I should also point out that inside announced last week that they completed enrollment in the two registration studies for the anti-PD-1 sinus in lung cancer and anal cancer. So, again, with those readouts as results accrue if those are successful. What we have on the table are a potential $320 million of regulatory clinical milestones, another 330 in commercial. So, over $600 million there. And we still have the potential for another $380 million from Sanofi. So, that’s over $1 billion of potential milestones from two approved products. So, getting back to the essence of your question, just with this additional 50 and the studies are ongoing, that does include the new antibody drug conjugate that we will file an IND in the fourth quarter this year.
It does include the opportunity to do additional studies, whether it be for new tumor indications or additional studies in different lines of prostate cancer. Those are under discussion right now. And it doesn’t take away from any of the work preclinically for a second ADC from the Synaptics that we said is ongoing right now, which we’re hoping to target for an IND in 2024, plus a lot of other preclinical development activity that we have not discussed to date. So, we’re very, very encouraged, both with our cash runway and the opportunity to pursue a very robust clinical and preclinical pipeline.
Jon Miller: Great. That makes sense. I guess, I know you sometimes include risk-adjusted future milestones and your cash runway. Can you talk a little bit about how much of that potential $1 billion in milestones you’re counting on when you give that runway into 2026?
Scott Koenig: Yes, we haven’t broken that down. Clearly, we make those adjustments based on real-time results. And certainly, we have the opportunity to adjust a probability based on the fact that Sanofi has said that they are going for regulatory approval. Obviously, we’d like to see the data. We have not seen the data on the results of the new study. But we are — at this point, we’re not in a position to break out the specifics there.
Jim Karrels: I would — this is Jim, Jonathan. I would just add to that, that historically, if we look back at the probabilities that we use for risk adjustment, we’ve been very conservative.
Jon Miller: Okay, makes sense. Thanks so much.
Scott Koenig: Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Silvan Tuerkcan with JMP Securities. Your line is open.
Silvan Tuerkcan: Yes, hi. Thanks for taking my question. A couple of questions on TAMARACK here. The patients group that you’re expecting to enroll by the end of the year or maybe early next year, will that have sufficient chemo-naive patients that, that could be also an option may be better than the chemo-experienced patients for a registrational study? Or what are your options after in terms of patient population that you have in the Phase II to go on?
Scott Koenig: No. Well, no, actually, that is one of the — one of the several hard fast enrollment criteria. They have to have been exposed to a chemotherapeutic most likely docetaxel. So, in this particular study, we’re not — we want to really compare the results, as I described earlier, of our previous experiences with vobra in a late-line population that is a chemo experience. So, not in this study, we are certainly interested in looking at opportunities in earlier lines of therapy, including hormone-sensitive populations, but nothing is on the table right now.
Silvan Tuerkcan: Great. Thanks. That’s very helpful. And then at ASCO, we saw first in human data from [Indiscernible], ADC, as directed B7-H3, are there any learnings from that, that we can apply to vobra duo?
