Good news from 67Cu-SAR-bisPSMA trial

[Maxone73]

We are still in Phase 1, so they are more concentrated on toxicity, even if the first patient receiving two doses months ago, went on complete remission (or missed it by few mm for one metastasis he still had active). We are talking about heavily pretreated castration resistant prostace cancers here...so not so easy! You can read more here below!

claritypharmaceuticals.com/...

[KocoPr]

That is a life saver for those heavily treated warriors. I can’t believe one was 93 yrs old and had been fighting this beast for 26 years!!!

[Maxone73 in reply to KocoPr]

Well...that also means that this guy was particularly tough!

[KocoPr in reply to Maxone73]

Probably a veteran from WWII.

[Maxone73 in reply to KocoPr]

a bit too young at 93 (even my mom is 95 and she was too young as well)....Korea maybe?

[Maxone73 in reply to KocoPr]

anyway, this damn trial made my day!!!

[HikerWife]

This is awesome! Saving to my files. Thanks for posting!

[KocoPr]

i hope to see this in earlier stages

[TC007]

This looks like a game changer compared to Pulvicto. Hopefully this can be fast tracked

[Maxone73 in reply to TC007]

I agree...if the efficacy is like that in both depth and breadth, it's truly amazing!

[Cenerus]

This is a very exciting update from Clarity. I'm looking forward to their next theranostic that will use Actinium in place of Copper 67.

One thing to be aware of with this trial is that Clarity is using their diagnostic isotope Cu64 to select candidate phase 1 patients. They look at Cu64 uptake and use it to screen out patients with low uptake. This is a form of intentional selection bias that may be biasing the results to look very positive overall, when in fact the patients have been preselected based on natural tendency to have high uptake of the molecule being studied. So in the real world, the results may be different if patients are being given the therapeutic version with a lower screening requirement. It would be nice if Clarity would count the patients that didn't have enough uptake of the screening molecule as failed. And it would be nice to see how patients that have already had and failed Pluvicto do on this new agent for comparison purposes.

[Maxone73 in reply to Cenerus]

This is an important fact to evaluate!

[Maxone73 in reply to Cenerus]

From what i understood part of the patients for the trial are those u used Cu64 tracer, but i suppose they use Cu64 to be sure you express PSMA?

[Cenerus in reply to Maxone73]

Yes, they screened the participants using the Cu64 version to ensure high uptake. What I don't see being reported is how many candidates were rejected for having uptake that was considered too low. If they are screening a lot of candidates for the few slots they have and only accepting the ones with the highest uptake of the molecule, then the test is skewed. I don't know if this is the case, so I'm being somewhat cynical. It would be nice to know how many they screened and what their acceptance criteria was for the trial.