Adrian Rawcliffe: Yes. Thanks, Michael. So, I think the Phase I program for SURPASS – for CD8 of the SURPASS-trial itself and the original cohort of that, which was recruiting across a basket of tumors types, all of whom are reasonable or high MAGE-A4 expression in late-stage patients were not having heavily pre-treated multiple prior lines of therapy, obviously. That study has two parts – that piece has two parts to it. The monotherapy arm where we reported 43 patients in monotherapy and that 37% response rate last year, we anticipate completing that arm. And the guidance we’ve given is that we’ll have ultimately 50 to 60 patients in it and reading that out in 2023. We also anticipate – or we’re also recruiting in parallel a combination arm again in those – that range of tumor types in again in late-stage patients in combination with nivolumab.
And that we intend to enroll between 10 to 20 patients to give us experience using checkpoints in combination with ourselves as a precursor for all the other work that we’re doing further downstream. And that will also read out, we anticipate this year later on this year. And so those — that’s what you can expect from the original. I just want to make sure that everyone understands like the two cohorts in first-line head and neck and first-line bladder are also part of that SURPASS trial, albeit that they’re separate cohorts in different patient populations.
Michael Schmidt: Great. Thank you.
Adrian Rawcliffe: Thanks, Michael.
Operator: Our next question comes from Jonathan Chang of SVB Securities. Please go ahead.
Jonathan Chang: Hi, guys. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. First question, how are you thinking about strategic priorities following the combination, more specifically for gavo-cel? Is the focus still ovarian cancer? And what would you need to see in the data by year-end to continue for the development of the program in ovarian cancer? And then second question, I guess, just for emphasis, following up on the prior questions, can you give us more granular color on how we should be thinking about expenses of the combined company moving forward? We’re just trying to make the model work. Thank you.
Adrian Rawcliffe: Okay. So maybe I’ll start on sort of view a strategic focus. And then maybe I’ll ask Garry to comment on the focus in ovarian cancer with gavo-cel and perhaps what a good signal looks like there. And then I’ll come back to the cost discussion. So in terms of strategic focus, one of the things that you have is you have two companies who have already gone through a very significant portfolio rationalization as part of their becoming fit-for-purpose for the world that we find ourselves in. And so for us, that was narrowing down our focus clinically to afami-cel for synovial sarcoma and for CD8 to the three indications at different stages, as we just talked about for MAGE-A4 and focusing on MAGE-A4. And then in preclinical, that was us focusing really heavily down on PRAME in the short term and moving forward to IND with that.
For the other — for TCR2, the focus is on mesothelin, focus on ovarian, specifically for gavo-cel and then TC-510 in dose-escalating drive. Again, first and second-generation programs in one target essentially in the clinic on each side. So, that’s the narrowing of the focus and then behind of the 510, obviously, TC-520 for CD70 in preclinical. So, I think you’ve got a very nicely focused pipeline, 2 clinical targets, 2 preclinical targets within the clinical targets focused out on indications. Nonetheless, we as a company will look to make rational data-driven decisions as we go forward about how to develop this combined focused portfolio. And you can anticipate that not just immediately, but over the course of the entire financing window as well, we are going to focus the resources of the company on those areas where we feel as a combined company, we have the most opportunity to create real value on products for patients.
