‘Trojan horse’ drug treated British patients with six different forms of cancer

Re:‘Trojan horse’ drug treated British patients with six dif... by mft_ on Sunday February 10, 2019 @07:54AM (#19127594)

I'm hoping here that HN isn't going to be too taken in by a good PR strategy from the biotechs who are supporting the clinical trials here (Seattle Genetics and Genmab - see here: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03485209)

I mean, it's interesting data, and any step forwards in treating cancers (especially solid tumours) is great... but this isn't especially novel. Toxin-bearing antibodies like this have been worked on now for years; indeed, there are examples which have successfully made it all the way through large phase III trials and onto the market, which takes many years.

e.g. https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/2859 and https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/9537/smpc

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:‘Trojan horse’ drug treated British patients with six dif... by true_religion on Sunday February 10, 2019 @09:43AM (#19127929)

Not novel isn't the same thing as not news. As a tech site, we read lots of articles about new JavaScript libraries reimplementing techniques discovered in the 60s.

Can we not have one breathless article about an incremental improvement in cancer drugs without everyone in the know scoffing about how it is not revolutionary?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:‘Trojan horse’ drug treated British patients with six dif... by cat199 on Sunday February 10, 2019 @10:33AM (#19128129)

> Can we not have one breathless article about an incremental improvement in cancer drugs without everyone in the know scoffing about how it is not revolutionary?

this will probably happen about the same time that the headlines stop presenting incremental things as revolutionary..

[ Parent | on HN ]