I am respectful that in monotherapy, you may have modest benefit, but yet certainly, in combination, there is at least a question here that, if you could show anything better than you really have an opportunity set. And I’m just throwing this out as a thought if it’s directionally correct? Or maybe what you think about it.
John Orwin: Yes, maybe you want to address that from the preclinical side and then I don’t know if maybe we have some further thoughts.
Tito Serafini: Yes, Tony. So you are right. In the sense that if the mechanism is directed towards the innate immune system, then that upstream of agents to act on T cells like anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. And so yes, in principle, that converting tumors that normally don’t have as an immune response with ATRC-101 is possible. And we all know that as you point out, CRC is one of those tumor types.
Philippe Bishop: Yes. From a clinical I think, a very provocative thought and question that I think would be at some point worth addressing in the clinical setting. I think the — as you know, the individuals with mismatch repair or MSI high colon cancer are more likely to have a response with pembrolizumab of PD-1 or PD-L1 agents. And I think this concept of cold and converting a cold tumor to something that is more likely to respond is something that is worth investigating for sure.
John Orwin: Good suggestion, Tony. Thank you for raising here.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Stephen Willey of Stifel.
Stephen Willey: I think I’ve asked you this before, but I’m going to ask it again. And just curious if in this incremental patient data set, you were able to somehow look at longitudinal H-Score expression just as a way to assess the stability of target expression over time.
Philippe Bishop: So thank you for the question. We are collecting biopsies well on studies for patients that consent to it. And we are planning to do some analysis, longitudinally for those matched biopsies that we’ve obtained. As you know, these are — there are — that is that are not that easy to conduct. And with small numbers, we have to be careful with entrances. To date, what we have is the baseline data. We batched the assessments and plan to analyze this at the final analysis. So we have not looked at the serial biopsies yet for those — for the patients who have given us permission to go ahead and sample again. And just for clarity, we do it during — at baseline, we do it during the first cycle and we do it also at the disease progression.
Stephen Willey: Okay. And then I think eligibility for the combo cohort required either progression on a PD-1 or L1 targeting mab and/or stable disease on a PD-1 or L1 targeting mab. I’m just curious if you know if the incremental patients enrolled into the combo cohort either fit the progression definition or if there were some patients in there who also fit the stable disease definition.
Philippe Bishop: Yes. So I think the eligibility criteria is worded slightly differently. It’s an unsatisfactory response while on the PD-1 or PD-L1 agent and/or disease progression. So there in the opinion of the physician, the response that was obtained while on the PD-1 or PD-L1 would have to be unsatisfactory and require the institution of new therapy. What we have is, for the most part, looking at those 9 individuals, the reason for the last therapy was really a lack of efficacy and progressive disease. So looking at those individuals, I would say that most of them would have had progressive disease.
