# AMPLIFY-7P (ELI-002 7P): what clinicians are saying

> 255 statements from 77 sources (3 podcasts, 5 videos, 67 posts, 1 paper, 1 registry record), 51 of them from 10 confirmed clinicians, each linked to its source. Commentary checked Nov 4, 2026.

## Report

- Trial: First in Human Phase 1/2 Trial of ELI-002 7P Immunotherapy as Treatment for Subjects With Kirsten Rat Sarcoma (KRAS)/Neuroblastoma RAS Viral Oncogene Homolog (NRAS) Mutated Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and Other Solid Tumors
- NCT ID: NCT05726864
- Registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05726864
- Sponsor: Elicio Therapeutics
- Phase: Phase 1/Phase 2
- Status: Active, not recruiting
- Drugs tested: ELI-002 7P
- Indication: KRAS/NRAS mutated pancreatic cancer and other solid tumors
- Version: v1.0.0, edition 1
- Accepted: 2026-11-04 UTC
- Last checked: 2026-11-04 UTC
- Release hash: 6995ea73ba328a08dcda2cce1355a082e9b77bbc9e8a9b39768137d70513e735

## Counts

- Commentary sources screened: 228
- Sources cited by verified statements: 77
- Verified statements: 255
- From speakers with a confirmed clinical role (verified by the NPI registry or their own institution's staff page): 51
- Findings: 10
- Named people in screened sources (unnamed speakers and accounts not counted): 32
- Voices cited: 32
- Cited voices with a verified identity: 17
- Cited clinicians, voices with a confirmed clinical role (the abstract's clinicians): 10
- Of them physicians, whose confirmed role is a physician's, not a physician assistant's, nurse's or pharmacist's (the abstract's physicians): 10
- By role and specialty (the abstract's specialty counts):
  - 7 physician, Medical oncology
  - 1 physician
  - 1 physician, Hematology and oncology
  - 1 physician, Pathology
- Organisational or shared accounts (not counted as people): 18

A verified identity says who a voice is. A cited clinician also has a clinical role confirmed by the NPI registry or their own institution's staff page. Verified voices without such a role, such as researchers, advocates, company staff, or clinicians whose role only a source or their own profile states, are not counted as clinicians.

Counts describe the retained sources. They do not estimate how many HCPs hold a view.

## Abstract

AMPLIFY-7P tests ELI-002 7P against observation for disease-free survival in KRAS/NRAS-mutated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; debate weighs immune activity against a negative clinical result. The report cites 10 physicians, including seven medical oncologists and a physician described in the sources as involved in AMPLIFY-7P; a medical oncologist recalls having the trial open at their center. R0-focused development and ctDNA-guided patient selection remain debated. What future trials would justify adding vaccination after standard care, isolate its contribution in combinations and help explain uncertainty without taking away hope?

## Open Medical Affairs question

What prospective evidence would justify adding vaccination after standard care, distinguish its contribution within combinations, and explain uncertainty without extinguishing hope?

Raised by the leading finding. The report shows what clinicians said and the sources behind it; it does not settle the question.

## Findings (titles)

- F1. Speakers weigh AMPLIFY-7P’s immune-response findings and research prospects despite missed primary DFS endpoint and unproven clinical benefit; one poster rejects softening trial failure.
- F2. Speakers see an R0 development rationale, while others question whether the subgroup can support a confirmatory program
- F3. Speakers treat ctDNA and prior radiation as selection hypotheses; one public explainer presents them much more decisively
- F4. Speakers welcome tolerability but do not regard it as a substitute for efficacy; one asks about anti-albumin immunity
- F5. Speakers favor further development; one poster questions whether uncontrolled metastatic ORR can isolate added vaccine activity
- F6. Speakers value off-the-shelf breadth and access, while one questions whether a neoantigen-based vaccine may be better
- F7. Speakers use AMPLIFY-201 to explain vaccine enthusiasm while acknowledging that responder comparisons do not establish efficacy
- F8. Public commentators disagree on what delayed DFS maturation implies, and one explicitly acknowledges a failed efficacy prediction
- F9. One clinician describes trial participation as a source of hope; public commentators warn that immune response is not cure
- F_C4_metastatic_combination_context. One author reads metastatic sequential responses as encouragement for combinations; one poster questions what uncontrolled ORR can attribute to vaccination

## What sits behind each finding

Counts describe what the report retained, not how many clinicians hold a view. A statement can support more than one finding. Speakers named counts every name a finding's statements carry, of any role and including names not yet matched to a person, so it is not the report's count of cited voices or confirmed clinicians and can be larger.

| Finding | Statements | Passages | Sources | Speakers named (any role) | Limitations |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| F1 | 13 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 3 |
| F2 | 18 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 3 |
| F3 | 20 | 11 | 10 | 8 | 3 |
| F4 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 3 |
| F5 | 26 | 18 | 17 | 18 | 5 |
| F6 | 19 | 20 | 13 | 10 | 4 |
| F7 | 28 | 19 | 9 | 9 | 4 |
| F8 | 19 | 15 | 11 | 5 | 3 |
| F9 | 14 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 3 |
| F_C4_metastatic_combination_context | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 |

### What the statements are

| Finding | Views | Questions and uncertainty | Clinical experience | Comparisons | Restated results and context | Statement links to supporting passages | Statement links to context passages | Sources by kind | Feeds the Medical Affairs question |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | --- |
| F1 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 8 posts and articles | yes |
| F2 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 21 | 0 | 10 posts and articles, 1 podcast or video | yes |
| F3 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 0 | 9 posts and articles, 1 podcast or video | yes |
| F4 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 5 posts and articles, 2 podcasts and video, 1 publication | yes |
| F5 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 29 | 2 | 15 posts and articles, 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F6 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 22 | 3 | 10 posts and articles, 2 podcasts and video, 1 registry | yes |
| F7 | 18 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 30 | 7 | 6 posts and articles, 3 podcasts and video | yes |
| F8 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 20 | 1 | 11 posts and articles | yes |
| F9 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 2 | 4 posts and articles, 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F_C4_metastatic_combination_context | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 2 posts and articles | yes |

### Trial dimensions

- Primary endpoint: Phase 1: Evaluate the safety of ELI-002 7P: no finding draws on it directly
- Primary endpoint: Phase 2: Compare ELI-002 7P versus standard of care (SOC; observation) in DFS (disease free survival): F1 (7 shared claims), F2 (1 shared claims), F4 (1 shared claims), F5 (1 shared claims)
- Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Overall Survival (OS): F1 (1 shared claims), F5 (1 shared claims), F9 (2 shared claims)
- Secondary endpoint: Phase 1 and Phase 2: Determine the biomarker reduction or clearance rate: no finding draws on it directly
- Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Determine the 1-year DFS: F5 (1 shared claims)
- Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Evaluate the safety of ELI-002 7P: F1 (1 shared claims), F4 (3 shared claims)
- Population and setting: F1 (1 shared claims), F3 (3 shared claims), F6 (4 shared claims), F9 (1 shared claims)
- The comparison: F4 (2 shared claims), F5 (1 shared claims), F7 (1 shared claims), F9 (1 shared claims)
- Safety and tolerability: F4 (6 shared claims)
- Design and conduct: F2 (4 shared claims), F3 (5 shared claims), F8 (1 shared claims)

## Abbreviations

- DFS: disease-free survival
- HCP: healthcare professional
- MCP: Model Context Protocol, how AI agents read the report
- NPI: National Provider Identifier, the US registry number for clinicians
- ORR: objective response rate
- OS: overall survival

## Sample findings

Paraphrased; the full report links each statement to its source.

## What's inside

| Section | Items | Access |
| --- | ---: | --- |
| Findings with interpretation, counterviews and limits | 10 | Titles free |
| Detailed analysis | 11 sections | Paid |
| Verified statements with short source quotes and links | 255 | Paid |
| Who said each statement, with each cited voice's role and what confirmed it (NPI registry or staff page) | 32 | Every edition |
| Trial aspects mapped | 18 | Free |
| Sources with links | 77 | Counts free |
| MCP access for your AI agent, same license key | Included | Every edition |
| Verified speaker IDs as data (NPI, social and scholarly IDs) | 17 | 12-month plan add-on |

Every edition, the free report included, names who said each statement, as the source shows them. Each named voice's card gives a clinical role only when the NPI registry or the person's own institution's staff page confirms it, and says which; a role only a source states is labelled as the source's. Here 10 of the 32 cited voices have a role confirmed that way. Every edition also comes with MCP access, so your AI agent reads the same evidence with your license key. The verified speaker identities add-on, sold with 12-month plans, adds each verified person's IDs as data (the NPI number, X, Bluesky and LinkedIn accounts, ORCID and institutional pages), so your team can check each attribution itself. It is for checking attribution inside your organization, never for outreach or targeting, and it does not unlock who said what.

## Trial aspects

18 discussed · 0 no commentary found · 0 assessment incomplete.

| Aspect | Coverage | Statements | Sources |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: |
| Primary endpoint: Phase 1: Evaluate the safety of ELI-002 7P | discussed | 1 | 1 |
| Primary endpoint: Phase 2: Compare ELI-002 7P versus standard of care (SOC; observation) in DFS (disease free survival) | discussed | 13 | 12 |
| Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Overall Survival (OS) | discussed | 4 | 4 |
| Secondary endpoint: Phase 1 and Phase 2: Determine the biomarker reduction or clearance rate | discussed | 1 | 1 |
| Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Determine the 1-year DFS | discussed | 1 | 1 |
| Secondary endpoint: Phase 2: Evaluate the safety of ELI-002 7P | discussed | 4 | 4 |
| Population and setting | discussed | 9 | 7 |
| The comparison (The registered arms and what clinicians said about how they compare.) | discussed | 5 | 4 |
| Safety and tolerability | discussed | 6 | 6 |
| Design and conduct | discussed | 9 | 4 |
| Immune activation versus demonstrated clinical benefit | discussed | 17 | 12 |
| R0/R1 imbalance and credibility of an R0-focused strategy | discussed | 16 | 11 |
| ctDNA, residual disease and prior radiation as prognostic or selection factors | discussed | 18 | 10 |
| Durability, extended dosing, combinations and phase 3 readiness | discussed | 27 | 18 |
| Off-the-shelf versus personalized platforms, HLA breadth and equitable research access | discussed | 19 | 13 |
| AMPLIFY-201 ELI-002 2P as the rationale for expectations about ELI-002 7P | discussed | 26 | 9 |
| Event-driven timing, external control expectations and failed forecasts | discussed | 18 | 10 |
| Patient hope, research participation and communication about cure or standard care | discussed | 15 | 7 |

Discussed means at least one verified statement addresses the aspect, not that every question in it is covered: gaps inside a discussed aspect are listed under Scope and limits, and the full report gives each aspect its own limitations. No commentary found means none in the sources read. Assessment incomplete marks an aspect with no statement found while known source limits apply.

## Sources

| Channel | Screened | Cited |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| X threads | 184 | 57 |
| Bluesky threads | 28 | 3 |
| LinkedIn posts | 8 | 7 |
| YouTube | 5 | 5 |
| Podcasts | 3 | 3 |
| Publications (primary source, cited for context) | not screened | 1 |
| Registry (primary source, cited for context) | not screened | 1 |

- Screened window: 2023-04-27 to 2026-11-03
- Cited window: 2024-01-09 to 2026-11-03
- Retrieved: 2026-11-04

Screened sources were retrieved for this trial. Cited sources back at least one verified statement and include primary sources used for context.

## The trial

From ClinicalTrials.gov.

- Title: First in Human Phase 1/2 Trial of ELI-002 7P Immunotherapy as Treatment for Subjects With Kirsten Rat Sarcoma (KRAS)/Neuroblastoma RAS Viral Oncogene Homolog (NRAS) Mutated Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and Other Solid Tumors
- Registry: NCT05726864 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05726864)
- Study IDs: ELI-002-201
- Sponsor: Elicio Therapeutics
- Design: Phase 1/Phase 2 · interventional, randomized, sequential, phase1, phase2
- Status: Active, not recruiting
- Enrollment: 158 (actual)
- Start: 2023-04-14 (actual)
- Primary completion: 2026-04-20 (actual)
- Primary endpoint: Phase 1: Evaluate the safety of ELI-002 7P (28 days after the first dose of ELI-002 7P)
- Primary endpoint: Phase 2: Compare ELI-002 7P versus standard of care (SOC; observation) in DFS (disease free survival) (After the last radiographic assessment at Visit 26 (Week 150))
- Intervention: ELI-002 7P (drug)

## Scope and limits

This report does not judge efficacy, estimate HCP prevalence or consensus or give treatment advice.

- Discussion that does not name the trial may be missing from this edition.
- 3 matching sources (2 X threads, 1 YouTube video) could not be read and are not included.
- 1 cited commentary passage leaves a source question open, such as who was speaking. The report attributes no further than the source shows.
- Not yet captured in this edition: a remark on an unspecified anticipated milestone for vaccination after curative-intent therapy.
- 116 passages in 71 sources used in this report were not fully assessed for clinician views, so a view there may be missing from this edition.
- 145 statements in the sources reviewed for this edition are about other patients or topics, or only mention the trial, and are not counted.
- Further source limits: discussion that describes the trial without naming it may be incomplete; some discussion that describes the trial without naming it may be missing; 7 sources about other trials or topics are not included.
- The sources reviewed for this edition are not representative of all HCPs or all public discussion. Repeated posts and reposts should not be counted as independent clinical agreement.
- Several audio and video statements cannot be assigned to a named speaker. A program description, channel name or guest list does not identify who said a particular passage.
- Named authors and account operators have differing levels of identity and professional-role confirmation. Patient, corporate and investment perspectives are not treated as confirmed HCP views.
- No full protocol or exact regulatory label was available. The report cannot independently settle statistical-analysis planning, regulatory requirements or approved-use status.
- The R0 analysis is described inconsistently as post hoc or prespecified, and phase 3 is described inconsistently as ongoing, planned or possible. These accounts are preserved rather than reconciled by assumption.
- Immune-response findings use evaluable-patient denominators and response-defined associations. They do not establish recurrence prevention, survival benefit or cure in the full randomized population.
- Earlier AMPLIFY-201 ELI-002 2P findings, historical comparisons and model-based timing arguments provide context for expectations, not randomized AMPLIFY-7P efficacy evidence.
- The report does not treat proposed longer dosing, checkpoint combinations, molecular enrichment or off-the-shelf access advantages as demonstrated clinical benefits.
- The three-patient metastatic observations after ELI-002 7P and later nivolumab-based therapy explain interest in combination research. They do not answer the postoperative randomized question or establish concurrent-combination efficacy.
- Coverage of alternative postoperative vaccine studies is incomplete, particularly their chemotherapy backbones, comparators, accrual status and time to randomized evidence. The report should not be read as a complete comparison of those alternatives.

How reports are built and checked: https://www.erudio.com/methods

## Editions and corrections

- v1.0.0, edition 1, accepted 2026-11-04 UTC: current edition

Each new edition gets a new version: a new or changed finding raises the middle number (1.0.0 to 1.1.0), added evidence or newly verified speakers alone the last number (1.0.0 to 1.0.1), and a change of report format the first number. A correction fixes the published edition in place without making a new edition, so the version stays the same. Changes are corrections that add, remove or change a statement or finding, or withdraw a source; routine maintenance (people cards, names and spellings, recounts, tags and page wording) changes none. Every correction is listed here with its date. Last checked for new commentary 2026-11-04 UTC. No changes.

## Offer

- Size: Standard · 255 verified statements · 51 from 10 confirmed clinicians
- Current edition: $1,250. A purchase starts a check for new commentary and any newer edition follows at no charge
- 3 months of updates: $2,200
- 6 months of updates: $3,100
- 12 months of updates: $4,400
- Optional verified speaker identities (12-month updates only, product updates-12-identities; speakers are named and described in every report): the NPI and other verified IDs, to check that each statement is attributed to the right person, never for outreach or targeting, at $15 per identity-verified person in the edition at purchase (17 now), at most $1,250; people verified later in the term at no charge
- Pricing: https://www.erudio.com/pricing
- Buy now (card, through Stripe): https://www.erudio.com/reports/amplify-7p-nct05726864
- Agents: POST https://www.erudio.com/api/orders with {"report": "amplify-7p-nct05726864", "product": "edition" | "updates-3" | "updates-6" | "updates-12" | "updates-12-identities", "buyer_email": "...", "licence_key": "<your key, if you hold one>"}; it returns a payment link for your user (and a pay_url your own MPP or x402 payment client can pay over HTTP 402, when offered), and once paid the status_url returns your license key. Send the same key with every later order so all reports sit on one key. The buyer gets their account key by email, which reads every report bought with their address; recover_key (POST https://www.erudio.com/api/keys/recover) sends it again
- Talk to Audun Utengen and Tom Lee (invoice, PO, questions): https://www.erudio.com/contact?report=amplify-7p-05726864

## Cite

Erudio Health. AMPLIFY-7P (NCT05726864): HCP commentary report. Edition 1, v1.0.0. Accepted Nov 4, 2026. https://www.erudio.com/reports/amplify-7p-nct05726864

## Machine access

- JSON: https://www.erudio.com/reports/amplify-7p-nct05726864.json
- Markdown: https://www.erudio.com/reports/amplify-7p-nct05726864.md
- Change feed (JSON Feed: new editions and changes): https://www.erudio.com/reports/amplify-7p-nct05726864/feed.json
- MCP, no sign-in: https://mcp.erudio.com/free, tool `get_report_card` with `{"slug": "amplify-7p-nct05726864"}`