| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Frank
Family Elder
![]()
Joined: Jan 04, 2007
Posts: 295
Location: Germany
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:27 am Post subject: AHSCT follwoup over 6 years |
 |
|
26 Patients were followed over diffent periods of time (3-72month).
In the whole group only one new lesion has been seen on MRI.
In contrast 16 patients worsend (9 by >1 EDSS), 4 improved (1 by >1 EDSS).
Quite disappointing in my eyes...
--Frank
http://www.abstracts2view.com/aan2008chicago/view.php?nu=AAN08L_P02.162
_________________
Current regime: Tysabri restarted 05/2008 after LDN, ABX Wheldon Regime for 1 year, interested in T-Cell vaccination, helminth immunomodulation |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gwa
Family Elder
Joined: Dec 02, 2005
Posts: 847
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is not surprising, Frank. The median
EDSS was 7 and there was only 1 RRMS person in the study.
All of the rest were PPMS or SPMS, both types which respond to nothing anyway, so it would have been more surprising if the results were better.
gwa |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shayk
Family Elder
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 575
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject: HDIT/ACST Trial Results |
|
|
Frank
Thanks for posting this. I don’t think the results look so good either and GWA I agree with you that nothing so far has proven effective for SPMS or PPMS.
I don’t know if this article will help in the interpretation of the results, but I saw it during the free access to the MS Journal (available through April) and thought it may help a little. The purpose of the study was to establish a baseline to help assess the risks/benefits of HDIT/ASCT in a clinical trial.
Survival and time to an advanced disease state or progression, of untreated patients with moderately severe multiple sclerosis in a multicenter observational database: relevance for design of a clinical trial for high dose immunosuppressive therapy with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Estimated probability of disease progression (increase in EDSS of 1 or more sustained for 180 days) in this sample (EDSS scores of 3.0-5.5 at baseline) was:
| Quote: | · 5% after one year
· 14% after two years
· 22% after three years
· 38% after five years
· 57% after 10 years, and
· More than 80% after 20 years of observation |
So, my understanding of this (as one example) is that after 5 years, more than 60% of untreated people with a baseline EDSS score of 3.0-5.5 would not be expected to experience an increase of 1 or more on the EDSS. Or conversely, fewer than 40% of people would be expected to experience an increase of more than 1 on their EDSS over the course of 5 years or more.
Since more than 50% of the HDIT/ACST trial patients worsened on their EDSS over the course of 5+ years–a question would seem to be not only were the results disappointing, but was HDIT/ACST possibly detrimental? Although the participants in these studies aren’t exactly comparable I think one has to at least ask the question.
At best, roughly comparing these two different studies, HDIT/ACST doesn’t seem to be any better than “placebo“, at least as far as I understand it.
Other comments or observations anyone?
Sharon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rainer
Family Elder
Joined: Jan 18, 2008
Posts: 219
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: HDIT/ACST Trial Results |
|
|
| Quote: |
At best, roughly comparing these two different studies, HDIT/ACST doesn’t seem to be any better than “placebo“, at least as far as I understand it.
Other comments or observations anyone?
Sharon |
Would need to know what the classification of MS the patients int the 2nd study had to compare the two.
That first study is disappointing but fwiw the procedures involved in ACST are not always consistent from one study to the next. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gwa
Family Elder
Joined: Dec 02, 2005
Posts: 847
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am starting to wonder if research is directed toward RRMS so much because the people with SPMS OR PPMS have not responded to anything and it may be more difficult to get funding for research for these types of patients.
The fact that the cause is still unknown is also a big roadblock to finding suitable therapies.
gwa |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shayk
Family Elder
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 575
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rainer
| Quote: | | Would need to know what the classification of MS the patients int the 2nd study had to compare the two |
Why?
GWA
I suspect like you that it's difficult to get funding for clinical trials for progressive phases of MS, precisely because they don't know the cause or the pathology and so far they seem to be striking out.
Sharon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rainer
Family Elder
Joined: Jan 18, 2008
Posts: 219
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shayk wrote: | Rainer
| Quote: | | Would need to know what the classification of MS the patients int the 2nd study had to compare the two |
Why?
|
Because some MS patients with RRMS who have rapidly advanced in disability respond remarkably well to ACST.
And if the second study was done on a level more proportional to the actual MS population, it's representation of MS types would be much different then the first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shayk
Family Elder
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 575
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Rainer
I'm not really all that familiar with the ASCT trials. It's good to know that some people who've advanced rapidly in disability did so well with ASCT. I do think that resolution of inflammation can bring dramatic improvements, I'm less certain that it stops disease progression, which is what I tend to be most concerned about.
You're definitely right, the representation of MS "types" was probably different between the two studies. I've just never quite figured out what relevance or significance these "types" have other than to serve as "descriptors" of how the disease is experienced.
Sharon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rainer
Family Elder
Joined: Jan 18, 2008
Posts: 219
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shayk wrote: | I do think that resolution of inflammation can bring dramatic improvements, I'm less certain that it stops disease progression, which is what I tend to be most concerned about.
|
I think you are right about the inflammation being key to the dramatic improvements. The one thing I'd say about progression is that other MS drugs thought to treat inflammation *do* slow disability (albeit not very well.) Untying the good inflammation/bad inflammation/underlying cause knot is well beyond me though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiff
Newbie
Joined: Dec 01, 2004
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:02 pm Post subject: PPMS results |
|
|
These results are not what someone with PPMs wants to hear. I was DX'd ten years ago and have heard the same story over and overagain. Isn't it about time to take a different approach? From what I can see it's the same thing over and over with different results expected each time. How can anyone ever solve the problem when the cause is unknown?
Find the cause/find the cure.
spiff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank
Family Elder
![]()
Joined: Jan 04, 2007
Posts: 295
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thats a very interesting study, thanks Sharon!
I wouldnt have thought that "only" 43% tend to get worse >=1 EDSS after 10 years.
--Frank
_________________
Current regime: Tysabri restarted 05/2008 after LDN, ABX Wheldon Regime for 1 year, interested in T-Cell vaccination, helminth immunomodulation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marcstck
Family Member
Joined: Jan 04, 2006
Posts: 81
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:07 pm Post subject: Re: PPMS results |
|
|
| spiff wrote: | These results are not what someone with PPMs wants to hear. I was DX'd ten years ago and have heard the same story over and overagain. Isn't it about time to take a different approach? From what I can see it's the same thing over and over with different results expected each time. How can anyone ever solve the problem when the cause is unknown?
Find the cause/find the cure.
spiff |
Results such as those discussed here, and the recent failing of Rituxan in its PPMS trials, seem to point very distinctly to the fact that PPMS is not an immune modulated disease. Immuno ablation and immunosuppression have proven to have very little effect on PPMS patients, yet these methods and others of their ilk are continuously tried time and time again, all to unceasingly negative results. It's about time medical science took its head out of the sand and realized that the progressive form of MSis not going to be addressed by drugs or therapies that manipulate the immune system.
There has to be some other mechanism at work that is causing the cell death that we see in PPMS. SPMS may or may not be yet another beast. Clearly though, this dead horse has been beaten beyond recognition... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiff
Newbie
Joined: Dec 01, 2004
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: Thank you |
|
|
Thank you for your elegant reply.
I am too frustrated to be tactful...researchers should concentrate on how to fix the damn problem and move on to ther things to research. They can get rich there!!!!!!!!!!!!!
spiff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lyon
Family Elder
Joined: May 04, 2006
Posts: 3372
Location: Mid-Michigan
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject: Re: PPMS results |
|
|
| spiff wrote: | | These results are not what someone with PPMs wants to hear. I was DX'd ten years ago and have heard the same story over and overagain. Isn't it about time to take a different approach? From what I can see it's the same thing over and over with different results expected each time. How can anyone ever solve the problem when the cause is unknown? |
Good point spiff.
Marc entered into the commonly accepted take on the situation. As might be expected, I've got a different take which I think is more likely and logical.
Thinking that when MS becomes "progressive" (taking both PPMS and SPMS into consideration) it becomes something "different" than RRMS is exactly the same incorrect concept as, when putting out a blazing fire, thinking that the difficult to eliminate last few embers are "different" than flames of the original blaze.
The situation seems to have shown that MS is primarily driven by inappropriate T cell response which is causing the inflammation which is causing the damage of MS.
With that in mind, I think it's valid to say that MS is a continuously low grade inflammatory disease from start to finish and that if there is anything "different" about any phase of MS, it's the RRMS phase in which "something" causes the inflammation to greatly cycle in intensity until......as close as I can tell, it's done as much damage as possible to the areas it can affect and drops back to the baseline continual, wide spread, low grade inflammation phase (what we call SPMS/PPMS).
How would any of that be possible? If our treatments were acceptable at dampening large amounts of inflammation but not effective at eliminating the "embers" (which is the case) and in which our imaging capabilities are acceptable at seeing intense areas of inflammation but not effective at discerning wide spread, low grade inflammation (which is the case).
Additionally, plasticity plays a huge part in MS....and in keeping us from understanding what we think we're seeing. Considering that a virgin brain, early in MS, has an abundance of plasticity resources available, exacerbations of lesion forming intensity can happen without a person with MS being aware......silent lesions are actually lesions in which plasticity was able to mask the damage...there are no unused or unimportant parts of the brain in which silent lesions, as typically considered, could happen without being noticed.
Hopefully that opens for consideration that there are other, perhaps more logical ways, of viewing the MS picture than the "medically accepted" ways. I think enough time has passed that investigating different outlooks is warranted and in fact is necessary if MS is going to be understood in our lifetimes.
Bob
_________________
Wife diagnosed with MS in Feb. 2006 and is a participant in the Tovaxin IIb clinical trial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
