I am not sure if anyone else has posted this yet. Here are updated results from a small trial using the ImMucin vaccine that I saw online.
"All patients enrolled in this study were experiencing a gradual re-emergence of the disease after a period of remission that had been attained following an autologous stem cell transplantation. The results indicate a high safety profile for ImMucin. In addition, 100% of the patients demonstrated a strong immunological response to ImMucin. Furthermore, nine of the fifteen patients demonstrated a clinical response. Of these, five patients ended the study in a state of Complete Response and a further four ended the study with Stable Disease, which requires no further treatment."
"At the end of the trial, the Principal Investigators classified five of the patients as being in a state of Complete Response, four of the patients in a state of Stable Disease, requiring no further treatment and six of the patients with Progressive Disease. As mentioned above, of the six Progressive Disease patients, one had demonstrated a significant decrease in the progression rate for a period of time while undergoing treatment."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/vaxil-reports-positive-results-phase-124553348.html
Forums
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
Thank you for sharing the results of this encouraging study. That one third of the patients showed a CR is excellent. Were these trials in the U.S or Israel? And I recall that another company (in the US), based on research in Ken Anderson's lab, is working on a different vaccine. These developments, along with the mabs elotuzumab and daratumumab may represent yet another big change in the multiple myeloma treatment landscape within the next few years.
-
Dan D
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
Not to mention zero side effects other than some infusion related side effects. Also, I wonder if combining Revlimid or Velcade would increase the efficacy.
Eagerly awaiting the published study.
Eagerly awaiting the published study.
-
Ronald
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
Thanks, Mark, for sharing news about this research.
It's certainly interesting research, particularly because it represents a novel approach to treating myeloma. The greater the variety of approaches available to treat the disease, the greater the chance that some combination of different treatments might actually cure myeloma in a good share of patients.
That said, I think it's fair to mention a few caveats.
First, this report is a press release. It's not an abstract of a published paper, so it hasn't undergone any sort of peer review. Moreover, it seems odd to me that the press release came out right around the time of the recent myeloma conference in Japan, yet the company for some reason chose not to (or was unable to) present the results there. In fact, as best I can tell, no data about InMucin has ever appeared in a peer-reviewed journal or even a conference presentation or poster. Why?
Second, what was the duration of response? There are no quantitative data on that. The implied 33 percent complete response rate seems great, but only if the responses are durable.
Third, am I the only person who finds it strange that the company says in the press release that the drug had no side effects ("no side effects observed except for minor local irritations"), yet at the same time the company says that the optimal dose of the drug was the LOWER of the two doses tested? It's fairly uncommon that the lower dose of a drug is more effective. I know that has been seen with elotuzumab, so it's not entirely crazy, but it does strike me as a bit odd.
Again, I think it's great that this sort of research is being carried out. I'm just a little sceptical due to the reasons I just mentioned.
It's certainly interesting research, particularly because it represents a novel approach to treating myeloma. The greater the variety of approaches available to treat the disease, the greater the chance that some combination of different treatments might actually cure myeloma in a good share of patients.
That said, I think it's fair to mention a few caveats.
First, this report is a press release. It's not an abstract of a published paper, so it hasn't undergone any sort of peer review. Moreover, it seems odd to me that the press release came out right around the time of the recent myeloma conference in Japan, yet the company for some reason chose not to (or was unable to) present the results there. In fact, as best I can tell, no data about InMucin has ever appeared in a peer-reviewed journal or even a conference presentation or poster. Why?
Second, what was the duration of response? There are no quantitative data on that. The implied 33 percent complete response rate seems great, but only if the responses are durable.
Third, am I the only person who finds it strange that the company says in the press release that the drug had no side effects ("no side effects observed except for minor local irritations"), yet at the same time the company says that the optimal dose of the drug was the LOWER of the two doses tested? It's fairly uncommon that the lower dose of a drug is more effective. I know that has been seen with elotuzumab, so it's not entirely crazy, but it does strike me as a bit odd.
Again, I think it's great that this sort of research is being carried out. I'm just a little sceptical due to the reasons I just mentioned.
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
Anyway, TerryH, there has been a published journal regarding ImMucin in the past. In 2011, there was an NCBI article entitled "ImMucin: a novel therapeutic vaccine with promiscuous MHC binding for the treatment of MUC1-expressing tumors"
Here is a link to the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21570434
Here is a link to the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21570434
-
Ronald
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
I understand that there is healthy skepticism about ImMucin, but it might be of interest to the
myeloma community to know that an abstract on ImMucin will be submitted for the December 2013 ASH conference, however, I do not know if the paper has been accepted.
myeloma community to know that an abstract on ImMucin will be submitted for the December 2013 ASH conference, however, I do not know if the paper has been accepted.
-
Gratia Williams
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
Pursuant to my previous post on September 25 regarding ImMucin, here is a link for Dr. Carmon's abstract, which has been accepted for presentation at the 2013 ASH Conference in New Orleans:
https://myelomabeacon.org/resources/mtgs/ash2013/abs/1943/
https://myelomabeacon.org/resources/mtgs/ash2013/abs/1943/
-
Gratia Williams
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
There is an abstract updating Immucin at ASH 2014. Unfortunately the responses do not appear very durable for the majority of patients.
"Median time from first vaccination was 24 months (range 2.5-41.3), at which time 10/15 patients had a PD. Disease progressed during the vaccination period (up to week 26) in 4/15 patients and during the follow up period in 6/15 patients. Notably, 5/15 patients maintained their CR (n=3) or SD (n=2)."
"ImMucin demonstrated an encouraging short and long-term safety profile. Vaccination induced a remarkable anti-MM immune response. However, immunity was transient suggesting a need for boosting. Interestingly, durable disease stabilization was achieved in third of the patients, continuing despite loss of immune response in peripheral blood. Moreover, the encouraging responses to subsequent therapies employed at clinical progression, suggest this novel approach to be potentially valuable in the setting of maintenance and/or early biochemical progression. "
https://ash.confex.com/ash/2014/webprogram/Paper76906.html
"Median time from first vaccination was 24 months (range 2.5-41.3), at which time 10/15 patients had a PD. Disease progressed during the vaccination period (up to week 26) in 4/15 patients and during the follow up period in 6/15 patients. Notably, 5/15 patients maintained their CR (n=3) or SD (n=2)."
"ImMucin demonstrated an encouraging short and long-term safety profile. Vaccination induced a remarkable anti-MM immune response. However, immunity was transient suggesting a need for boosting. Interestingly, durable disease stabilization was achieved in third of the patients, continuing despite loss of immune response in peripheral blood. Moreover, the encouraging responses to subsequent therapies employed at clinical progression, suggest this novel approach to be potentially valuable in the setting of maintenance and/or early biochemical progression. "
https://ash.confex.com/ash/2014/webprogram/Paper76906.html
-
Mark11
Re: ImMucin Vaccine
A doctor friend of mine sent me an article about ImMucin, which lead me to do a mini search on it online and found this:
"Vaxil's Lead Product ImMucin Has Been Granted An Orphan Drug Designation By The FDA For The Treatment Of Multiple Myeloma," June 22, 2015)
So it seems that is has orphan drug status now. Does anyone know if this is being used clinically and at what point in a patient's treatment?
"Vaxil's Lead Product ImMucin Has Been Granted An Orphan Drug Designation By The FDA For The Treatment Of Multiple Myeloma," June 22, 2015)
So it seems that is has orphan drug status now. Does anyone know if this is being used clinically and at what point in a patient's treatment?
-
heatherlib - Name: heather
- Who do you know with myeloma?: self
- When were you/they diagnosed?: may 2014
- Age at diagnosis: 52
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Treatments & Side Effects