TA, as always, Thank you for posting! It is refreshing to be presented and exposed to the cutting edge, like here in the presentation of the PEACE-1 results... That PFS be extended by 2x the previous expectation for a given patient, even over some previous amazing results (Stampede, Chaarted, Latitude modalities).
Is compelling and completely makes sense, is intuitive, as other multifaceted or multimodal approaches to therapy have worked better than singular, why wouldn't this? But here, finally, is the hard data to support the argument!!!
Now, the question is will your MO support it(?), and subsequently will the insurance industry fight back, especially when we consider the cost of Zytiga!?
I don't see the difference for their consideration, because if you go the SOC and in 2 years show progression, you'll be on Zytiga then, or others, which are just as expensive anyways... No?
Which measure holds more value? Cost or Life? And how do administrators get to choose over doctors who can decide what may, or may not work best for their patient? Hmmmmm... We do know and are aware, that the Insurance Industry is one of the biggest lobby's in D.C., like BIG!
I wonder how hard the insurance industry will fight (back), as therapies now begin to extend survivability to a chronic disease format, as opposed to one that has quicker endpoints. Will they provide that sustainability? Absorb the cost?... How cynical are we allowed to think in this regard. What about compassionate Care? When does the patient get to decide what path belongs to them? Regardless of efficacy or results? When does the patient obtain the highest stratification in the decision making process?
All interesting thoughts. I mean we are only now leading into sustained therapies as prescribed in those trials, like Stampede, Chaarted, Latitude, that published their data how long ago(?), but by following their modality, extend survival! Is the Insurance Industry complicit in deaths if they fail to approve therapies then, in the face of this data? But when, and how long later?
And how about the conflicting thought process on how Bear Stern's had advised it's clients that treating Cancer as a chronic disease has more financial benefit than finding a cure? Are we as patients caught in between the Insurance and Banking/Financial industries looking to promote their bottom line? This is completely dismissing the Big Pharma as well in this arena... The banking industry probably has just a large a lobby in D.C.!
So back to the exposure of data that is released, and by example here, extremely useful to patients. What to do... What to do...? How do we accelerate past the molasses creep that causes the medical industry to delay introduction of these findings into practical application and benefit to the patient? Outside of trials and of course, FDA approval...? It just doesn't happen! I understand the benefit as well of the FDA, but they take too long, especially when the data isn't home grown (U.S.)...
So, in our relay race around the track, how do we jump the hurdles put in our way? How do we make it to the finish line without tripping ourselves up? It's a race with stacked hurdles, and sometimes, an seemingly insurmountable task to accomplish, just to get something for oneself, and others of course 
Thoughts... Just my thoughts...
Thanks for reading
Abiraterone + ADT feedback please
how fit can one be on ADT and abiraterone? 
