poster observationsThe trajectory of many patients is kind of what I expected. For NMIBC it is not an easy treatment.
For the first time we get:
- a breakdown of ages of patients and types of subtypes of cancer
- how many HCG treatments they got (and how difficult it would have been to cure them)
- the start to finish journey of 450day patients and all the ones from 90 to 360.
The patient trajectories.
- It is hard from the data to separate the optimized to non-optimized but we know from previous releases that of the 12 non-optimized, 3 were CR and 2 were IR. 7 were NR. On the list of patients many of the non-optimized that stop at 90 days are from that group.
- probabilities:
a) if a patient became CR at 90 days (53% chance or greater) then they had a 94% chance of staying CR to the next timepoint. (18 CRs become 17 CR's if you keep each patient on a track of their own).
b) If a patient was CR at 9 and 180 there are 17. 13 kepts the CR at 270. 76%.
c) If a patient has stayed CR till 270 days then there are 12 for which we have CR data. None of the 12 shifted to NR. 2 shifted to IR. 10 of 12 kept the CR.
d) ever patient who ever made it where they were continously CR from 90 to 360 stayed that way at 450 so an unbroken stretch from 90 to 360 is enough to consider them cured. So going forward I consider all 360 CR's to be a 450 day CR.
The rest of the patients are a hodgepodge.
- some were NR at 90 and switched to CR at some point but none have held on to that CR. So if they don't respond to one treatment by 90 days they are on a different path.
- the second treatment at 180 days took 2 IRs and made them CR's. Not a radical pattern. Suggests that the maintenance treatment is good to keep an unbroken stretch but doesn't seem to cure anyone who didn't respond at 90.
Because all 360 day CR's hold on to it and we know the IR and NRs for 360 we can already predict what the next 450 day data will show:
Eog, prove me wrong but I don't see how I could be wrong except on the IR.
450 day with next reporting will be:
CR 10 (8 plus 2 new arrivals)
IR 4 (3 + 1 new arrival) - could be wrong and coule be 5.
TR: 14 or 15
NR 23 (18 + 5 new arrivals) - could be wrong and could be 22.
Total: 29 + 8 new arrivals
Percent-wise the new 450 data will be
CR: 27%
IR: 11-13%
TR: 38-40%
It all comes down to looking at the 360 ones that are about to move into the 450 day grouping.
I will also say that there is a bunch of NRs, IR and messy ones where they don't have a perfect CR streak in the pipeline from 180 and 270 that are not going to radically improve the the %CR anytime quickly. That is why the full study size has to be big in the long run. I still think that this data should totally get BTD.
Finally, there are 5 CR's at 90 days that will be reported at 180 day soon. Probability is that 4 of the 5 keep the CR. They will be a nice cohort to move along and ripple up the numbers with time.
All IMO. Please correct me if you see an error.