Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

IMV Inc IMVIF

IMV Inc. is a Canada-based company. The Company has no business operations.


GREY:IMVIF - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by alphaseeking001on Jan 31, 2020 1:36pm
94 Views
Post# 30626510

RE:RE:Interesting. Show’s that IMV’s tech has some advantages

RE:RE:Interesting. Show’s that IMV’s tech has some advantagesYes, I should have been more clear that the main advantages of DPX seem to be in it's relative safety, not necessarily in any potential difference in certain tumours which don't seem to respond as well to T-cell therapies.  I just thought the other part was interesting.  I do think DPX has the potential to be a nice alternative, or even complementary therapy before or after CAR-T for DLBCL patients.

Cheers.

qwerty22 wrote:

Don't know this shows we have an advantage. What I think it show is that a subset of blood cancers carry a mechanism that allows them to evade activated T-cell, it's a new mechanism they've discovered. It could be all T-cells, Car-t activated, dpx activated and 'naturally' activated, unless the dpx activated T-cells are in some way different. In fact any immunoncology approach that depends on T-cells could be impacted by this mechanism potentially.

What it says to me is it re-inforces the idea there is no magic bullets in cancer treatment, there are so many different mechanisms that a cancer cell can employ to evade drugs and the immune system that likely all treatments are going to have these sorts of resistant populations.

We already know that dpx does not work with everybody. It might be that some of those that it doesn't work in carry this resistance mechanism to T-cells. It might be possible to screen the DLBC patients for this and see if this doesn't account for some of those that fail treatment, maybe this is one of the mechanisms that underlie the 'fast progressors' population they've already identified. In terms of understanding where the drug can be most successful they have to describe the times when it fails. They'd have to do the work to know the answer.


Maybe dpx activated T-cells do avoid this resistance mechanism that would be great but if it shared this limitation with CAR-T I don't think that would be such a bad thing as well. They seem now to be pitching this tech as in vivo CAR-T, a much simpler, much safer, much cheaper version of CART. If it shared this resistance mechanism with CART then in an odd way that might validate that idea. Again there are no magic bullets in cancer, dpx can have various populations where it's not effective just like all other treatments, obviously you don't want too many but describing where it does fail helps to better understand the drugs positive potential. Maybe they go back and screen the DLBC patients they treated to see which ones had this resistance mechanism, whatever the answer I'm sure Fred could find something positive to say about it. 

 

alphaseeking001 wrote:

 

Resistance to CAR-T? It's your cancer, not your immune system — study
 
Safety concerns and manufacturing shortcomings aside, existing CAR-T therapies — Novartis’ Kymriah and Gilead’s Yescarta — simply don’t work in 10% to 20% of patients with B cell malignancies. What factors underpin this resistance to CAR-T therapy? The main culprit could be the cancer cells themselves, according to a team of researchers at Penn.
 
CAR-T therapies are engineered to work in this way: Cells are extracted from the patient and then manipulated in a lab where chimeric antigen receptors are added to direct the patient’s own T cells to snuff out specific cancer cells once re-infused back into the patient. But in a fraction of patients, the armed immune attack does not obliterate the disease.
 
“Most theories have centered around a defect in the T cells, but what we’ve shown here is that the problem originates in an important death signaling pathway in the cancer cell itself, which prevents the T cell from doing its job,” said the study’s co-senior author Marco Ruella, an assistant professor of Hematology-Oncology in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, in a statement.
 
advertisement
 
advertisement
The findings were published on Thursday in Cancer Discovery, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.
 
By targeting CD19, a marker present on almost all B cells, CAR-T therapies have shown remarkable potency and durability in a number of blood cancers, including acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).
 
In the Penn study, researchers performed a genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9-based screen of an ALL cell line to isolate pathways associated with resistance. Cells were edited for loss of function of single genes and combined with CAR-T cells for 24 hours to identify the pathway driving the primary resistance. The in vitro data showed that in the ALL cells that resisted the CAR-T attack, there was a shortage of genes involved in activating the cell death pathway and a spike in genes necessary for evading the cell death pathway.
 
The findings were amplified in animal models. The researchers then tried to make sense of the results by using pediatric patient samples from previous CAR-T trials by analyzing the genes in leukemia cells and in T cells — pre- and post-infusion — from responders and non-responders. The data were stark: previously identified signaling pathways in cancer cells were directly associated with responses to CAR therapy, suggesting that death receptor signaling is a key regulator of primary resistance to CAR T cell therapy in ALL, the authors concluded.
 
“This mechanism appears to rely on two phases: an initial resistance to death receptor-driven killing, followed by an antigen-driven, progressive impairment in CAR-T cell function. Together this leads to CAR T cell failure that perpetuates disease progression,” they wrote.
 
Despite their promise, the adoption of CAR-T therapies — Novartis’ Kymriah and Gilead’s Yescarta — have underwhelmed initial expectations.
 
The uptake of Kymriah was plagued by manufacturing problems, and despite Novartis’ attempt to expand its capacity, sales continue to disappoint commercially, giving Yescarta an edge in the market. Still, big side effects — notably life-threatening episodes of cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity — as well as the therapies’ expensive price tags have also limited their use. Other drug developers have taken note of these constraints and are developing off-the-shelf CAR-T therapies, designed to smoothen manufacturing complexities by using healthy donor cells.
 
But the team at Penn cautioned that the practice may not necessarily help the subset of patients whose cancer cells carry this proportion of unfavorable genes.
 
“A possible implication of our observations is that the use of heathy donor (i.e. allogeneic donor or “universal” donor) T cells as a substrate for CAR T cell manufacturing may face the same barriers as autologous products,” the authors wrote. “Understanding how intrinsic and acquired T cell dysfunction cooperate to cause therapeutic failure will be critical to the design of the next generation of cellular therapies.”
 
AUTHOR
 
Natalie Grover
REPORTER
natalie@endpointsnews.com
@NatalieGrover
Natalie Grover on LinkedIn




Bullboard Posts