Arcus’ TIGIT data don’t provide hoped for differentiation

Long-awaited Phase II data from Arcus and Gilead’s TIGIT combination answer no questions about whether domvanalimab is differentiated from other therapies in the class, let alone whether it can succeed in Phase III given its efficacy appears no better, and may be worse, than Roche’s tiragolumab, which missed in Phase III.

Investors and drug developers had been hoping that data from the Phase II ARC-7 trial would provide some hints that prior failures of anti-TIGIT mAbs were related to molecule design rather than the target. They were disappointed, however, as the results provided no clarity in the debate over which Fc engineering strategy is best suited for targeting TIGIT...