The CF33, Vaxinia and Oncarlytics Deal, page-353

Hi Kron,

I believe you are correct, that seems to be the case regarding the treatment groups. Makes sense to have more randomly selected mice in the treatment group rather than control. They are testing the treatment after all. All four died in control group with median 35 day survival. Two out of the eight (or one in four) treated group survived past 210 days.

What is your point about the injection of the tumour? Mice were treated AFTER the establishment of s.c tumour being ~100m3. So once the tumours had grown to this size, they were treated (point 0), then on days 3 and 5.

In your study, pembro was the most effective as a single agent compared to other checkpoint inhibitors. The greatest benefit (cytotoxicity) was in combo, however. When it comes to pancreatic cancer, Pembro isn't the standard of care, nor is it the most effective, chemo still is. So being the most effective single agent against other checkpoint inhibitors is great, but it still trails against the standard of care, by a decent stretch. All the study does is confirm PD-1 is a therapeutic target on pancreatic cancer cells.

If you want to compare pembro and CF33 on the same cell lines check out the below:

Pembro and friends, from the study you referenced:


CF33:



I don't know about you but if comparing CF33 and Pembro as a single agent on pancreatic tumours in xenografts, CF33 looks to be the clear winner.

Running a comparative arm in addition to what? What is the standard of care for all metastatic tumours? There is none.

It's not easier to have absolute certainty and do all comparisons with a clinical trial. IMU needs to design trials based on a real economy of time and resources. Having a trial with CF33 on its own and in combo with Pembro on patients who have already progressed on 2 lines of therapy will certainly show CF33s therapeutic benefit. We are also talking about patients progressing in USA and AUS, where we have access to arguably the best cancer therapies available (unlike HER-vaxx where the trial was conducted in areas where is was difficult to access SOC, Herceptin). Again MAST cancers have little to no effective treatment options across the board. If CF33 can show clinical benefit to a group of indications, that would be huge. Hence Yuman's comment about human therapy. The other benefit is that CF33 currently has low toxicity and is extremely safe, so it doesn't need to go head to head with all other treatments, even if it plays nice in combo. Would you tack on CF33 to another standard of care if there was only a potential upside to beating cancer and no downside??