Re: Re: A few thoughts - Sharon's question

May 13, 2010

Thank you so much C. You have enlightened me!!!

Now I get it.

All I can say is Thank God for Dr. Druker.

Sharon

_____

From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of

hey00nanc

Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:46 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: A few thoughts - Sharon's question

>

> Why does Gleevec get all the praise it what I am wondering? Is it because

> it was the first?

>

> Is Gleevec better then Tasigna. Tasigna works for me. I am PCRU with it so

> why do we have to have so many of the same drugs that do the same thing?

>

> And another thing Gleevec and Tasigna are both with Novartis aren't they?

> What does Tasigna have that Gleevec does not have or what does Tasigna

have

> that Gleevec does not have. Is it as simple as two different antiobiotics

> that do the same thing?

____________________________________________

Hi Sharon,

This program was about Gleevec because Gleevec was the first drug, and if

Gleevec had not been developed there would not have been a Tasigna, a

Sprycel or the other drugs now in the pipeline.

Dr. Druker spent 10 years in the lab doing research to develop Gleevec

before there was ever any human trials. With this drug, he

proved/demonstrated that if you could identify the defect that was causing

the cancer (and this was already known for CML, the ph+ cell), then you

could develop a drug specifically for that target. This is like a smart bomb

vs just an atomic bomb (blow everything up). Dr. Druker is expected to get a

Nobel Prize in Medicine in the future....not because he developed just a

drug for CML but because he showed how to develop a 'molecularly targeted

drug'. This changed cancer research and cancer treatment.....and I think

this was a major point of the show. The show was not really about CML, it

was about a 'cancer breakthough'......that was a title of the show.

All of the cml drugs are not the same. Early on they saw that some people

either had mutations or developed mutations and that Gleevec was not going

to work for them....which is why the drug companies went to work to develop

more drugs (and get a piece of the financial pie).

Gleevec only works during one phase of the cell cycle (can't remember if it

is the open phase or the closed phase).

Tasigna is 2nd generation Gleevec, the improved version that some people

need....it works in both the open and closed phases of the cell cycle. Both

are Novartis drugs. There is talk that Norvartis will try to replace Gleevec

with Tasigna as the front line (first used) drug for CML.

Sprycel, developed by BMS, has a sl. different way of working....Dr. Druker

tells me it is 'more broad spectrum' and so is more effective for some

people. It also affects a second pathway, which some thinks makes it more

effective.

All anti-biotics are not the same....that is why you test an infection for

sensitivity to the drug. All CML drugs are not the same, but basically aim

to do the same thing...kill off the cml cell.

We all know from this list that some drugs are working better than others

for some people. If everyone had a great result to Gleevec, there would not

have been as much incentive to develop the other drugs (but they were really

developed because of the mutations), and it was found that some have fewer

side effects, but this varies with people.

All of this information is really out there...and has been. The development

of Gleevec is really a fascinating story and there is a book written about

it by the CEO of Novartis.

C.

May 13, 2010

Gleevec is getting all the praise because it is the FIRST drug to be able to

help fight CML. Dr. Druker is getting all the praise because he is the

major researcher who developed this marvel. For those of us who were

fortunate to be able to get into his trial, it saved our lives, and we knew

we had a future. If it were not for Dr. Druker and his research, there would

be no tasigna, or sprycel, or any of the newer drugs. I am in the Ariad

trial and doing well, but it was the Gleevec trial that got me to be where I

am now. But as good as Gleevec is, it does not stop some of the mutations

people have, so they are developing drugs that will. Some drugs help one

person, but will not help another. For those of us that were in the early

trials for Gleevec, it is our miracle pill and Dr. Druker is our idol.

Bobby

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:45 PM, hey00nanc <ncogan@...> wrote:

>

> >

> > Why does Gleevec get all the praise it what I am wondering? Is it because

> > it was the first?

> >

> > Is Gleevec better then Tasigna. Tasigna works for me. I am PCRU with it

> so

> > why do we have to have so many of the same drugs that do the same thing?

> >

> > And another thing Gleevec and Tasigna are both with Novartis aren't they?

> > What does Tasigna have that Gleevec does not have or what does Tasigna

> have

> > that Gleevec does not have. Is it as simple as two different antiobiotics

> > that do the same thing?

> ____________________________________________

>

> Hi Sharon,

>

> This program was about Gleevec because Gleevec was the first drug, and if

> Gleevec had not been developed there would not have been a Tasigna, a

> Sprycel or the other drugs now in the pipeline.

>

> Dr. Druker spent 10 years in the lab doing research to develop Gleevec

> before there was ever any human trials. With this drug, he

> proved/demonstrated that if you could identify the defect that was causing

> the cancer (and this was already known for CML, the ph+ cell), then you

> could develop a drug specifically for that target. This is like a smart bomb

> vs just an atomic bomb (blow everything up). Dr. Druker is expected to get a

> Nobel Prize in Medicine in the future....not because he developed just a

> drug for CML but because he showed how to develop a 'molecularly targeted

> drug'. This changed cancer research and cancer treatment.....and I think

> this was a major point of the show. The show was not really about CML, it

> was about a 'cancer breakthough'......that was a title of the show.

>

> All of the cml drugs are not the same. Early on they saw that some people

> either had mutations or developed mutations and that Gleevec was not going

> to work for them....which is why the drug companies went to work to develop

> more drugs (and get a piece of the financial pie).

>

> Gleevec only works during one phase of the cell cycle (can't remember if it

> is the open phase or the closed phase).

> Tasigna is 2nd generation Gleevec, the improved version that some people

> need....it works in both the open and closed phases of the cell cycle. Both

> are Novartis drugs. There is talk that Norvartis will try to replace Gleevec

> with Tasigna as the front line (first used) drug for CML.

>

> Sprycel, developed by BMS, has a sl. different way of working....Dr. Druker

> tells me it is 'more broad spectrum' and so is more effective for some

> people. It also affects a second pathway, which some thinks makes it more

> effective.

>

> All anti-biotics are not the same....that is why you test an infection for

> sensitivity to the drug. All CML drugs are not the same, but basically aim

> to do the same thing...kill off the cml cell.

> We all know from this list that some drugs are working better than others

> for some people. If everyone had a great result to Gleevec, there would not

> have been as much incentive to develop the other drugs (but they were really

> developed because of the mutations), and it was found that some have fewer

> side effects, but this varies with people.

>

> All of this information is really out there...and has been. The development

> of Gleevec is really a fascinating story and there is a book written about

> it by the CEO of Novartis.

>

> C.

>

--

a Doyle/dob 1929

DX /CML/1995/Interferon/hydrea

2/00 - Gleevec Trial, OHSU, Dr. Druker

6/02 - Gleevec/Arsenic Trial, OHSU,Dr. Druker

6/03 - Gleeved/Zarnestra Trial, OHSU, " " " "

7/04 - Sprycel Trial, MDACC, Dr. Talpaz

3/05 - CCR

12/07 - Ended trial due to Pleural Effusion

4/08 - XL228 Trial, U. of Michigan, Dr. Talpaz

4/09 - Ariad Trial, U.of Michigan, Dr. Talpaz

#840 Zavie's Zero Club #840

May 13, 2010

I took gleevec also and know it saved my life! I was not putting gleevec or Dr.

D down in anyway. I am just trying to understand it all. Dr Druker is a

wonderful nan and I too owe him my life!

Sharo t

Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T

Re: [ ] Re: A few thoughts - Sharon's question