The initial study, the 179 study, was originally designed just to look at glofitamab in multiple cohorts of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. There was a spin-off cohort looking at patients with mantle cell lymphoma for which initially we saw a very impressive response rate and I think in the context of what we were seeing with other agents in the field it spurred an expansion of this cohort to get further sort of efficacy and duration of response...
The initial study, the 179 study, was originally designed just to look at glofitamab in multiple cohorts of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. There was a spin-off cohort looking at patients with mantle cell lymphoma for which initially we saw a very impressive response rate and I think in the context of what we were seeing with other agents in the field it spurred an expansion of this cohort to get further sort of efficacy and duration of response.
So from what we did publish, ideally if we look at this patient population, we did see that patients who were in complete remission at the end of treatment, a fair number of these patients, over 50% of these patients, have remained and maintained in remission, which fares very favorably with what we see with even the cellular therapy such as brexu-cel and liso-cel. Moving forward, obviously we’ll continue to generate more, hopefully, durability of response to get more long-term follow-up of this initial cohort, which will hopefully be some sort of harbinger of what we can expect to see with the final readout of the GLOBRYTE study, which will fully evaluate the efficacy of this in a randomized fashion. Obviously, it’s very hard to truly determine the efficacy of treatment options in single-arm studies.
This transcript is AI-generated. While we strive for accuracy, please verify this copy with the video.