Roy Buchanan: Okay. Fair enough. And then just the last one, can partners use the Drug Master File? Like can Roche use it for the KRAS program?
Joern Aldag: Yes, we can use it as we are preparing the Phase 1b and we are doing the IND work, and we can use that Drug Master File from the HB-200 and 300 in that context as well.
Roy Buchanan: Okay, great. What about partners that are doing the Phase 1 themselves? Can they use it?
Joern Aldag: Katia, can you answer this?
Katia Schlienger: Yes. They can certainly use it, like, once they use our product, this could be something that they can use when they find an IV in projects that are related to those, the ones that are using Gilead is a bit different than the ones that we are using in oncology so that — file was done for the two vector replicating, which is different from the 400 technology. So depending on what our partner will use, so for example, for Roche as weekly, this will be used for the IND submission as well.
Roy Buchanan: Great. Okay.
Joern Aldag: So just very, very briefly, yes, they can use it. At this point in time, no one is doing a Phase 1 with our program.
Roy Buchanan: Got it. Great.
Operator: And our next question comes from Suzanne van Voorthuizen at Kempen.
Suzanne van Voorthuizen: Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. I just wanted to circle back to the Q2 update on the HB-200 program. I’m not sure I heard it right. So can you clarify what you will include in terms of duration data in the press release? Will it include both duration of response in PFS? And what conference in the latter half of the year are you targeting to get the data presentation? And then I’ll follow-up as well.
Joern Aldag: Katia.
Katia Schlienger: Yes. So in terms of duration of response, the challenge would be to obtain a median on patient probably we will not have any agenda at that time, but I’m just speculating. The duration of response for pembrolizumab is 22 months. So, it’s difficult to know if we will be able to reach anything at that time. We will disclose on what we have in terms of object response rate uses control rates and associated efficacy endpoints. We will disclose those chosen safety profile and the immunogenicity data that we will have at that time. Is it helpful or?
Suzanne van Voorthuizen: Yes, for sure. Thank you. And what conference in the latter half year are you targeting for presentation?
Katia Schlienger: So, we do not decide yet. And we will release it when we are ready.
Suzanne van Voorthuizen: And then a follow-up is on a different topic with now Gilead and the addition of Roche as partners for HOOKIPA. How are you looking at potential 4-1BB? We’d like to hear your considerations and preferences in terms of type of deals on quality or infectious diseases, development stage or platform deals? Yes, just some thoughts that you can share there.
Joern Aldag: Yes. So, any collaboration is actually quite a complex undertaking. Working with bigger pharma companies like Gilead and Roche, that’s trigger a lot of activity organizational and otherwise within an organization and adding business development activities, has to take account of that. So we, at this point in time would like to retain value in our programs and now partner them away. Having said that, we have a technology platform and we know that there are many different antigens that we’re currently not tackling, which we could, if a pharma company was interested in it. And clearly, the development of capital markets, the way we’re seeing them today, may also trigger one or the other thought about interesting deal structures that provide — that would provide funding capital to the Company.
