Kevin writes:
" sCR does not necessarily equate to better PFS or OS with respect to CR, while IR or MR does."
Yes!! That's why I am anxious to get the rest of the results. Unfortunately, I do not go to clinic again until after harvesting which is why I don't have results yet.
Liked that cycle!! I need something with a wider padded seat.
Why do you call it a 29er? Is that height or weight?Mark writes:
"A patient with VGPR could have LESS of a tumor burden than someone with a CR with negative immunofixation."
Precisely! Clinical trials show this often. A patient with a PR can have a longer PFS than a patient with CR. It was these type of confounding outcomes that resulted in stratifying multiple myeloma into risk groups based on cytogenetics as well as doing further tests as you mentioned like MR and IR. If I recall correctly it was the French group that looked at the former and the Arkansas group that looked at the latter to understand better the spectrum of outcomes which PR, VGPR, CR did not explain when it came to PFS.
And from Mark's second link:
"Achieving an IR translates into superior PFS and TTP compared with conventional CR or stringent CR. "
I also know for certain that they have done multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) (high volume of BM aspirate) which will give me the immunophenotypic response (IR) and I suspect they are doing PCR as well for MR. YAY!
Now, I just gotta pray for great IR results....either way I will just soldier on.
.
