At the moment it can take a long time to bring new treatments to the market because of the criteria of looking at Overall Survival (OS) as the key objective. With the latest research they are finding that a better marker could be the Biochemical Recurrence Time (the time when the PSA starts to rise to a set criteria after initial treatment). The rate at which the treatment reduces the PSA to a very low level is now being evaluated as a possible additional criteria. The regulatory bodies have already been approached to see if they will approve the modified criteria which could reduce the time required to bring the new treatments on to the approval list. OK this is only of academic interest to most people on the forum but it could have an impact for a large number of drugs which are currently on trial such as the work being done on the way prostate cancer can hijack myeloid cells (white blood cells) to feed on once testosterone is removed, and the drugs to stop this, as well as the work involving genome testing to develop targeted therapies such as PARP inhibitors.
Thank you Alwayshope for posting that. The apprentice nerd
has read through it and two interesting (to me) points come out of it:
* Ten years for a clinical trial that could produce life saving medication is a very long time.
* In the UK 47500 men are diagnosed with Prostate Cancer each year and 11500 die of it. Now I am 100% my 98% of men with Prostate Cancer die with it not of it statement is correct. That means each year 527500 men are not diagnosed but are living with it!!
Just a thought. - Thanks again AH.
Best wishes - Brian..
Macmillan Support Line - 0808 808 00 00, 7 days a week between 8am-8pm
Strength, Courage, Faith, Hope, Defiance, VICTORY.
I am a Macmillan volunteer.
Chief nerd here.
Worried Wife has made a very good point about the COVID vaccinations where a solution was found based on existing technology. This is also an area which is being looked at e.g. the BCG jab was initially developed against TB but can now also be used to treat bladder cancer. The approval process for this kind of technology can be a lot shorter because the first safety evaluation trials have already been done - all that is left are the efficacy trials and then the regulatory body approval. A lot of these treatments are off patent so cheaper as the research and development costs have already been covered.
Those are apparently the figures for England apprentice nerd. Here are some figures for the UK taken from the PCUK website. The statistic which is missing is the actual number of men living with prostate cancer and not knowing it, but because it is slow growing and not causing any problems then it is not in the figures unless picked up at autopsy. I seem to have a memory that about 1 in 2 old men (define old) have prostate cancer.
