Skip to main content

Melinda Chelva

Mon, 09/21/2020 - 14:04

Excellent post Michaela! You did an amazing job delving deep into the topics Dr. Lee discussed during the MGR last week!
As you mentioned, the resistance to Imatinib in patients has encouraged the development of analogs, such as Nilotinib, in order to allow patients to continue to be treated for CML.
After reading through some clinical trials, I came across Ponatinib, which is another analogue of Imatinib. This drug is thought to be 520 times more potent than Imatinib, and importantly, it has also been noted to inhibit both the wild-type and mutant BCR-ABL1 (including the T315I mutation). However, there is evidence that Ponatinib also leads to some adverse effects. This makes me wonder- does the level of side effects of Imatinib analogues play the most important role when differentiating and dictating one analogue as a “better” treatment for CML compared to others, or, could there be other factors that determine this? I wonder whether researchers and scientists will continue to study Imatinib analogues to find ways to ensure that their endpoints achieve similar efficiency and patient prognosis as Imatinib does?
Furthermore, I am super curious to see if there is a possibility to avoid CML patients from establishing resistance to Imatinib? I wonder whether this could be achieved with a more diverse treatment regime that alternates between medications?
Overall, I am super eager to continue to follow Imatinib in the literature, and I am very excited to see its advancements in the future!

Melinda Chelva

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.