Welcome back to Plenary Session.

This is the Polo Trial Revisited.

It's back. It's out in the JCO.

And a couple people I know and trust have written to me, and they say,

VP, you got to take a look at this manuscript.

This manuscript needs a thorough review on Plenary Session.

Now, of course, Plenary Session was the podcast that broke the Polo Trial.

Now, I don't mean we broke the news. Of course, the news was broken by the

press release and the corporate types. We were the ones that broke the trial, i.e. we broke it.

We pointed out the substantive pitfalls of the study that pretty much invalidates the conclusions.

What's the polo olap rib versus sugar pillor placebo versus placebo in

germline mutant pancreas cancer? So we take people with pancreas cancer. They have germline

mutations in braca and we randomize them three to two. Of course, that's ever sweet, sweet

ratio. We'll talk about that on a future podcast why I am critical of these ratios.

Three to two, two, olaprib, new costly PARP inhibitor, I think a $12,000 a month medication

when I last checked, or sugar pill. Now, how often in pancreas cancer do you take someone

and you give them no treatment at all? And the answer is not pretty often, because that would

be a delinquent

and negligent standard of care. The polo-trial actually took people with germline mutant

brachopancreas cancer. It gave him 16 weeks of therapy with a platinum-containing

regiment like Fulphyrinox. Then they randomize him three to two to a laprib or placebo.

In the new manuscript, they say that you just have to stop the platinum.

...