Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Justin Zelin with BTIG.
Justin Zelin: Maybe just a follow-up on the prior question just on duration of therapy. Do you expect that this duration of therapy, what kind of tick in the results seen thus far mirroring the clinical trials in the real world? Or do you think that it’s possible that you could see extension with more follow-up here?
Bahija Jallal: Go ahead.
Ralph Torbay: So Justin, that’s what we expect. We expect to see so far what we’ve seen in the clinical trial. And if you look at our clinical trial to a clinical trial, you see the median staying somewhat the same and then the mean growing not significantly, and that’s driven mostly by the tale. So we do expect that the longer we’re in the market, if physicians keep treating the way they’re treating, we do expect the mean to be growing, not significantly, and I think you can use the clinical trial the benchmark to see where this is going.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Peter Lawson with Barclays.
Peter Lawson: I guess more of a follow-up here, just around where you think that duration of treatment could eventually settle for KIMMTRAK? And the half-life extension, is that for patient convenience? Or do you think that could help with durability as well?
Bahija Jallal: Yes. Great. I think Ralph you take the duration and maybe David on the half-life expected — extension.
Ralph Torbay: So, I think the best answer I can give you is that we’re going to be providing an update of our 3-year overall survival, which will include duration of therapy in PFS at an upcoming conference. So I invite you to take a look at that. So you can see where we expect the mean duration of treatment to go. David?
David Berman: Yes. Peter, you know what’s remarkable with KIMMTRAK with a plasma half-life of 8 hours, we saw survival benefit with a hazard ratio of 0.51. So we know that our current platform is, of course, very highly active. I think it’s an open question about whether a half-life extension will have any improvement in efficacy or durability. We’ll have to just be data driven on that.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Jeff Hung with Morgan Stanley.
Jeff Hung: For advanced melanoma, can you talk about why you’re using ctDNA in Phase 2? And how predictive do you think that is for survival endpoint in Phase 3? And then for PRAME, how do you think about treating multiple HLAs? And what needs to be done to get there?
Bahija Jallal: Right. Great question. David?
David Berman: So for the advanced melanoma, the dual endpoints for the Phase II are both ctDNA and overall survival. The reason we’re doing ctDNA is because that gives us the earliest fastest read so that we can make the decisions for the Phase 3, i.e., drop one of the arms, repower it. We also designed it though, because ctDNA is not yet completely validated in cutaneous melanoma, we realize that. It’s going to give us a directional look. We designed it also to have a survival look. We realized survival won’t be mature at that point, but we will have enough power to get an estimate about whether survival is trending. So that’s really the reason for the ctDNA. With regard to the second question, I think you’re asking about different alleles for PRAME. Is that Correct?
Bahija Jallal: Yes.
David Berman: So after A2, the most attractive HLA allele for PRAME A24, and that’s why we announced that we are pursuing this HLA-A24. And we’ll take the learnings from the HLA-A2 allele and apply it to A24 to make it develop faster. We estimate this will increase the opportunity 30% from a patient population opportunity.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Nick Gallo with Goldman Sachs. Looks like we lost Nick. I’m going to bring through the next questioner. Our next questions come from the line of Ahu Demir with Ladenburg Thalmann.
Ahu Demir: Congrats on a good quarter and a year. My first question is on KIMMTRAK. Could you maybe provide more color on discontinuation rates and treatment beyond progression in the real world?
Bahija Jallal: Great. Thank you. Ralph, do you want to…
