This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
spk01: study in the last six months. I think that surpassed expectations both at our level and at the physician level. What does it mean beyond that? I think it's important. It underlines or underscores the tremendous enthusiasm amongst physicians and patients for a new treatment option, particularly a targeted treatment option for patients with DMF liposarcoma, which as we know is MDM2 amplified by definition. And so that's really reflected in the enormous enthusiasm to enroll into the study, and we would expect to see that play itself out in future trials and in future circumstances, hopefully if the study is positive in the commercial setting as well.
spk00: Great, thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Jeff Jones with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead. Your line is now open.
spk03: Thank you, and good afternoon, guys. I guess two questions from me. On the Monitor 2 basket trial, any idea what kind of duration response data you'll have in hand when that reads out top line end of year? And then the second question, any updates on the RAD52 program?
spk06: Hi, Jeff, thanks for the question. Let me turn that question over to Bob.
spk05: Yeah, so to answer the first part of the question regarding mantra two, we've messaged in the past that we expect to have 10 patients with a meaningful operational follow-up. This would be at least four months or approximately two scans for those patients as the minimum duration, and that expectation has not changed. Regarding your second question on the RAD52 program, we are continuing to progress that project, and we've signaled in the past, however, that we have mitigated spend on that to focus on milidimetan, and based on that, there's some progress in the RAD52 program. Great. Thanks.
spk00: Once again, if you'd like to ask a question, that's press star 1. And we'll take our next question from Sumit Roy with Jones Research. Please go ahead. Your line is now open.
spk02: Hi, everyone. Possibly this is a question for Bob. I was wondering, as we are seeing in multiple phase three trials, the standard of care or the control arm is outperforming the historical data. Anything that possibly due to better tumor monitoring or better supportive care? So I'm curious to get your thoughts on if you think the control arm could outperform the seven-year or eight-year-old historic data or if there is any concern for that.
spk06: Thanks for the question, Shomit. Bob?
spk05: Yeah. You know, I think this is – we're looking at data, obviously, from the registrational trial of Travectin, which is the clinical arm in our trial. That is a modern clinical trial with robust subset analysis, and we see no indication to expect that Travectin will outperform in the mantra study compared to its registrational data.
spk06: Let me add there's some of that, you know, of course, to predict, but as a reminder in terms of the clinical trial design for Mantra, we actually did assume that the control arm would modestly be improved from its efficacy from the registrational study. So we did actually anticipate any potential improvement. We still anticipate an opportunity to succeed for indemnity.
spk02: Great. I have a quick second question, if I may. Are you allowing crossover from the control arm in the trial, mantra trial?
spk06: No, we're not. We're not. There's no crossover in mantra.
spk02: All right. Thank you so much for taking the questions. And congratulations on the fast enrollment.
spk06: Thank you so much.
spk00: We'll take our last question from the line of Tony Butler with Roth Capital. Please go ahead. Your line is now open.
spk04: Yes. Thanks very much. I just wanted to ask about Mantra 4 since it's one of the things we haven't discussed this evening in detail given the population size and the opportunity for the compound in that CDK in 2A population. And as you're Looking forward to that trial, I would think that the number of sites that could or would like to participate would be quite a few. Could you just provide a brief discussion, if I may, on are you thinking about a small number or would you get in with both feet and perhaps expand it, including internationally? Thank you. Even if it is a phase one, I understand.
spk06: Thanks for the question, Tony. Let me turn the question over to Bob.
spk05: Yeah, thanks for the question. You know, obviously the MONTRA-4 study is very similar to the MONTRA-2 study, which is ongoing in the fact that it is a basket design, all cumbersolid tumors, genetically selected patients. So we hope to take the learnings from the MONTRA-2 trial into the MONTRA-4. You can expect probably some overlap in terms of the sites that we've used. Obviously, as you mentioned, the population is far larger for the CDK into a loss population. And therefore, we would expect enrollment, you know, on a kind of per site basis to be much, much faster given the population of those. So hopefully that answers your question.
spk04: Thank you, Bob. Appreciate it.
spk00: That concludes today's question and answer session. I'd like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Valenka for any additional closing remarks.
spk06: Thank you, Operator, and we want to thank everyone for joining us on this quarter's earnings call, and we look forward to updating everyone on our progress over the next quarter. Thank you.
spk00: This concludes today's call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.
Disclaimer