And it’s just worth pointing out that in ovarian cancer, checkpoint inhibitors typically do not have a significant efficacy signal on them. So it’s a real opportunity for synergy associated with the cells. In terms of timeline, from that trial, SURPASS-3, because that is a registration-oriented trial, we do not anticipate releasing data from that until we have fully enrolled that trial and that cohort. And that won’t happen until sort of tail end of 2024 when we’ve fully enrolled that registration-oriented trial. And so I think the data from ovarian cancer will be in combination will be related to a small number of patients that we have been able to recruit — or we’ll be able to recruit in the Phase I study, so a slightly different patient population in combination with nivolumab.
And that we would anticipate being probably tail end of this year or into early next year before we have durability data in that relatively modest number of patients.
Garry Menzel: And then I think just to reaffirm on gavo-cel again, in ovarian cancer, you’ll see clinical durability data at the end of the year. That’s what our intent is to present. In the middle of the year, you’ll see some translational data, which hopefully will provide a pathway to that clinical data at the back end of the year.
Yanan Zhu: Great. And also, I have another kind of related question. I think Adaptimmune, obviously, is advancing the head and neck and urothelial cancer studies in earlier line setting. I was wondering if the — on the mesothelin side for the combined company, would exploring earlier line also potentially be a potential strategy from that side of the combined company? Thanks.
Adrian Rawcliffe: So, I think – I’ll talk maybe in principle, then maybe, Garry, you could touch on and thinking on from your side on mesothelin in earlier lines of therapy. So in principle, we think that there are substantial advantages to moving into earlier line for cell therapies. In addition to the normal oncology development advantages that you get, which is healthier patients, less fewer levels of pre-treatment and a less advanced tumor, there’s a really critical piece in self-therapy that everything that we know says that the earlier you can get cells from a patient, the more pristine those cells are, the less damaged by repeated assaults from chemotherapy or other therapeutic regimens. The earlier you can go, the better those cells are likely to perform.
And this is — the ultimate starting point is that when we do work in patients who have patients — cancer patients or healthy donors, the healthy donor cells typically grow better and produce better T-cells, engineered T-cells. So everything suggests that getting in earlier will be better for cell therapies. And that’s why we believe that there’s this opportunity in head and neck and bladder cancer to go in, in these earlier settings and potentially transform those spaces with the response rates that we’re seeing in very late-stage patients, replicated, potentially improved in the early line setting. Garry?
Garry Menzel: And I would just endorse that in our own data set, we just don’t have enough patients to be able to parse out lines of therapy versus dose escalations or use of checkpoint inhibitors or re-dosing or other strategies, but the principle that’s been shown, I think, in many other studies in oncology is that the earlier lines of therapy give you a better shot at treating patients. If you think of gavo-cel in Phase I, we were treating a lot of patients who were either in or going to hospice, who had other comorbidities just incredibly sick, 5, 6, 7, 8 lines of therapy before them, and it just makes it very difficult. So having healthier patients who can tolerate therapies more and whose cells are likely to be more robust, logically, you would hope that, that would lead to better clinical benefit. We just don’t have the data to prove that out yet from our own studies.
