So the VEBrant study looked at patients with clear cell sarcoma. This is a group of patients in whom we really have very limited efficacy from standard cytotoxic chemotherapy or even targeted therapies. That disease has net overexpression, so this drug is a Met inhibitor. And so part of the reason for using that agent. The patients who entered on the study were all on some form of immunotherapy for at least four months...
So the VEBrant study looked at patients with clear cell sarcoma. This is a group of patients in whom we really have very limited efficacy from standard cytotoxic chemotherapy or even targeted therapies. That disease has net overexpression, so this drug is a Met inhibitor. And so part of the reason for using that agent. The patients who entered on the study were all on some form of immunotherapy for at least four months. And then they continued with the combination, which is intriguing because probably some of the best data that we have from prospective studies is a study that combined nivolumab with sunitinib. And so, you know, is there something about this combination that is better for this particular disease? What was sort of interesting about the data that was presented is that the response rate that we’re seeing, which is over 30%, is the highest reported response rate in any trial. And in sort of evaluating it, there were a couple of things that I noted. Some of the responses were quite short. And there were initial patients who were excluded from sort of the reported response who had been taken off therapy quite early. I think sort of the other thing that is known about clear cell sarcoma is while there is evidence of Met overexpression in tissue studies in clear cell sarcoma, it’s not clear that the receptor is actually activated. And we don’t see evidence of the Met ligand in tissue. So I think there’s a question about, is that the right target to be using? Having said that, the data is quite compelling. And I really, for purposes of knowing how this moves forward, want to understand, is there something about this drug which really is targeting Met in a way that other drugs have not? Because Met inhibitors that have been tried before have really had response rates of less than 10%. Or is there something unique about the biology of this combination? And, you know, can we do correlative studies to try and understand what that means?
This transcript is AI-generated. While we strive for accuracy, please verify this copy with the video.
