Here we are with Part 2 of our latest mini-series on novel ways to jumpstart the immune system so that subsequent therapy can be more effective, leading to improved outcomes.
In Part 1, we looked at the preclinical and scientific evidence regarding a novel approach to modulate a cold or non-inflamed tumour type, thereby turning the phenotype into a hotter or inflamed one.
In principle, this concept sounds quite simple in theory, but in practice it’s actually much more technically challenging to do than many realise, especially when we consider not just the design of the antibody itself and perhaps even efficacy, but also the convenience of administration and tolerability, both as monotherapy and also in combination with other therapies.
What’s up on deck today is not one, but three interviews, offering readers a candid look through the keyhole at varied insights from different perspectives around a central R&D topic, namely…
What do you do when you have a new compound in clinical development and wish to explore how to integrate it – do you use it with an existing framework or try something new and different? What about other compounds that might be competing with it internally?
It’s a question every single oncology company faces when a new molecule moves out of preclinical development into phase 1 trials. What next?