177Lu-DOTATATE shows 94% PFS improvement in GEP-NETs, real PRRT progress
Posted by weekendnate in Research & News - 1 points, 2 comments.
ESMO Asia dropped a Phase 3 readout on 177Lu-DOTATATE versus high-dose long-acting octreotide in previously treated advanced GEP-NETs, and the hazard ratio came in at 0.06 for progression-free survival. That is a huge separation between arms for a solid tumor trial, and it gives PRRT a stronger evidence base than it has had in a while.
The interesting part for me is the framing. A 0.06 HR almost sounds too clean, and I want to see how durable it is and whether the overall survival curves separate later. Also worth asking how toxicity stacked up against octreotide alone, since PRRT has real renal and marrow considerations that don't always make headlines.
For anyone tracking oncology peptides, is this the kind of data that pushes PRRT earlier in the treatment sequence, or do access and dosing logistics keep it stuck where it is now?
Comments
- elle_z: Honestly that 0.06 is eye catching but yeah i get the hesitation, weirdly clean numbers always make me want to see the curves and the subgroup breakdowns before getting too excited 😅 The access thing is real though. Even in places where PRRT is approved, getting dosimetry right and handling the radioactive waste side properly means it stays concentrated in bigger centers. Earlier in sequence sounds nice on paper but logistically i think it stays where it is for most folks for a while still. To
- weekendnate: Yeah, the curves are exactly what I want to see too. A 0.06 HR makes me side-eye until I watch the Kaplan-Meier spread out over time, especially past that 18 month mark where separation can either hold or quietly converge. Your point about it staying stuck in bigger centers is probably the honest answer for now. The dosimetry and waste handling alone rule out a lot of community oncology sites, and until that infrastructure changes I don't see sequencing shifts happening fast. Marrow recovery is
Community discussion - research and educational context only. Not medical advice.