We’ve written a lot on TIGIT as a cancer target going back to 2015 (see examples here) as we have followed the trials and tribulations of numerous developments in this niche longitudinally.

I’ve often wondered how people would have viewed results from anti-CTLA4 trials had anti-PD(L)1 therapies came first and not the other way around.  You just imagine the disappointment this might have induced given the way things panned out!

Not all anti-PD(L)1 agents have consistently demonstrated similar results – some have succeeded where others failed. Whether this was due to differences in trial designs, different patient populations, or other factors is often something of a mystery since there is still much we don’t know – the unknown unknowns – and how they can impact performance. If they are not accounted for in the baseline characteristics then differences in outcomes might well unwittingly be impacted from the get-go.

It was always going to be tough to add in another immunotherapy agent and shift the survival curves up and to the right, thereby impacting outcomes even further.

Should we be considering the recent top line tiragolumab readouts an indication of failed trials or something else?

In our latest analysis, we consider a number of pertinent factors and discuss how they can impact performance…

To continue reading our latest discussion on oncology new product development plus commentary and analysis BSB subscribers can log-in or you can click to access the content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Posted by