Severe ME Day of Understanding and Remembrance: Aug. 8, 2017
Determined to paper the Internet with articles about ME, Jody Smith brings some additional focus to Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Day of Understanding and Remembrance on Aug. 8, 2017 ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

If the Norway Rituximab trials are a success - Will it be available worldwide?

Discussion in 'Rituximab: News and Research' started by Apple, May 24, 2017.

  1. MEMum

    MEMum Senior Member

    Messages:
    413
    Likes:
    2,130
    Yes we are lucky.
    Hopefully the insurers/health providers will see that it would be financially as well as humanly preferable to treat people once there is something effective, even if it is only for a subset.
     
    Mel9 likes this.
  2. maybe some day

    maybe some day Senior Member

    Messages:
    214
    Likes:
    976
    San Francisco bay area
    I really hope so. We've come along way with answers than ever before
     
    MEMum likes this.
  3. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards "Gibberish"

    Messages:
    5,241
    Likes:
    31,952
    They may be responding to the placebo as much as the drug. If that is the case we will have a lot to think about - and Dr Knoop will have to stop claiming that ME does not respond to placebos.

    Nobody knows yet whether this is a real lead or a false scent and nobody is clearer about that than the Norwegians themselves.
     
  4. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    They are clear about it due to research obligation
    It would be a massive placebo response if so & would contradict (to some extent) Phase II, hence I am working on balance of probabailities which is that it is highly unlikely to be placebo effect. Hence why I said that October unveiling will be a formality.
     
    MEMum likes this.
  5. Aurator

    Aurator Senior Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes:
    3,077
    Perhaps I'm less fortunate than you in having no crystal ball, but I'm prepared for anything and would be surprised by nothing.
     
  6. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    It would be a massive surprise (as to be improbable) if the statistically significant response was in the placebo group
     
    MEMum likes this.
  7. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Hibernating

    Messages:
    4,615
    Likes:
    12,451
    South Australia
    Perhaps "hype" was the wrong word. Rumor is a better word.

    The fact is they haven't analysed the data. It's all speculation at the moment.
     
    TrixieStix and AndyPR like this.
  8. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    Does anyone know if Fluge/Mella are applying for registeration of Rituximab with the European Medicines Agency?
    Is it standard procedure to apply? Norway is not a member of the EU, but the EEA
    http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/about_us/general/general_content_000109.jsp
    Can @Jonathan Edwards give some insights?
     
  9. Murph

    Murph :)

    Messages:
    520
    Likes:
    2,669
    I'm overall an optimist, but I also like to follow good scientific practice in making predictions. So we should find a good background probability for establishing whether the Rituximab Phase III trial will report a success.

    My reading suggests that in some fields, around 40 to 60 per cent of Phase III trials fail. (1, 2, 3)

    Screen Shot 2017-06-08 at 3.46.20 PM.png

    Source: Clinical Development Success Rates 2006-2015

    Rituximab is a Phase III trial so if we want to argue it is a higher chance of success than its peers, we need good reasons.

    We can perhaps adjust our background probability for research coming from a stable European country, for researchers with no financial stake, and also for a disease with such strong Phase II trials. (Edit: some other good reasons to be more confident have been suggested below.) But there is no way the Ritux Phase III trial result unveiling is just a formality.

    There remains a serious chance (perhaps 25 per cent?) that it comes back unable to reject the null hypothesis. I think it's important to keep this in mind so the patient community doesn't fall into despair if it happens - we have many irons in the fire at the moment and for once, not everything is riding on one research team or one study.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2017
    MEMum, Hutan, ryan31337 and 6 others like this.
  10. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    Because Dr Fluge said they were getting a significant response.
    I would be interested to know what percentage of Phase III trials got a significant placebo response, when the Phase II trial of said drug had a response rate north of 65%
    I would bet it's never happened in the last 20 years & if it has I would bet it is a 'false equivalence'

    FYI, false equivalence is my favourite logical fallacy of late!
     
    MEMum likes this.
  11. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,863
    I think he said they were getting reports of responders but that he didn't know if they were placebo or not.
     
  12. Murph

    Murph :)

    Messages:
    520
    Likes:
    2,669
    That Fluge quote is definitely another factor to build in. It should increase our confidence. Perhaps Fluge is poring over the data whenever it is collected, trying to guess who is treatment and who is placebo and doing statistical transformations that try to figure out the odds the patterns he sees are explained by chance! This is certainly plausible!

    But it's also possible he's focussing on his oncology patients and has just heard from the trial workers that some patients are going well. Given we don't know how closely they've looked at the data yet - and that it is all still blinded - the background probability is still pretty salient.
     
    AndyPR likes this.
  13. Marc_NL

    Marc_NL Senior Member

    Messages:
    471
    Likes:
    1,378
    I agree that approval is definitely not a formality but I think the percentages for drugs that are already approved for other indications (like Rituximab) are a bit more favorable because safety issues are better known.
     
  14. ghosalb

    ghosalb Senior Member

    Messages:
    136
    Likes:
    258
    upstate NY
    If one looks at the phase 2 results, responders are of younger age and of low to moderate level sickness.....whereas non responder are of all ages and all level of sickness.....granted that sample size is small, but may be there is more than placebo effect.
     
    MEMum likes this.
  15. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
  16. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/871787?src=soc_tw_share#vp_3

    Key takeaway:
    I would bet there are hardly any drugs that take 6 months to have an effect - more reason that I'll bet there has been no Phase III drug trial in the last 20 years anywhere in the world that had a placebo effect, when the actual drug effect was so relatively high in Phase II
     
    Jo Best and Forbin like this.
  17. Forbin

    Forbin Senior Member

    Messages:
    959
    Likes:
    4,026
    It would seem like a complex placebo effect to manifest. Based on the earlier studies, the duration of the effect seems to be linked to how quickly it appears. In other words, someone might have a placebo effect that was inconsistent with the expected pattern of the b-cell depletion effect. So, it would not just be whether someone shows an effect. It would be whether they show the expected effect.
     
  18. Jesse2233

    Jesse2233 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,712
    Likes:
    4,296
    Southern California
    @Forbin but what about those who (for various biological reasons) clear the autoantibodies faster? they might see a response in 2 months that is not a placebo
     
    MEMum likes this.
  19. Forbin

    Forbin Senior Member

    Messages:
    959
    Likes:
    4,026
    From what I understand, the sooner the effect has occurred the longer it has lasted. This is thought to be because the sooner it occurs the more time there is before the b-cells repopulate. So, you could have an early response, but it would be less consistent with the hypothesis if that response were short. Conversely, a delayed response would be more consistent with the hypothesis if it were shorter in duration.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2017
    pibee, MEMum and Jesse2233 like this.
  20. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Messages:
    311
    Likes:
    512
    Australia
    Additionally, the size of the effect is important.
    Is there a correlation between reported symptom reduction & the treatment group?
    That is, is the symptom reduction greater in the drug group than the placebo group?
    But, most importantly to me, on what measures of symptoms?
    OBJECTIVE or SUBJECTIVE measures?

    I think the lesson to be learned from psychological studies (& scientific research in general), is to pay far less credence to subjective measures
     
    pibee, MEMum and Forbin like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page