Dr. Kristen Buck: Thanks, Steve. I would only add a few caveats. We are definitely looking to improve overall survival as the patient populations which we’re studying have horrible diagnosis and prognosis. So while overall survival will predict their outcome, we’re looking at progression-free survival, how long the patient stays well before their tumor progresses. And the most important part is not enhancing the toxic side effects that these drugs have because we’re targeting the tumors instead of over blasting the patient with cytotoxic, we’re trying to target the tumor, so the cytotoxic and immunotherapies are specifically going into the tumor. So therefore, we’re looking to increase progression-free survival and overall survival without enhancing the toxic side effects of the standard of care drugs.
Steve Brozak: Okay. It obviously makes sense. And along those same lines you’ve talked about, you’ve got a number of different partners, clinicians, researchers that are working with you across the globe. How would you categorize the level of interest because you can’t obviously do everything given the fact that you’re maximizing your resources, but you’re still a small company. How do you decide on what programs initiatives, collaborators, you’re going to go forward with? And in terms of what else you would like to expand to, if given resources and everything else are always possible, given the number of queries, I’m sure you probably are seeing, and I’ll hop back in the queue after that.
Dr. David Mazzo: Thanks, Steve. Once again, I’ll provide some general commentary and turn to Kristen for some specifics. But when we embarked upon our development plan creation, Kristen and her team as well as a large number of key opinion leaders who were consulted came up with a list of solid tumors where we felt that the presence of stroma, the lack of a satisfactory outcome with current standard of care and all sort of toxic side effects all combined to leave an opportunity for an unmet medical need and an improvement where LSTA1 could make a difference. And that’s how we started and chosen which tumor types to initially work up. We’ve chosen our partners very, very simply and pragmatically. We choose people who are not only enthusiastic but who are pragmatic and can actually operate in the clinic.
And I don’t mean physically operate on a patient, but I mean execute in the clinic and get clinical trials done. They can enroll efficiently, effectively, they can follow the protocols. And in some cases, they contribute some or all of the capital needed to allow us to move forward in a manner that will advance the development status of the compound from a regulatory perspective, not just provide interesting data to write medical journal papers. And so that’s basically how we’ve chosen what we’re working on and with whom we’re working. But Kristen can add to that. And also, we have a list of things that we’d like to do should we find additional resources in the near future that might allow us to do so. Kristen, would you like to add some color, please?
Dr. Kristen Buck: Actually, David, I think you did a really great job in answering that. I mean, we’ve described before how we chose the tumor types we’ve chosen. They’re very difficult to treat cancers with hostile tumor microenvironment with dense stroma, where the standard of care today is just suboptimal. And when we explored with key opinion leaders around the world, where they felt our technology wouldn’t work best, we landed on the list of cancers in which we’re currently studying. I think, as Dave mentioned, we are picking sites, investigators, et cetera, based on their scientific rigor and understanding that this drug needs to get through registration as soon as possible. And our partners, we ensure that we are doing our drug development in the most capitally efficient way we can. And so we’re seeking funding by alternative means and allowing our drug to be exploited both in pancreatic cancer and other solid tumors.
Steve Brozak: Got it.
