STAAR test results are out. Here's how to look up your student's scores.
Results for the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness exams were released this week, showing improvement in certain areas across the state.
Results for math, reading language arts, science and social studies STAAR exams that were taken this spring were released on June 17. Results for exams taken in June will be released on July 31, according to the Texas Education Agency
How to look up your student's STAAR test results
Log on to texasassessment.gov and enter your student's unique six-character code, date of birth and legal first name.
Your student's unique code should be the same every year. If you don't know your student's code, you can look it up under "Information and Support" and entering their first name and Social Security number.
2025 STAAR test results show slight improvement across Texas
Students across Texas continue to show growth in reading, but more than half remain below grade level in math, a concern for long-term academic success, test results show.
Despite the positive momentum, some experts remain cautious.
"It was really encouraging to see continued growth in reading," said Gabe Grantham, policy advisor for the nonprofit Texas 2036. "But more than half our students are below grade level in math, which is just not okay when we're thinking about how core those skills are for academic and post-academic success."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
S3 Episode 2: Cancer Survivorship and Toxicities of Cancer Therapy
This transcript has been edited for clarity. For more episodes, download the Medscape app or subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast provider. Kathryn J. Ruddy, MD, MPH: Hello. I'm Dr Kathryn Ruddy. Welcome to season 3 of the Medscape InDiscussion Cancer Survivorship podcast series. Today, we'll discuss approaches to reduce the toxicities of systemic cancer therapy. First, let me introduce my guest, Dr Elizabeth Cathcart-Rake. Dr Cathcart-Rake is a medical oncologist at Mayo Clinic who specializes in the treatment of breast cancer. Her research is focused on reducing symptoms in cancer survivors. For example, she's currently leading a cooperative group trial that aims to reduce chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy to improve quality of life. Dr Cathcart-Rake, welcome to the Medscape InDiscussion Cancer Survivorship podcast. Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake, MD: Thanks so much for having me. Ruddy: I want to start by asking you about some of the most common problems among your patients due to systemic therapy. Cathcart-Rake: We use a number of different systemic therapies, and each comes with its own side effects. There are side effects to chemotherapy, and these are fairly well-documented: things like fatigue, neuropathy, nausea, vomiting, alopecia, and risk of infection. There are also side effects to endocrine therapies, so our hormonal blocking therapies: vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, night sweats, insomnia, mood changes, joint stiffness, and vaginal dryness. There are side effects to agents such as targeted therapies and antibody-drug conjugates, which are our newer medicines in the breast oncology space. Ruddy: Immunotherapy has really revolutionized treatment in oncology. Are there specific side effects that you're seeing from immunotherapy? Cathcart-Rake: Yes, absolutely. Immune-related toxicities can come up at any time, and there's a really broad group of side effects that fall under this bucket. It could be inflammation of nearly anything. So inflammation of the thyroid can cause thyroiditis or hypothyroidism, inflammation of the lung, pneumonitis, adrenalitis, hypophysitis, all those sorts of 'itises.' Many of these are managed with steroids and holding the offending agent. But these can also be really challenging. Ruddy: Which of the chemotherapy side effects are we pretty good at mitigating, and which are we still really struggling to address well with evidence-based treatments today? Cathcart-Rake: This is a good question because there's a group of side effects that we've gotten really adept at preventing and managing, such as nausea and vomiting. We have a number of antiemetics that we give as preventive medicines, and also for patients to take at the first sign of nausea. We know that growth factor support helps to decrease the length of time of neutropenia and neutropenic fever. And then we have strategies to help manage things like hot flashes and vaginal dryness. But even these strategies that have been fairly well documented, and for which we have a number of different medications to help manage, we still see patients really bothered by these side effects — so much so that with endocrine therapy, which is a pill a day for many patients, about 50% of patients stop their endocrine therapy early because of things like side effects. This is actually a huge number, acknowledging the fact that we have medicines and other ways to try to help manage side effects. There are a number of side effects that we don't have enough research on, and we still don't address them well. We are hoping to help this with our own research, things like neuropathy. There's a single medicine that we know, that we've studied, that does help decrease the pain associated with neuropathy, but we don't have a good way to treat the numbness and tingling. And we don't have great prevention strategies other than changing the chemotherapy dose, which many oncologists and patients are understandably hesitant to do. Certainly, there's some interest in cooling, but the data have been mixed in clinical trials. In addition to all this, there's a third group of medicines and side effects that haven't been well researched, that we don't have any active ways to manage, and that we need a lot more data to better understand. Ruddy: One topic that is of a lot of interest to patients is scalp cooling. What are the logistics and the reasons that people might want to consider scalp cooling during chemotherapy? Cathcart-Rake: Scalp cooling can help reduce the risk of hair loss and hair thinning during chemotherapy in particular. There are several different kinds of scalp cooling techniques. One is that big companies have scalp cooling devices in chemotherapy units. Patients typically will purchase their own, kind of like a hat that is fitted to them and they bring into chemotherapy, but they attach it to a machine in chemotherapy. There are other centers, though, that don't have access to those machines, and patients can buy these online and do the scalp cooling themselves. An organization called HairToStay, for instance, offers financial support for this kind of self-directed scalp cooling, which can be helpful. The Rapunzel Project is another one that can be really helpful for patients. Scalp cooling can be really effective for some types of chemotherapy. For chemotherapy agents like Taxol, we see really high response rates where even 80% of patients can retain their hair. But there are other agents where scalp cooling is a little less effective. We're trying to get to the bottom of why that is, whether there are longer cooling times needed or maybe just a different mechanism needed, where we're seeing response rates even of 30% or so. None of these techniques is perfect. Some patients lose their hair, and this is also dependent on hair texture, race, ethnicity, and other factors. It can be a really great option for patients who want to retain their hair, particularly when hair is such a huge part of their identity. This can be hugely impactful in terms of quality of life. Ruddy: Besides the cost, which I know can be substantial and the sometimes inadequate efficacy, are there any downsides to scalp cooling? Cathcart-Rake: The cost is the big one. Logistics can be a real challenge. Even in places where you have a scalp cooling machine in the chemotherapy unit, it adds an extra couple of hours to your chemotherapy time. It's just a much longer day for patients, and you have to get the cap fitted correctly. There are a number of things patients need to do, including getting special conditioners, to help scalp cooling be as effective as possible. For patients who do this themselves, it's a big process. I'm so impressed with the dedication of our patients to doing these things that are important for them. Some of it involves checking the temperature of the caps multiple times throughout the chemotherapy infusion process. They'll actually switch out the caps when they get to be too warm, and they'll carry in these big chests of scalp cooling hats. It can be a big logistical challenge and a lot of added time and sometimes stress to patients and their caregivers who are going through the chemotherapy process, which is already time-intensive and unfortunately stressful as it is. Ruddy: I've had some patients mention headache or the discomfort of having your head be cold, too. I don't know if you've seen that, but I have. Cathcart-Rake: Yes, I'm glad you mentioned that. It's also the side effects of it. Unfortunately, there's no zero side effect option. Ruddy: I want to talk a little bit about endocrine therapy. You mentioned some of the side effects of endocrine therapy, which is a very common treatment in patients with breast cancer and also some other endocrine-sensitive cancers. Can you talk a little bit about what evidence-based strategies we have for managing some of those menopausal-type symptoms? Cathcart-Rake: Hot flashes are the first one that comes to mind. It's such a common side effect. Up to 80% of patients note some increases in hot flashes on these agents. There are a number of different strategies that patients can use based on the other medications that they're on and based on other symptoms they might be having. I think of three big classes of medicines: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and oxybutynin. For SSRIs, I think of medicines like citalopram or escitalopram. I often lean on those agents when someone has concurrent anxiety or low mood associated with all of this, because these do help even out mood. For SNRIs, I think about venlafaxine, which also helps with mood and anxiety. The one drawback of venlafaxine, and why I mention it after those SSRIs, is that it has significant withdrawal symptoms. Patients who aren't used to it or haven't been told about the withdrawal symptoms will sometimes stop it and not realize that they have huge rebounds and symptoms. They could have really racing heart rates, a significant increase in anxiety, and even some palpitations. Often we'll overlap that with an SSRI when we stop it. And in this third group of medicines, one medicine is oxybutynin. This was initially looked at for bladder spasm, but it has been shown to help with hot flashes as well. That one's helpful if you have a patient who's already on a number of different mood medicines and you don't want to interfere with those or run into medication interactions. That one is not a great medicine to prescribe in older patients because they can feel a little dizzy or have some cognitive changes, even with that medicine. Ruddy: These are very important issues. Please tell the audience more about your clinical trial through the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology that is focused on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Cathcart-Rake: We are really excited about this study. It's a cooperative group nationwide trial. There is an early-phase component and a leader-phase component where we are using a compound called ganglioside-monosialic acid (GM1) and looking into, first, the right dose, but then more importantly, the benefits of GM1 in preventing taxane-associated neuropathy, particularly with paclitaxel. It is a prospective trial. We are administering GM1 intravenously (IV) prior to paclitaxel chemotherapy. We're giving patients this up to 12 cycles with their paclitaxel. The impetus behind this trial is that this compound had really significant improvements in terms of neuropathy prevention when it was studied in Asia. So, there are some really exciting preliminary data on this compound in other countries. Ruddy: You've also done some very interesting work on nasal vestibulitis. Can you tell us what that is, and what might help patients with that? Cathcart-Rake: Nasal vestibulitis is one of those side effects that is overlooked by a number of people because, honestly, it sounds like a silly thing. Nasal discomfort sounds like a little thing. But I have had very few other side effects that I've had so many patients send me emails about and say, this is a huge problem. In fact, this is like a million paper cuts, just on top of everything else. They have pain in their nose. Nasal vestibulitis is dryness. It can be crusting, scabbing, bleeding, and pain in the nasal passages. We have studied this prospectively. We see it associated primarily with paclitaxel, but also with Abraxane chemotherapy. We also see it with the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, such as bevacizumab, at really high rates — like more than 70% of patients get the side effect. We've looked at a topical nasal preparation called rose geranium and sesame oil nasal spray; this can be compounded by any compounding pharmacy using pharmaceutical-grade oils, and folks can put that into their nose twice a day. We've shown that we can help treat these nasal symptoms significantly and better than we do with just nasal saline alone. Ruddy: That's terrific. What about some of the rarer side effects — things like pulmonary, renal, and dermatologic toxicities? Can you speak a bit to those and how can we manage those? Cathcart-Rake: The issue of a pulmonary side effect is really top of mind. Particularly because we're using so much in HER2 or fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (T-DXd), particularly in the breast cancer space, pulmonary toxicity from Enhertu (T-DXd) in particular is so concerning because if left unchecked, if left unsurveilled, it can be fatal. Thankfully, that's very rare, but we can still see that. There are some consensus guidelines as far as surveillance monitoring with chest CT, for instance, and monitoring for symptoms. There's guidance both in the package insert and also by these consensus groups talking about managing primarily withholding the drug and steroids. That's a side effect that we've gotten some experience with over time, but there are many others that we're trying to learn more about and the dermatologic toxicities are of particular interest with a lot of our targeted therapies. Things like capivasertib have a really high frequency of dermatologic side effects that haven't been well delineated. We often treat this the same way we treat most dermatologic issues: with topical steroids. But it would be great to have more information on who's at risk for that, and really what we should be using. Ruddy: We used to think about hair loss as being specifically related to chemotherapy, but you're doing some work on hair loss as a side effect potentially of nonchemotherapy cancer drugs. Can you speak a bit about that? Cathcart-Rake: We do see full hair loss with a variety of chemotherapies, which is a huge issue. But we're also realizing that a number of our endocrine therapies and targeted therapies also cause significant hair thinning and big changes in hair texture. We're seeing this a lot more now that we're prescribing more cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors, such as ribociclib and abemaciclib in the adjuvant setting. We're seeing more hair loss and hair thinning with those. We're also seeing some of it with endocrine therapy alone — so tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors (AIs), and this really hasn't been categorized as far as frequency and severity prospectively. We have a prospective study where we're trying to quantify the number of patients who experience this and what patients are experiencing from a hair thinning perspective on endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibitors. We're really hopeful that we'll be able to follow up with treatment trials looking into ways to try to help prevent this. Although hair thinning is milder than complete hair loss, these therapies continue for 2-3 years. For endocrine therapy, this is 5 years. So this is a long-term toxicity that can be really challenging for patients. Ruddy: That is so important. How can we make sure that our patients know that we, as oncologists, want to hear about their side effects? Obviously, we can't manage them well if we don't know that somebody's suffering from something. How can we set patients up to know that we want to hear about that, and so that we can help them feel as good as possible during cancer treatment? Cathcart-Rake: There are a number of ways to do this. Often in clinical trials, we ask patients about very specific symptoms, and we have very specific grading scales, which are really important. I don't advocate changing that. However, I also think asking open-ended questions is usually important — saying 'You know, if you could, bring up just one or two side effects that you feel like if we could change this, it would really change your quality of life in the course of this. What are those symptoms?' Something open but that gets to the heart and crux of the issue, which is, 'What are those things that are most meaningful to you that we could help with?' I think that can sometimes open the door for things that we're maybe not expecting or to hear more about, say, those nasal symptoms that people have. People might not bring up when you're asking these very targeted questions about things like nausea and vomiting. Ruddy: Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom with us today. Is there anything else you want to tell our audience about before we close? Cathcart-Rake: I'm so thankful for the opportunity to talk on this topic and to talk about some side effects that aren't mentioned as frequently in clinic visits. Especially if there are oncologists in the audience, I hope they'll consider enrolling patients in symptom control interventional trials and think more about these side effects and how we can better document them. Ruddy: Thank you so much. Today, we've talked to Dr Cathcart-Rake about improving our management of side effects of systemic therapy for cancer. We've learned about some of her very exciting research pertaining to alopecia and chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, and her comments about symptom management in general were extremely informative. Thank you for tuning in. Please take a moment to download the Medscape app to listen and subscribe to this podcast series on cancer survivorship. This is Dr Kathryn Ruddy for the Medscape InDiscussion Cancer Survivorship podcast. Listen to additional seasons of this podcast. Patient-Reported Discontinuation of Endocrine Therapy and Related Adverse Effects Among Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Scalp Hypothermia to Reduce Chemotherapy-Induced Alopecia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis HairToStay The Rapunzel Project Scalp Cooling for Hair Preservation and Associated Characteristics in 1411 Chemotherapy Patients — Results of the Dutch Scalp Cooling Registry Advances in the Management of Menopausal Symptoms, Fertility Preservation, and Bone Health for Women With Breast Cancer on Endocrine Therapy Venlafaxine Withdrawal Syndrome Oxybutynin vs Placebo for Hot Flashes in Women With or Without Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial (ACCRU SC-1603) Finding an Effective Dose of GM1 to Reduce or Prevent Neuropathy (Numbness or Weakness) Due to Treatment With Paclitaxel (Phase II) The Effects of Ganglioside-Monosialic Acid in Taxane-Induced Peripheral Neurotoxicity in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Trial Nasal Vestibulitis: An Under-Recognized and Under-Treated Side Effect of Cancer Treatment? Multidisciplinary Clinical Guidance on Trastuzumab Deruxtecan (T-DXd)-Related Interstitial Lung Disease/Pneumonitis — Focus on Proactive Monitoring, Diagnosis, and Management Retrospective Cohort Study of CDK4/6-Inhibitor-Induced Alopecia in Breast Cancer Patients
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Head Position Matters in Stroke Care Before Thrombectomy
A flat 0° head positioning before thrombectomy was associated with a significantly less risk for early neurologic deterioration and all-cause mortality than a conventional 30° head elevation in adults with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke, a new study showed. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted the prospective, multicenter ZODIAC trial from 2018 to 2023 with 92 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52% men). All had LVO stroke confirmed on CT angiography and a viable penumbra and were eligible for thrombectomy within 24 hours of stroke. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 0° (n = 45) or 30° (n = 47) head-of-bed positioning before thrombectomy. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores were assessed every 10 minutes until thrombectomy began. The primary endpoint was early neurologic deterioration, defined as a worsening of ≥ 2 NIHSS points before thrombectomy. Additional outcomes were severe neurologic deterioration (worsening of ≥ 4 NIHSS points) before thrombectomy, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and all-cause death within 3 months. TAKEAWAY: Early neurologic deterioration was more common in the 30° group than in the 0° group (55% vs 2%; hazard ratio [HR], 34.4; P < .001), as was severe neurologic deterioration (n = 20 vs n = 1; HR, 23.6; P = .002). < .001), as was severe neurologic deterioration (n = 20 vs n = 1; HR, 23.6; = .002). The all-cause mortality rate at 90 days was significantly lower in the 0° group than in the 30° group (4% vs 22%; P = .03). = .03). A greater proportion of patients in the 0° group than in the 30° group showed neurologic improvement at 24 hours post-thrombectomy (87% vs 60%; odds ratio, 0.2; P = .01). = .01). No participant in either group developed hospital-acquired pneumonia. IN PRACTICE: 'Results suggest that patients awaiting thrombectomy treatment for LVO stroke should be positioned with the head at 0° to ensure clinical stability and prevent worsening,' the investigators wrote. 'We posit that 0° head positioning is a bridging maneuver to thrombectomy, protecting ischemic tissue and possibly reducing infarct progression before definitive treatment,' they added. SOURCE: This study was led by Anne W. Alexandrov, PhD, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee. It was published online on June 04 in JAMA Neurology . LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its small sample size and early termination, the lack of blinding to head position, and the exclusion of data on thrombectomy decisions. Additionally, patients transferred between facilities were excluded, which may have affected the 3-month outcomes. DISCLOSURES: Funding was provided by the NIH. Several investigators reported receiving a grant or per-patient payment from NIH during the study. One also reported being a paid co-investigator on the NIH grant for imaging core lab services. Full details are listed in the original article.
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Q&A: New Myeloma Bispecific Rivals CAR T in Early Data
CHICAGO — Two early-phase clinical trials released data at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2025 annual meeting that suggest their premise — an elranatamab-based triplet regimen and a new trispecific regimen — shows good potential in multiple myeloma (MM). 'It was interesting to see where these new lines of thought will take us in treating myeloma. Elranatamab is already approved in the third-line setting in the US, and using it in the frontline setting in MagnetisMM-6 shows promise,' said oral abstract session discussant Amrita Krishnan, MD, of the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California. 'And the first-in-human data from JNJ-5322 shows the drug has incredible activity.' 'In both these trials, we need to see if their responses hold,' Krishnan added. Early MagnetisMM-6 Readout The key takeaway from MagnetisMM-6 Part 1, dose level G, is that initial data show that the triplet combination of elranatamab with daratumumab and lenalidomide is effective and manageable in patients with newly diagnosed MM who are not eligible for transplant. That's according to study author Hang Quach, MD, of St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, University of Melbourne, in Melbourne, Australia. Elranatamab is a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-CD3 bispecific antibody approved as a late-line monotherapy in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Quach and co-authors hypothesized that adding daratumumab and lenalidomide may enhance immune cell-mediated myeloma cell death. MagnetisMM-6 enrolled 37 patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed MM. Of these, 34 received the triplet regimen. At data cutoff, the median follow-up was 7.9 months, and 32 patients were still on treatment. 'The combination showed early and promising efficacy, and we expect responses to deepen with longer follow-up,' Quach said. Quach reported that the safety profile was predictable and consistent with the components' known toxicities. Treatment-related adverse events were seen in more than 50% of patients. The most common were hematologic AEs, infections, and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). All CRS events were grade 2 or less, and one grade 2 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome event occurred. The phase 3 MagnetisMM-6 Part 2 trial, which will open soon, will evaluate the same elranatamab triplet combination against daratumumab plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible and transplant-deferred patients with newly diagnosed MM. The study design is patient-centric regarding dosing frequency and de-escalation, Quach said: 'There will be a response-adapted scheduling modification upon achievement of complete response after 12 months at least.' JNJ-5322: First-in-Human Trial The first-in-human trial of JNJ-5322, a BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeted T-cell redirecting trispecific antibody, enrolled 147 patients. 'We treated these patients with different doses and at different dosing schedules and defined the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) as 100 mg administered every 4 weeks subcutaneously with only one step-up dose,' said Niels W.C.J. van de Donk, MD, PhD, of Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 'At the RP2D, we see a manageable safety profile with improved or similar GPRC5D-related adverse events.' As expected, infections were common. The grade 3 or 4 infection rate was 28.6% with prophylactic infection management. GPRC5D-related oral side effects were also observed in the study. Taste-related changes were observed in 60% of patients, while other non-taste-related oral AEs were less frequent and included dry mouth, dysphagia, stomatitis, and decreased appetite. 'The frequency and severity of these oral adverse events is lower than what is typically seen,' van de Donk said. 'And this milder oral treatment emergent AE profile is also reflected in that only 6% of the patients had a transient weight loss of grade 1 or grade 2.' Among patients naive to BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeted therapies and treated at the RP2D, the investigators observed a 100% response rate, a complete response (CR) rate of 70%, and at least a very good partial response in 96%. 'And this deep response translates into a promising progression-free survival of 95% at 1 year,' van de Donk said. 'Overall, JNJ-5532 demonstrated a manageable safety profile and an overall response rate comparable to CAR [chimeric antigen receptor] T with convenient off-the-shelf every 4 weeks dosing with one step-up dose to facilitate outpatient dosing.' Following this presentation, Krishnan sat down with Medscape Medical News . The following interview has been edited for clarity. What is the premise of the MagnetisMM-6 trial? The rationale for using elranatamab in the upfront, newly diagnosed setting is that, in a newly diagnosed myeloma, you probably have healthier T cells than a patient with heavily pretreated disease. The hope is that this drug may work even better in this setting. What stood out to you about MagnetisMM-6's trial design? Participants had a median age of 75 years, which is old for a trial, and 24% of them were frail, which is also quite notable. Patients had a very deep response, which is encouraging in this newly diagnosed setting. The approved dose of elranatamab is weekly, but the investigators gave it only once every 4 weeks, which may be in part why they had a much more favorable safety profile in terms of risk for infection. What will you be watching for from MagnetisMM-6? The data looked promising, but the follow-up is very short. On this trial it's about 7.9 months, so we really need to see if the responses hold and how deep the responses are. What is the premise of the JNJ-5532 trial? The drug targets both GPRC5D and BCMA, with the idea being that, if you hit both targets at once, maybe your response rates are higher than hitting just one target, and that appears to be the case. The reported response rates of 100% are certainly dramatic, but the follow-up right now is very short. What stood out to you about JNJ-5532? With most of the bispecifics, the response rates are about 60%-70%. Now we're looking at a response rate that's close to CAR T-cell therapy for the first time, and it's frankly incredible. But the attractive thing with CAR T has always been 'one and done' vs staying on treatment for a fixed duration or even indefinitely. If you're still having to give patients a drug for, say, 5 years, that's probably not as attractive. Is JNJ-5532 likely to be better tolerated than CAR T? We haven't seen any neurologic toxicity yet, so that's encouraging. And the logistics, of course, are much easier. With JNJ-5532, you get one step-up dose, and it can be given outpatient. So, the comparison with CAR T is not just about side effects: The whole burden of care is very different, and the ability to get it in the community versus entirely inpatient is another big issue in terms of access. MagnetisMM-6 was funded by Pfizer. Quach disclosed relationships with Antengene (Inst), Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Janssen-Cilag, Karyopharm Therapeutics (Inst), Pfizer, roche, and Sanofi (Inst). JNJ-5532 was funded by Johnson & Johnson. van de Donk reported ties with Adaptive Biotechnologies (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Cellectis (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Merck (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Roche (Inst), Servier (Inst), and Takeda (Inst).
