear activity in the wtEGFR pt.

  • Reply to

    An opening? Perhaps?

    by enabeler May 29, 2015 5:41 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 29, 2015 10:35 PM Flag

    Just a point of clarification here, BMY did not drop today because of lack of efficacy in pts expressing less than 1% PDL1 on their tumors the stock dropped becusse the OS difference in 2nd line compared to docetaxel was less than expected. One thing I noted is docetaxel came in at over 9months. This is a bit higher than expected as about 8 months is more typical in this setting.

    The big question now is if Cabo can do better than Nivo in this setting. We will know this answer to this very important question on Sunday. Of course with all the cautions associated with cross trial comparisons etc.

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 28, 2015 4:31 PM Flag

    With all due respect this is not Exelexis trial it was conducted by ECOG. My guesses is the press release will follow the presentation on Sunday. I don't understand why you find it difficult to believe that they would not be reporting OS data after all they already disclosed in the abstract the HR was 0.50. They submitted the abstract months ago and were most likly still waiting for events so they could determine the medians of each arms. These facts above and the fact that ASCO selected this as an oral presentation doesn't take a genius to conclude what I have, OS will be reported.

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 28, 2015 2:04 PM Flag

    Yes you are correct HR reflects the entire curve and can be reported prior to the median being reached. Given that PFS events where reached back in Oct and given the fact that ASCO chose this as an oral presentation leads me to believe the median for OS has been reached and will be reported.

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 27, 2015 11:03 PM Flag

    Because technically some pts are still in follow-up. The trial was closed to accrual many months ago.

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 27, 2015 7:43 PM Flag

    Yes that's it but this trial has been done for some time now. We know the PFS was positive and we know the HR is 0.50 for OS we just don't know the absolute OS difference. This absolute OS topline data will be reported at ASCO

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 27, 2015 7:02 PM Flag

    Your thinking of a different trial.

  • Reply to

    ASCO vs. Abstracts

    by ulingt May 27, 2015 2:25 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 27, 2015 6:51 PM Flag

    ECOG E1512 OS results will be reported. Mark my word this is the most important presentation at ASCO for EXEL...,. Oral presentation on Sunday,

  • Reply to

    ASCO Abstracts

    by trufflesdrive May 21, 2015 4:07 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 21, 2015 8:31 PM Flag

    As Ive stated previously on another thread this is the study that is a sleeping giant for PPS rise. People need to appreciate this is in EGFRwt pts. That's about 70% of all NSCLC pts. The real question is how to design a pivotal trial. Docetaxel is all but soon to be irrelevant in second line as soon as nivo's approval extends to adeno, So the way I see it the trial needed is Cabo plus or minus Nivo.

  • shortnstocke by shortnstocke May 14, 2015 9:34 AM Flag

    Wall Street will not be able to ignore E1512 showing a significant OS over erlotinib in refractory NSCLC. If the absolute OS benefit is similar to docetaxel then this trial is a huge catalyst to pps in my opinion. It also increases the likelihood that Cabo will meet its primary endpoint in RCC.

  • Reply to

    E1512

    by shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:12 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 10:04 PM Flag

    I don't believe you could use erlotinib as a comparator in this space. Nivo et al are emerging 2nd and 3rd line options pushing docetaxel and erlotinib to later lines. it would be a real question what to use here but I think your going to have compare or combine with immunotherapy.

  • Reply to

    E1512

    by shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:12 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 7:16 PM Flag

    the real question is what to compare Cabo to in a registration trial. Clearly erlotininib isn't the best choice nor is docetaxel and given that nivo is rapidly moving into 2nd line I think they will need to do a phase I/II with Cabo plus minus Nivo and if good move this to phase iii. With the stated HR of 0.50 and historic OS for this population erlotinib probably in the range of 4mo I'd estimate Cabo arms over 8mo we will see at the oral presentation

  • Reply to

    Muted AH action

    by roger5147 May 13, 2015 6:06 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 6:28 PM Flag

    Any guesses what the Absolute OS will be for NSCLC? I'm guessing 10-12 mo for combo arm.

  • shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:48 PM Flag

    lBA are embargoed til then. Typical for late breaking abstracts

  • Reply to

    Great results for Cabo in lung cancer:

    by wildbiftek May 13, 2015 5:13 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:34 PM Flag

    Well with a HR of 0.50 I bet the OS is double at a minimum to erotinib. .

  • Reply to

    E1512

    by shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:12 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:16 PM Flag

    And did I mention this is in wtEGFR pts. Not exactly a small piece of the pie!!!

  • shortnstocke by shortnstocke May 13, 2015 5:12 PM Flag

    Interesting Cabo beat eroltinib along and in combination both showing significantly improved OS with HR about 0.50. So Cabo not only had a PFS advantage which has been known but now has a significant OS advantage over eroltinib. Abstract did not give absolute OS so I assume his will be reported at the oral presentation. IMO this data is a sleeping giant in terms of potential effect on pps. Time will tell I guess.

  • Reply to

    I just loaded

    by grothesbigtruck May 13, 2015 1:01 PM
    shortnstocke shortnstocke May 13, 2015 3:53 PM Flag

    Typical sell the news set up here. Easy money already made,

CELG
132.14-3.28(-2.42%)Jul 29 4:00 PMEDT