And then we have other areas where we can, over time, combine and bring synergies. So, there’s a great deal of intellectual synergy associated with the act of developing engineered T-cell therapies for solid tumors. But at the same time, the engineering allows us to do different things because TCR2 is focused on extracellular proteins. And we’ve been focused almost entirely on intracellular proteins and the expression on a peptide MHC complex and targeting that. And so it’s a very unique combination where there is a lot of intellectual platform capability advantages. But at the same time, it expands the universe of the things that we’re able to address and build a company that really has heft in the solid tumor space.
Asthika Goonewardene: Thanks.
Adrian Rawcliffe: Thanks, Asthika.
Operator: Our next question comes from Kelly Shi of Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Kelly Shi: Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. And I apologize if this has been asked. I’m curious to how do you all see manufacturing for the combined business unit to supply future clinical and commercial demand? Should we expect the cost of savings on this front without synergy cost to companies? Thank you.
Adrian Rawcliffe: Garry, do you want to have a go on that in addition to what I just said?
Garry Menzel: Yes. I mean I think from our side, Kelly, what excites me are many of the things that excite me about this deal. Manufacturing is one of them. We have adopted a policy up to this point of relying on external agencies in order to do our manufacturing. And that’s worked very well for us up to this point. Now, we don’t need to build internal capabilities because those exist already as Adaptimmune. And so we’ll be able to roll out that. It’s great that gives you greater control over your patient delivery supply chain, and I’m happy about that. So for me, this is one of the major advantages of the combination.
Kelly Shi: Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from Soumit Roy of Jones Research. Please go ahead.
Soumit Roy: Good morning, everyone and congrats on all the progress. One question on the MAGE-A4 on the ovarian side and the gavo-cel are. Trying to understand if this is going to be competing products or they are mutually going to be exclusively developed or address the patient population? Or is there any overlap in the expression of MAGE-A4 and mesothelin? Or they are exclusively expressed in different patient populations, be it in ovarian or head and neck or any of the other indications?
Adrian Rawcliffe: So, I think we have most insight into probably the ovarian space. So maybe I can just think about that and guide as to how to think about that. So, we’re actually really excited about the opportunity for developing these in parallel. I think it is in parallel because although I’m sure there are some patients who expressed both MAGE-A4 and mesothelium, we don’t think that the – they’re unlikely to be completely separate populations, nor is the overlap likely to be enormous given that both of these are expressed in a subset of the ovarian population. So, we think that there’s a real opportunity to do a couple of things. One is to — one and probably in sequence first is to look at how we screen patients onto the trials.
And it’s obvious that if you could reduce the screen failure rate, increase the screen success rate by having both of the trials ongoing at a particular site, that would be a fantastic opportunity to capture a larger portion of the ovarian cancer patients. Then the second sort of piece of that is, obviously, then in commercial where you can offer a broader cell therapy to a broader commercial population as well. And then the other piece is, I think, longer term, scientifically, it will enable us to explore, well, what happens in those patients who have both — both, do have overlapping expression? Is there the opportunity to either give the products into sequence or together to enable for that patient population and even deeper response? And I will add to that, that PRAME is also — it has significant — it’s not in the majority of patients, the significant expression in the ovarian cancer population.
