Dr. Brad McGregor

I actually am not so sure I buy what to do with a negative, right?

I think it shows that ctna is better as a serial marker, right?

So if you look at the indigger 010 or the checkmate system,

Like patients who had a single negative, about 30 to 40% of patients still relapse, right?

So like that single time point doesn't mean anything at the end of the day.

It's helpful, but you can't feel great about things.

And so the real question is, if you're negative up front, should you monitor and only give them IO when they relapse or convert?

Or by giving them IO in a true adjuvant setting, right?

Could you prevent them from ever developing micrometastatic disease and improve outcomes even further?

Because if you look at those curves, those patients who are negative do the best.

And so if we can keep patients in that negative group, that's better.

So to that point, I think modern is incredibly important.

So modern is open to the alliance.

And it's looking to say, in those patients, there's going to be a lot of variations, a lot of prior I.O.,

But if you're in this situation, you're CTA positive, can you escalate therapy, add in a lag three?

Does that improve outcomes with NEVO versus NEVO alone?

And if you're negative, is it, it's not a priority, should you give NEVO or should you do serial monitoring and do NEVO atomic conversion?

The other point I want to make out is every six weeks CTA testing for a year, I mean, that's not an insignificant hurdle.

And we talk about a lot about scan anxiety with our patients.

I mean, there is CTA anxiety.