A Randomized Phase III Trial of OSE2101 Compared With Chemotherapy (Docetaxel or Pemetrexed) in HLA-A2 Positive Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With Progressive Disease After Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
Phase: PHASE3
Conditions: Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Sponsor: OSE Immunotherapeutics



OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 2 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Signature page 
 
Sponsor 
 
  
 
Signature 
 
 
 
Date 
Coordinating investigators – Co-Chairs of the Steering Committee 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date 
 
 
Signature 
 
 
 
Date 
Principal Investigator 
 
 
Signature 
 
Date 
As an investigator, I have read and approve this protocol. My signature, in conjunction with the signature of 
the sponsor, confirms the agreement of both parties that this clinical study will be conducted in accordance 
with the protocol and all related documents, and in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations 
including but not limited to the Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (GCP), the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), Directive 2001/20/EC, the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and its 
amendments. 
Nothing in this document is intended to limit the authority of a physician to provide emergency medical 
care under applicable regulations. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 4 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Revision History 
 
Study protocol 
version 
Summary of main changes 
Version 1.0 on 
27-Jul-2015 
Initial version submitted to Authorities (not applicable in countries) 
Version 1.2 on 
02-Oct-2015 
Exclusion criteria n°9 added to exclude patients treated with corticosteroids within 3-weeks 
before inclusion (except if low dose) 
Version 2.0 on 
30-Nov-2015 
Exclusion criteria n°1 modified to exclude patients with Large Cell Carcinoma; Inclusion 
criterion n°5 clarified to authorize patients as 2nd line after failure of prior platinum-based 
chemotherapy or as 3rd line after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy then immune 
checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) 
Version 3.0 on 
14-Feb-2017 
Inclusion criterion n°5 modified to authorize patients as 2nd line or 3rd line after failure of 
platinum-based chemotherapy and/or failure of ICI (sequential or combined with chemo) as ICIs 
may be used either as 1st or 2nd line therapy; PDL-1 expression on tumor biopsy not further 
mandatory for inclusion; clarification on inclusion criteria n°9 to authorize only patients with 
asymptomatic brain metastases 
Version 4.0 on 
21-Dec-2017 and 
Version 4.1 on 
28-Feb-2018 
Inclusion criterion n°5 modified to only authorize the subgroup of patients previously treated 
with ICI and who have progressed after ICI (as 2nd line after ICI + chemotherapy first line or 
as 3rd line after platinum-based chemotherapy in first line then ICI in second line);  Study design 
modified for a Phase II (Step 1) / Phase III (Step 2) design with a first step Fleming non 
comparative Phase II design; First secondary criterion modified for disease control rate instead of 
progression-free survival; Clarification on population for analysis for Step 1 and Step 2 (in 
version 4.1 per request after the  voluntary harmonized procedure (VHP) in the European 
Union); Per IDMC request, the recruitment was temporarily halted from June 2017 to November 
2017 before the decision to restart the recruitment only in the subgroup of patients who 
progressed after ICI was taken based on the IDMC independent analysis of data (safety and 
death events) reported in the first 131 patients randomized until June 2017; This analysis was 
blinded from the investigators and the Sponsor. 
Version 5.0 on 
29-Mar-2019 
Implementation of the 8th edition of TNM instead of 7th edition leading to modify the study title 
with no modification of the target study population; Inclusion criterion n°7 modified to authorize 
patient with progression during or within 12 months after the end of ICI as sequential or 
concomitant platinum-based chemotherapy ± radiation for locally advanced disease (stage III); 
Study design modified to remove the possibility of a sample size reassessment of Step 2 based on 
the Step 1 Phase II results,  to continue with the 2:1 randomization ratio in Step 2 and, as a 
consequence, to increase the number of events in Step 2 from 250 to 278 and to increase 
accordingly the number of patients, also to not consider for the final analysis the 38 patients with 
previous ICI treatment randomized before the recruitment hold; Implementation of NCI CTCAE 
version 5.0 instead of CTCAE version 4.0 leading to clarifying the definition of cytokine release 
syndrome (CRS) as well as the management of CRS still per Lee recommendation; A 
translational study has been added for patients/sites who agreed, in order to assess 
immunogenicity before and under treatment. 
Version 6.0 on 
02-Feb-2022 
To notify the decision to early stop the recruitment in April 2020 per the IDMC recommendation 
due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the primary endpoint of the study (OS) and the 
risk on data integrity, and to harmonize the study protocol with the final Statistical Analysis Plan 
(SAP) completed on 23-jul-21 before database lock.  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 5 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Main changes of the analysis plan compared to protocol v5.0 were to reorder the secondary 
endpoints and to add Post-Progression Survival (PPS) and Time to worsening of ECOG PS as 
first secondary endpoints to better reflect the efficacy of a cancer vaccine, to consider a 
Population of Interest (PoI) identified during Step-1 as the main population for the final analysis, 
and to estimate the study power considering that half of patients have been finally included due 
to the early study discontinuation. Additional analysis of COVID-19 impact, and quality of life 
based on EORTC and FDA guidance’s were added. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 6 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Protocol Summary 
 
Title 
A randomized parallel group Phase III trial of OSE2101 as 2nd or 3rd 
line compared with standard treatment (docetaxel or pemetrexed) in HLA-A2 
positive patients with advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with progressive 
disease after last treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) 
(OSE2101C301) 
Objectives 
Step 1 (Phase II) 2:1 randomized non-comparative one stage Fleming Phase II 
Primary objective 
• To evaluate the overall survival (OS) rate at 12 months in HLA-A2 positive 
patients with advanced NSCLC as 2nd or 3rd line therapy after failure of 
checkpoint-inhibitor regimens 
Secondary objectives 
• To describe secondary measures of clinical efficacy including OS (median), 
disease control rate (DCR) at 6 and 12 months, Health-related Quality of life 
(QoL), progression free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and 
evaluate duration of response (DR) 
• To assess the safety and tolerability 
• To describe patient reported outcomes (PRO) disease/treatment-related 
symptoms of lung cancer 
 
Step 2 (conditional Phase III) 2:1 comparative randomized Phase III 
Primary objective 
• To demonstrate that OSE2101 is superior to control treatment with respect to 
OS in HLA-A2 positive patients with advanced NSCLC as 2nd or 3rd line 
therapy after failure of checkpoint-inhibitor regimens; primary population 
will be the Population of Interest (PoI) defined as patients with secondary 
resistance to ICI monotherapy with ICI given 2nd line; sensitivity analysis 
will be done in all patients 
Secondary objectives 
• To compare secondary measures of clinical efficacy including Post 
progression Survival (PPS), Time to worsening of ECOG PS, Health-related 
QoL, DCR at 6 and 12 months, and PFS 
• To assess the safety and tolerability of OSE2101 compared to the control 
treatment 
Exploratory objectives 
• To compare other efficacy criteria (ORR, DR), other QoL criteria, time to 
next lung cancer therapy and COVID-19 impact in both treatment arms.  
Design  
Open-label, multicenter, controlled, randomized, parallel group, 2-step Phase 
II/III study; Randomization 2:1 in experimental Arm A OSE2101 or Arm B 
Standard of Care (SoC) docetaxel or pemetrexed using the following 
stratification factors: histology (squamous vs. non squamous), best response to 
first line treatment (objective response vs. no objective response), line rank of 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 7 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
previous treatment with ICI (ICI first line vs. ICI second line)  
Study  
planned 
duration 
First subject 
First visit 
 
Q1 2016 
Last subject 
Last visit (Step 1) 
Last visit (Step 2) 
 
≈Q1 2020  
Q1 2021  
Centers / 
Country 
Approximately 80 to 125 centers in the European Union, North America and 
other countries. The study includes IND and non-IND centers (21 CFR 312.120 
compliant). 
Subjects / 
Groups 
Step 1 (Phase II) 
A total of 38 patients with previous ICI treatment have been recruited before 
protocol version 4.0. After implementation of protocol version 4.0, 108 new 
patients are to be randomized with a 2:1 randomization ratio in order to reach a 
total of 84 patients in arm A (OSE2101) evaluable at 12 months (death observed 
within 12 months or follow-up time of 12 months or more). 
Step 2 (Phase III) 
After end of randomization in Step 1, the same 2:1 randomization ratio will be 
continued for patients entering Step 2 until a cumulated total of new 363 patients 
or a cumulated total of 278 deaths (both counts excluding the 38 patients 
enrolled before protocol 4.0) is reached. 
Step-1 analysis was reviewed by the independent data monitoring committee 
(IDMC) in March 2020. Step-1 data showed that the predefined thresholds of 12 
months-OS rate in OSE2101 arm was achieved. At this time, the IDMC was 
concerned about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the primary endpoint 
of the study (OS), on the risk on data integrity and recommended to stop accrual 
early.  
The Sponsor decided to stop the accrual in April 2020. At that date, 219 patients 
have been enrolled and planned to be followed for survival up to mid-January 
2021. From Step-1 analysis, a population of interest (PoI) consisting of patients 
from the 2d line ICI stratification factor with secondary resistance to ICI 
(duration of ICI ≥ 12 weeks) was identified as having a benefit over SoC and 
being proposed as the main population for final analysis (Kluger et al., 2020). 
 
N.B.: All patients included in the study will be monitored until death-events or 
termination of the study or decision to withdraw from the study, even after a 
change in therapy for progression, as the main criterion is OS and as all patients 
included in the post-ICI stratum will be kept for the final analysis. 
Patients included within the subgroup "no previous treatment with ICI" before 
recruitment hold in this subgroup will continue treatment as planned. They will 
be described separately in the final analysis.  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 8 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Study periods 
The total study duration for an individual subject will depend on the survival of 
the subject, including the following periods: 
• Pre-screening: HLA-A2 testing (using PCR methods) can be done at any 
time before inclusion (a specific consent form is available). 
• Screening: 1 to 35 days before treatment administration. 
• Randomization: treatment allocation and baseline for OS calculations. 
• Treatment:  
− For OSE2101 (Arm A): Day 1 each 21-day cycle for 6 cycles, then 
every 8 weeks for the remainder of year one and, finally every 
12 weeks beyond year one (see Figure 2: Schedule of OSE2101 
administration) 
− For docetaxel or pemetrexed (Arm B): Day 1 each 21-day cycle (i.e. 
every 3 weeks) 
− In both arms, treatment cycles will be repeated until unequivocal 
RECIST 1.1-defined disease progression as determined by the 
investigator, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Should 
pseudo progression or delayed response to treatment be suspected in 
arm A, investigator may continue treatment beyond the time of 
RECIST-defined progression, if the patient is perceived to be 
experiencing clinical benefit. 
• End of treatment: 4 weeks after the final treatment administration to obtain 
assessments from the 4 previous weeks. 
• Post-treatment follow-up: every 2 months after discontinuation of 
treatment for the post-treatment survival status. 
Inclusion 
criteria 
Protection of study subjects and compliance 
1. Signed and dated informed consent document indicating that the patient has 
been informed of all the pertinent aspects of the trial prior to enrollment 
2. Willingness and ability to comply with scheduled visits, treatment plans, 
laboratory tests, and other study procedures 
Demography 
3. Female or male, 18 years of age or older 
Cancer Diagnosis and treatment  
4. Histologically or cytologically proven diagnosis of NSCLC that is locally 
advanced (stage III) unsuitable for radiotherapy or metastatic (stage IV) 
according to the 8th edition of tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) in Lung 
Cancer published by the International Union Against Cancer and the 
American Joint Committee on Cancer 
5. Subjects with disease recurrence or progression after therapy with an 
immune checkpoint inhibitor and platinum-based chemotherapy:  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 9 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• either 1st line chemotherapy followed by 2nd line checkpoint inhibitor 
• or 1st line combination of checkpoint inhibitor and chemotherapy 
Patients with progression during or within 12 months after the end of ICI as 
sequential or concomitant platinum-based chemotherapy ± radiation for 
locally advanced disease (stage III) are eligible 
6. Subjects with measurable or non-measurable lesions 
7. Subjects must express HLA-A2 phenotype as assessed serologically 
8. Subjects must be considered suitable for chemotherapy with either single-
agent pemetrexed or docetaxel 
9. Subjects with brain metastases are eligible if treated (whole brain 
radiotherapy, stereotaxic radiotherapy, surgery) at least 3 weeks prior to 
initiation of study treatment and have no symptoms related to brain 
metastases for at least 2 weeks before initiation of study treatment and are 
not taking any forbidden medications (see Section 4.3.5 of the protocol) 
10. Any prior chemotherapy, immunotherapy, hormonal therapy, radiation 
therapy or surgeries must have been completed at least 3 weeks prior to 
initiation of study treatment 
11. Any toxicity from prior therapy must have recovered to ≤ Grade 1 (except 
alopecia) 
Clinical status 
12. ECOG performance status 0-1 
13. Adequate organ function as defined by all the following criteria: 
• Albuminemia > 25 g/L 
• Serum aspartate transaminase (AST) and serum alanine transaminase 
(ALT) 1.5 x upper limit of normal (ULN) with alkaline 
phosphatase  2.5 x ULN, or AST and ALT  5 x ULN if liver 
function abnormalities are due to liver metastases 
• Total serum bilirubin  1.5 x ULN  
• Absolute neutrophil count (ANC)  1500/L  
• Platelets  100000/L 
• Hemoglobin  9.0 g/dL (in the absence of transfusion within 2 weeks 
before randomization) 
• Creatinine clearance (based on modified Cockcroft-Gault formula) 
≥ 45 ml/min 
Exclusion 
criteria 
 Cancer Diagnosis and treatment 
1. Small-cell lung cancer/mixed NSCLC with small cell component or other 
neuroendocrine lung cancers (typical and atypical carcinoids, large-cell 
neuroendocrine carcinomas) 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 10 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
2. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma histology, and who had docetaxel as 
part of his prior chemotherapy will not be eligible to the trial 
3. Current or previous treatment with investigational therapy in another 
therapeutic clinical trial (interrupted less than 4 weeks before study treatment 
initiation) 
4. Patients whose tumor harbors EGFR gene mutation that sensitizes tumors to 
TKI (EGFR exon 18-21) or ALK rearrangement 
5. Ongoing immunotherapy (checkpoint inhibition, antigen immunotherapy 
that would be scheduled to continue concomitantly to the study) 
6. Spinal cord compression (unless treated with the patient attaining good pain 
control and stable or recovered neurologic function), carcinomatous 
meningitis, or leptomeningeal disease 
7. Patients with squamous cell histology or non-squamous cell histology 
previously treated by pemetrexed, with a contraindication for docetaxel with 
grade ≥ 2 neuropathy or hypersensitivity reaction to medications formulated 
with polysorbate 80 (Tween 80) as they could be randomly assigned to 
Arm B 
Medical history and clinical status 
8. Patients with a condition requiring systemic treatment with either 
corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive medications 
9. Treatment with corticosteroids in the last 3-week period before inclusion, c 
corticosteroids with minimal systemic absorption (e.g. with a dose ≤ 500 
microgram beclomethasone equivalent for inhaled steroids), or steroid doses 
≤ 10 mg daily prednisone equivalent which are permitted 
10. A 
recognized 
immunodeficiency 
disease 
including 
human 
immunodeficiency 
virus 
(HIV) 
infection 
and 
other 
cellular 
immunodeficiencies, hypogammaglobulinemia or dysgammaglobulinemia; 
subjects who have hereditary, congenital or acquired immunodeficiencies 
11. Patients with auto-immune disease, with the exception of type I diabetes or 
treated hypothyroidism 
12. Patients with interstitial lung disease 
13. Patients with active B or C hepatitis 
14. Other malignancy: patients will not be eligible if they have evidence of other 
active invasive cancer(s) (other than NSCLC) within 5 years prior to 
screening (except appropriately treated non-melanoma skin cancer or 
localized cervical cancer, or other local tumors considered cured (e.g. 
localized and presumed cured prostate cancer) 
15. Other severe acute or chronic medical or psychiatric conditions, or 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 11 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
laboratory abnormalities that would impart, in the judgment of the 
investigator and/or sponsor, excess risk associated with study participation 
or study drug administration, and which would, therefore, make the patient 
inappropriate for entry into this study 
16. Female patients must be surgically sterile or be postmenopausal, or must 
agree to use effective contraception during the period of the trial and for at 
least 90 days after completion of treatment (See Appendix 4: Guidance on 
Contraception) 
17. Male patients sexually active with a woman of childbearing potential must 
be surgically sterile or must agree to use effective contraception during the 
period of the trial and for at least 90 days after completion of treatment. The 
decision of effective contraception will be based on the judgment of the 
principal investigator (See Appendix 4: Guidance on Contraception) 
18. Breastfeeding women 
19. Women with a positive pregnancy test 
Investigational 
drug 
OSE2101 is combination of 10 synthetic peptides targeting 5 tumor–associated 
antigens. It is a T-cell specific immunotherapy. 
  
OSE2101 will be administered as a 1 mL-subcutaneous injection on Day 1 every 
three weeks for six cycles, then every eight weeks for the remainder of year one 
and finally every twelve weeks beyond year one until unequivocal RECIST 1.1-
defined disease progression as determined by the investigator, unacceptable 
toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Should pseudo progression or delayed response 
to treatment suspected in arm A, investigator may continue treatment beyond the 
time of RECIST-defined progression, if the patient is perceived to be 
experiencing clinical benefit. 
 
OSE2101 dose will be 5 mg of peptide (0.5 mg for each peptide). 
Control 
treatment 
Docetaxel, 75 mg/m2, will be administered by intravenous infusion over 1 hour 
on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle to patients with squamous cancer or to patients with 
non-squamous cancer who had previously been treated with pemetrexed.  
Pemetrexed, 500 mg/m2, will be administered by intravenous infusion over 
10 minutes on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle to patients with non-squamous cancer 
and who have not previously received pemetrexed.  
Docetaxel and pemetrexed will be continued until unequivocal RECIST 1.1-
defined disease progression as determined by the investigator, unacceptable 
toxicity, or consent withdrawal.  
Concomitant 
therapies 
• Mandatory concomitant therapies (premedication) for patients in Arm B 
(Docetaxel / Pemetrexed) are detailed in Section 4.3.5 of the protocol. 
• 
and authorized and prohibited therapies for patients in Arm A and B are 
detailed in Section 4.3.5 of the protocol. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 12 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Efficacy 
endpoints 
Primary efficacy endpoint:  
• Overall survival (OS):  
o In Step 1: OS rate at 12 months in experimental Arm A 
(OSE2101) in 84 evaluable patients exposed to OSE2101 
o In Step 2: comparison of OS between experimental Arm A 
(OSE2101) and control Arm B (docetaxel or pemetrexed) when 
278 events observed; due to early study discontinuation (219 
patients included instead of 363 patients), statistical hypothesis 
was revised with a comparison of OS between experimental Arm 
A and control Arm B in the PoI (refer statistical methodology 
section) 
Secondary efficacy endpoints (in Steps 1 & 2):  
• Disease control rate (DCR) at 6 and 12 months based on RECIST1.1 
• QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ questionnaire): “Global health status/QoL” 
score based on questions 29 (How would you rate your overall health 
during the past week?) and 30 (How would you rate your overall quality 
of life during the past week?)  
• QLQ-LC13 (lung cancer module from EORTC QLQ questionnaire): 
time to 1st ≥ 10-point deterioration in chest pain (question 40), dyspnea 
(questions 33, 34, 35) or cough (question 31) (in Step-1 only) 
• Post Progression Survival  
• Time to worsening of ECOG PS  
• QLQ-C30 Global health status score change from baseline (in Step 2 
only) 
• QLQ-C30 Functional scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• QLQ-C30 Symptom scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• QLQ-LC13 Symptom scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• Progression free survival based on RECIST1.1 
• Objective Response Rate (ORR) (in Step 1 only) 
• Duration of Response (DR) (in Step 1 only) 
Exploratory 
endpoints 
In Step 2 only: 
• ORR 
• DR 
• All the other scores of QoL 
• COVID-19 impact 
In Steps 1: 
• Time to deterioration (TTD) in patient reported chest pain 
• TTD in patient reported dyspnea 
• TTD in patient reported cough 
In Steps 1 & 2: 
• Time to next lung cancer therapy 
Tolerability / 
Safety 
• Incidence, severity, seriousness and relationship to study treatments of 
adverse events (AE), immune-related adverse events (irAE) and any 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 13 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
endpoints 
laboratory abnormalities 
Translational 
study  
Patient can agree to participate in all or some parts of the translational study. 
Patient can refuse to participate in the translational study without compromising 
his/her participation in the main study.  
The main objectives are to explore biomarkers and pharmacodynamic 
parameters before and after the start of study treatment (OSE2101 or 
chemotherapy) in a population of NSCLC patients who progressed after ICI 
treatment.  
Blood samples: 
• Pre-, on-treatment and after treatment collection of peripheric blood 
mononuclear cells (PBMCs) for: 
o Immunophenotyping 
o OSE2101 vaccine antigen-specific T-cell frequency 
• Pre-, on-treatment and after treatment collection of liquid biopsies (e.g. 
cell free DNA (cfDNA)): 
o Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) and/or other mutation of 
interest (e.g. gene profiling of OSE2101 vaccine TAA) 
Blood samples will be taken at baseline, then every 6 weeks until Cycle 7 (e.g. 
Day 1 of Cycles 3, 5 and 7), then every 12 weeks (e.g. at time of CT scan) until 
end of treatment and/or progression in all arms.  
 
Tumor samples: 
• Specimens from archiving tumor biopsies (at first diagnosis and/or at any 
time before study entry) will be collected.  
• If possible, a new tumor biopsy will be collected within 35 days prior to 
the first study treatment administration (during the screening period). An 
archiving tumor biopsy collected before the screening period is 
acceptable, should the biopsy be collected after the end of ICI treatment. 
A second tumor biopsy (e.g. in the same tumor site) will be undertaken 
between cycle 3 and cycle 6 and/or at time of the disease progression. Of 
note, a blood sample will be collected for Whole-Exome sequencing 
(WES) for: 
o Determination of HLA class I expression in tumor (e.g. HLA-A2 
and Beta-2 microglobulin) 
o Tumor and tumor microenvironment (TME) characterization by 
multiplex IHC and gene profiling (i.e. CD8 exhausted T cells, 
TIL infiltration, …) 
All blood and tumor samples will be stored in certified biobanks before being 
submitted to central laboratories for analysis.  
If the patient agrees, remaining specimens after analysis will be biobanked for 
future biomarker research and drug development projects, e.g. to identify 
patients that are more likely to benefit from a treatment or experience an 
adverse event (AE), or to gain a mechanistic or genetic understanding of drug 
effects and thereby. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 14 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Statistical 
methodology 
Step 1 – Phase II sample size 
The primary objective of Step 1 is to evaluate the overall survival rate after 
12 months in OSE2101 arm. The following statistical hypotheses are considered: 
- 
H0 (null): 25% of overall survival rate at 12 months (uninteresting to 
pursue any further investigation) 
- 
H1 (alternative): 40% of overall survival rate at 12 months (clinically 
relevant to discuss the interest of further investigation in a Phase III 
comparative trial). 
According to the previous hypotheses and a Fleming one step Phase II design 
with a 2.5% one-sided type I error and a power of 80%, 84 evaluable patients 
have to be enrolled in the arm A. 
 
Fleming decision rules  
Amongst the first 84 evaluable patients: 
To reject H0 we have to observe at least 30 (35.7%) patients alive at 12 months 
then it will be interesting to run the next step of Phase III comparative trial.  
If less than 30 patients are alive at 12 months, H0 will not be rejected and it will 
be considered uninteresting to pursue any further investigation. 
The probability to conclude for inefficacy whereas the true rate is 40% is 
β=18.1%. 
The probability to conclude for efficacy whereas the true rate is 25% is α=1.9%. 
In order to limit the total number of patients needed in Step 1, a 2:1 
randomization ratio to receive OSE2101 (Arm A) or pemetrexed or docetaxel 
(Arm B) has been used for new patients recruited since version 4.0 of the 
protocol came into effect. A total of 38 patients with previous ICI treatment 
have been recruited before protocol version 4.0, from whom 18 patients 
randomized in arm A (OSE2101), thus 84 – 18 = 66 new evaluable patients need 
to be recruited in arm A (OSE2101). Based on a 2:1 randomization ratio, 66/2 = 
33 
 
new patients need to be randomized in arm B, leading to a total of 99 new 
evaluable patients. With an expected 7% rate of patients not evaluable at 12 
months or withdrawn, a total of 108 new patients will be randomized for Step 1. 
 
Step 2 – Phase III sample size 
For Step 2, the same 2:1 randomization ratio will be continued. All the 38 
patients randomized before protocol version 4.0 in the subgroup of patients with 
previous ICI treatment and all new patients included in Step 1 / Phase II will be 
followed during Step 2 /Phase III. However, the final analysis of Phase II/Phase 
III will exclude the 38 patients with previous ICI treatment randomized before 
the recruitment hold. 
In order to reach a power of 80% for the two-sided log rank test at the 5% 
significance level when assuming a median OS of 7 months for the control and 
10 months for the experimental arm, a total of 278 events is required. If the new 
patients are uniformly included over an accrual period of 36 months followed by 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 15 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
a follow-up of 6 months after the last inclusion, observing 278 events would 
require a total of 363 new patients. The actual number of new patients may be 
reduced if the 278 events are observed earlier (this is an event-driven study). 
Both counts exclude the 38 patients enrolled before protocol 4.0. 
Due to early study discontinuation due to COVID-19 (219 patients included 
instead of 363 patients), the power decreased to 62% with the same hypotheses 
(HR=0.70). 
Considering Step 1 results in the PoI, the following hypotheses have been 
proposed for final analysis: 
Assuming a HR of 0.55 observed in PoI in Step-1 and a median OS of 7 
months in SoC (unchanged as initially planned), a total of 90 events in 
the PoI will provide a power of 80% and a 2-sided logrank test at a 5% 
two-sided level, if the patients are included over an accrual period of 48 
months followed by a follow-up of 6 months after the last inclusion. 
Steering 
Committee 
A Steering Committee including representatives from the investigators, the 
Sponsor and other experts will be responsible of the study supervision.  
Independent 
Data 
Monitoring 
Committee 
An independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) will review the safety and 
tolerability data and assess the risk/benefit ratio of the investigational drug on a 
regular basis. The IDMC membership, role and responsibilities will be detailed 
in a specific IDMC charter. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 16 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Table 1: Visits and assessments schedule (Arm A: OSE2101) 
Period 
Pre-screening 
Screening 
Treatment 
End of treatment 
Visit 
 
Screening and 
randomization 
Cycle 1 
(3 week-cycle) 
Cycles 2 to 6 
(3 week-cycle) 
Cycles 7 to 9 
(8 week-cycle) 
Cycles ≥ 10 or 
EOT 
(12-week cycle) 
End of 
treatment1 
Post-
treatment 
Follow-up2 
Cycle day 
 
-35 Day/ -1 Day 
Day 1 (±2) 
Day 15 (±2) 
Day 1 (±2) 
Day 1 (±4) 
Day 1 (±8) 
Informed consent for HLA-A2 
determination and biobanking 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HLA-A2 determination3 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Informed consent 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Medical/ Oncological history 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Previous medications 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EGFR/ALK alterations, PD-L14 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Body height 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Body weight 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Physical examination 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Vital signs (Body temperature, 
BP/PR, oxygen saturation) 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
12-lead ECG 
 
X 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
ECOG Performance status 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Hematology/ Biochemistry5 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Coagulation/ HIV test6 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pregnancy test (as appropriate) 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
Tumor assessments (including 
scans) 
 
X 
every 6 (± 1) weeks until documented RECIST 1.1 progression7 
(X)8  
Randomization 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OSE2101 administration9 
 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
 
EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-LC13 
 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Survival follow-up 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
Concomitant medications 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Adverse Events 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Serious Adverse Events 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Hospitalizations 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Informed consent for translational 
study and biobanking (optional)10 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Blood samples for biomarkers 
(optional)11 
 
X 
 
 
every 6 (± 3) 
weeks (e.g. at D1 
of Cycles 3, 5 & 7) 
every 12 (± 3) weeks (e.g. at time of imaging) until EOT 
and/or progression 
 
Tumor samples for biomarkers 
(optional)12 
 
X 
 
 
X (e.g. between 
Cycles 3 & 6) 
 
 
X (e.g. at 
tumor 
progression) 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 17 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
1 
End of treatment: visit to obtain last assessments after the study drug stop from the 4 previous weeks. 
2 
Post-treatment follow-up: data collection on survival status and any subsequent cancer therapy (if any) every 2 months after study drug discontinuation until death. 
3 
HLA-A2 testing can be done at any time during patient management before inclusion. A pre-screening consent is available to test patients for instance during 1st or 2nd 
line therapy. 
4 
EGFR/ALK alterations and PD-L1 expression on tumor tissue: if these results are not available, they have to be done in local or central laboratories during the screening 
period. EGFR/ALK alterations is mandatory before randomization in patients with non-squamous cancer or never/light smokers with squamous cancer. If PD-L1 
expression is not documented and no tumor tissue available to perform the testing, then the PD-L1 status can be omitted. 
5 
Hematology and biochemistry tests: to be done at Day 1 Cycle 1 only if screening assessment done more than 7 days before. Thereafter at Day 1 of each subsequent 
cycle, local laboratory tests will be done every 3 weeks (less than 72 hours (3 days) before study treatment administration) until Cycle 6, then every 8 weeks (less than 4 
days before study administration) until Cycle 9, then every 12 weeks (less than 8 days before each subsequent administration. 
6 
HIV test: to be done for all eligible patients with HIV status unknown. 
7 
Tumor assessments (CT scan of thorax, abdomen and brain CT or brain MRI) to be done every 6 weeks (± 1-week allowance) after Day 1 Cycle 1, meaning it could be 
between 2 treatment visits; CT scan of the pelvis will be performed only upon request according to clinical suspicion. In case of clinical suspicion of bone metastasis out 
of the area reported by CT scan, imaging test will be performed under discretion of the investigator and will be repeated every 12 weeks. For Germany, with respect to 
brain metastases, MRI should be the privileged imaging technic and CT should only be considered when there are contra-indications to MRI. 
8 
Tumor assessments should be continued until documented RECIST 1.1 disease progression for patients who have not progressed during the treatment period. 
9 
OSE2101 treatment will continue until unequivocal RECIST 1.1-defined disease progression as determined by the investigator, unacceptable toxicity, or consent 
withdrawal. Should pseudo progression or delayed response to treatment suspected in arm A, investigator may continue treatment beyond the time of RECIST-defined 
progression, if the patient is perceived to be experiencing clinical benefit. 
10 Separate informed consent (optional) will be obtained from the patient who agreed to participate in a translational study and authorizing the bio banking of the remaining 
samples to be used for future biomarker research and drug development projects. Patient can agree to participate in all and/or some parts of the translational study. 
Patient can refuse to participate in the translational study without compromising his/her participation in the main study. 
11 Blood samples for biomarkers will be taken at baseline (during the screening period), then every 6 (± 3) weeks until Cycle 7 (e.g. at D1 of Cycles 3, 5 and 7), then every 
12 (± 3) weeks (e.g. at time of imaging) until end of treatment and/or progression. 
12 Specimens from archiving tumor biopsies (at first diagnosis and/or at any time during previous treatment) will be collected. As possible, a new tumor biopsy will be 
collected within 35 days prior to the first study treatment administration (during the screening period). An archiving tumor biopsy collected before the screening period is 
acceptable, should the biopsy be collected after the end of ICI treatment. A second tumor biopsy (e.g. in the same tumor site) will be undertaken between Cycle 3 and 
Cycle 6 and/or at time of the disease progression. A blood sample will be collected for Whole-Exome sequencing (WES) at screening. 
 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 18 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Table 2: Visits and assessments schedule (Arm B: Docetaxel or Pemetrexed) 
Period 
Pre-screening 
Screening 
Treatment 
End of treatment 
Visit 
 
Screening and 
randomization 
Cycle 1 
(3 week-cycle) 
Cycle 2 
(3 week-cycle) 
Cycles ≥3 
(3 week-cycle) 
End of treatment1 
Post-treatment 
Follow-up2 
Study day 
 
-35 Day/ -1 Day 
Day 1 (±2) 
Day 15 (±2) 
Day 1 (±2) 
Day 1 (±2) 
Informed consent for HLA-A2 
determination and biobanking 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HLA-A2 determination3 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Informed consent 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Medical/ Oncological history 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Previous medications 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EGFR/ALK alterations, PD-L14 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Body height 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Body weight 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
Physical examination 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
Vital signs (Body temperature, BP/PR, 
oxygen saturation) 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
12-lead ECG 
 
X 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
ECOG Performance status 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
Hematology/ Biochemistry5 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Coagulation/ HIV test6 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pregnancy test (as appropriate) 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
Tumor assessments (including scans) 
 
X 
every 6 (± 1) weeks until documented RECIST 1.1 progression7 
(X)8 
Randomization 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Docetaxel or Pemetrexed9 
 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
 
 
EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-LC13 
 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
Survival follow-up 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
Concomitant medications 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Adverse Events 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Serious Adverse Events 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Hospitalizations 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Informed consent for translational study 
and biobanking (optional)10 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Blood samples for biomarkers (optional)11 
 
X 
 
every 6 (± 3) weeks (e.g. at D1 of Cycles 3, 5 & 7), then every 12 (± 3) weeks 
(e.g. at time of imaging) until EOT and/or progression 
 
Tumor samples for biomarkers (optional)12 
 
X 
 
 
 
X (e.g. between 
Cycles 3 & 6) 
X (e.g. at tumor 
progression) 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0  
Page 19 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
1 
End of treatment: visit to obtain last assessments after the study drug stop from the 4 previous weeks. 
2 
Post treatment follow-up: data collection on survival status and any subsequent cancer therapy (if any) every 2 months after study drug discontinuation until death. 
3 
HLA-A2 testing can be done at any time during patient management before inclusion. A pre-screening consent is available to test patients for instance during 1st or 
2nd line therapy. 
4 
EGFR/ALK alterations and PD-L1 expression on tumor tissue: if these results are not available, they have to be done in local or central laboratories during the 
screening period. EGFR/ALK alterations is mandatory before randomization in patients with non-squamous cancer or never/light smokers with squamous cancer. If 
PD-L1 expression is not documented and no tumor tissue available to perform the testing, then the PD-L1 status can be omitted. 
5 
Hematology and biochemistry tests: to be done at Day 1 Cycle 1 only if screening assessment done more than 7 days before. Thereafter at Day 1 of each subsequent 
cycle, local laboratory tests will be done every 3 weeks (less than 72 hours (3 days) before study treatment administration) until Cycle 6, then every 8 weeks (less 
than 4 days before study administration) until Cycle 9, then every 12 weeks (less than 8 days before each subsequent administration. 
6 
HIV test: to be done for all eligible patients with HIV status unknown. 
7 
Tumor assessments (CT scan of thorax, abdomen and brain CT or brain MRI) to be done every 6 weeks (± 1-week allowance) after Day 1 Cycle 1 meaning it could 
be between 2 treatment visits; CT scan of the pelvis will be performed only upon request according to clinical suspicion. In case of clinical suspicion of bone 
metastasis out of the area reported by CT scan, imaging test will be performed under discretion of the investigator and will be repeated every 12 weeks. For 
Germany, with respect to brain metastases, MRI should be the privileged imaging technic and CT should only be considered when there are contra-indications to 
MRI. 
8 
Tumor assessments should be continued until documented RECIST 1.1 disease progression for patients who have not progressed during the treatment period. 
9 
Docetaxel and pemetrexed treatment will continue until unequivocal RECIST 1.1-defined disease progression as determined by the investigator, unacceptable 
toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Premedication is required with docetaxel and pemetrexed. Premedication will occur before Day 1 (i.e. Day 1 of each cycle will be 
injection day for chemotherapy). 
10 
Separate informed consent (optional) will be obtained from the patient who agreed participating in a translational study and authorizing the bio banking of the 
remaining samples to be used for future biomarker research and drug development projects. Patient can agree to participate in all and/or some parts of the 
translational study. Patient can refuse to participate in the translational study without compromising his/her participation in the main study. 
11 
Blood samples will be taken at baseline (during the screening period), then every 6 (± 3) weeks until Cycle 7 (i.e. at D1 of Cycles 3, 5 and 7), then every 12 (± 3) 
weeks (e.g. at time of CT imaging) until end of treatment and/or progression. 
12 
Specimens from archiving tumor biopsies (at first diagnosis and/or at any time during previous treatment) will be collected. As possible, a new tumor biopsy will be 
collected within 35 days prior to the first study treatment administration (during the screening period). An archiving tumor biopsy collected before the screening 
period is acceptable, should the biopsy be collected after the end of ICI treatment. A second tumor biopsy (e.g. in the same tumor site) will be undertaken between 
Cycle 3 and Cycle 6 and/or at time of the disease progression. A blood sample will be collected for Whole-Exome sequencing (WES) at screening. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 20 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1 
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE .......................................................................26 
1.1 
Target indication........................................................................................26 
1.2 
OSE2101 ...................................................................................................31 
1.3 
Design considerations................................................................................35 
2 
STUDY OBJECTIVES ...............................................................................................37 
3 
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................38 
3.1 
Ethics and Good Clinical Practice .............................................................38 
3.2 
Ethics Committee/ Institutional Review Board .........................................39 
3.3 
Informed consent and subject information ................................................39 
3.4 
Governance of the study ............................................................................39 
4 
INVESTIGATIONAL PLAN .....................................................................................39 
4.1 
Overall Study Design and Plan .................................................................39 
4.2 
Study Population .......................................................................................41 
4.2.1 
Subject population .....................................................................................41 
4.2.2 
Inclusion criteria ........................................................................................41 
4.2.3 
Exclusion criteria .......................................................................................42 
4.3 
Study Drugs ...............................................................................................43 
4.3.1 
Description, packaging and labelling ........................................................43 
4.3.2 
Storage .......................................................................................................44 
4.3.3 
Study drug administration .........................................................................44 
4.3.4 
Treatment Exposure and Compliance .......................................................46 
4.3.5 
Concomitant medications ..........................................................................46 
4.3.6 
Study instructions, restrictions and exclusion period ................................48 
4.4 
Study premature discontinuation and withdrawal .....................................48 
4.4.1  
Premature discontinuation .........................................................................48 
4.4.2 
Lost to Follow Up......................................................................................49 
4.5 
Treatment Assignment ..............................................................................49 
4.5.1 
Identification of subjects ...........................................................................49 
4.5.2 
Randomization...........................................................................................49 
4.6 
Study Endpoints ........................................................................................49 
4.6.1 
Efficacy endpoints .....................................................................................49 
4.6.2 
Safety and tolerability endpoints ...............................................................50 
4.6.3 
Exploratory translational endpoints...........................................................51 
4.7 
Study Assessment Procedures ...................................................................52 
4.7.1  
Screening assessments ...............................................................................52 
4.7.2 
HLA-A2 testing .........................................................................................53 
4.7.3 
EGFR and ALK determination, PD-L1 expression at screening ..............54 
4.7.4 
Tumor assessments ....................................................................................54 
4.7.5 
Quality of life ............................................................................................55 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 21 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
4.7.6 
Safety laboratory assessments ...................................................................55 
4.7.7 
Vital signs ..................................................................................................55 
4.7.8 
Physical examination .................................................................................56 
4.7.9 
ECG ...........................................................................................................56 
4.7.10 
Day 1 of study treatment cycle assessments .............................................56 
4.7.11 
End of treatment / withdrawal assessments ...............................................56 
4.7.12 
Post treatment follow-up assessments .......................................................56 
4.8 
Post-study access to study treatment .........................................................56 
5 
SAFETY DEFINITIONS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ...........................57 
5.1 
Reporting of adverse events ......................................................................57 
5.2 
Reporting period ........................................................................................57 
5.3 
Assessment of causality.............................................................................58 
5.4 
Definitions of Adverse Events ..................................................................58 
5.5 
Severity of adverse events .........................................................................59 
5.6 
Serious Adverse Events .............................................................................60 
5.6.1 
Definition...................................................................................................60 
5.6.2 
Hospitalization - Prolongation of existing hospitalization ........................61 
5.6.3 
Serious Adverse Events related to study-mandated procedures ................61 
5.7 
Reporting of serious and non-serious adverse events ...............................62 
5.7.1 
Reporting requirements .............................................................................62 
5.7.2 
Serious adverse event reporting requirements...........................................62 
5.8 
Management of adverse events, dosing adaptations and risk minimization 
strategy ......................................................................................................63 
6 
STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSES ............................................68 
6.1 
Statistical Analysis Plan ............................................................................68 
6.2 
Analysis Sets .............................................................................................68 
6.3 
Sample size ................................................................................................69 
6.4 
Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints ................................................71 
6.5 
Exploratory efficacy endpoints .................................................................73 
6.6 
Safety and tolerability endpoints ...............................................................74 
6.7 
Interim analysis .........................................................................................74 
6.8 
Exposure to study drugs ............................................................................75 
6.9 
Baseline Parameters and Concomitant Medications .................................75 
7 
PROCEDURES AND QUALITY ASSURANCE ......................................................75 
7.1 
Procedures .................................................................................................75 
7.1.1 
Protocol amendments ................................................................................75 
7.1.2 
Monitoring .................................................................................................76 
7.1.3 
Data management ......................................................................................77 
7.1.3.1 
Data collection ...........................................................................................77 
7.1.4 
Recording of data and retention of documents ..........................................77 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 22 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
7.1.5 
Audit ..........................................................................................................78 
7.1.6 
Publication of study results .......................................................................78 
7.1.7 
Disclosure and confidentiality ...................................................................78 
7.1.8 
Premature termination or suspension of the study ....................................79 
7.2 
Insurance and Compensation to subjects and investigators ......................79 
8 
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................80 
9 
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................88 
APPENDIX 1: RECIST 1.1 CRITERIA .................................................................89 
APPENDIX 2: EORTC QOL QUESTIONNAIRES..............................................98 
APPENDIX 3: ECOG ...............................................................................................99 
APPENDIX 4: GUIDANCE ON CONTRACEPTION ........................................100 
 
LIST OF TABLES 
 
Table 1: Visits and assessments schedule (Arm A: OSE2101) .........................................16 
Table 2: Visits and assessments schedule (Arm B: Docetaxel or Pemetrexed) .................18 
Table 3: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed – Hematologic Toxicities ................................66 
Table 4: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed – Non-hematologic Toxicities .........................66 
Table 5: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed - Neurotoxicity CTC Grade .............................67 
Table 6: Summary of the Overall Response Status ...........................................................94 
Table 7: Best overall response when confirmation of CR and PR required ......................95 
 
LIST OF FIGURES 
 
Figure 1: Control group treatment allocation.....................................................................36 
Figure 2: Schedule of OSE2101 administration ................................................................45 
Figure 3: Treatment algorithm for management of cytokine release syndrome (per Lee, 
2014) ..................................................................................................................................65 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 23 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
AE 
Adverse Event 
ALK 
Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase 
ALT 
Alanine aminotransferase 
ANC 
Absolute neutrophil count 
AST 
Aspartate aminotransferase  
ATC 
Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical Classification 
BP 
Blood Pressure 
Bpm 
beats per minute 
CBC 
Complete blood count 
CEA 
Carcinoembryonic Antigen 
CFR 
Code of Federal Regulations 
CI 
Confidence interval 
CR 
Complete response 
CRF 
Case Report Form 
CRS 
Cytokine Release Syndrome 
CT 
Chemotherapy 
CTCAE 
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 
CTL 
Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte 
CYP3A4 
Cytochrome P450, family 3, subfamily A, polypeptide 4 
DCR 
Disease control rate 
DNA 
Desoxyribonucleic Acid 
DoR 
Duration of response 
EC 
Ethics Committee 
ECG 
Electrocardiogram 
ECOG 
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 
EGFR 
Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 
ELISA 
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay 
ELISPOT 
Enzyme-Linked Immuno Spot 
EORTC QLQ 
European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of 
Life Questionnaire 
EOS 
End of Study 
EOT 
End of Treatment 
FDA 
Food and Drug Administration 
FDG-PET 
Fluorodeoxyglucose Positon Emission Tomography 
FFPE 
Formaldehyde Fixed-Paraffin Embedded 
FISH 
Fluorescence in situ hybridization 
G-CSF 
Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor 
GCP 
Good Clinical Practice 
HBV 
Hepatitis B Virus 
HCV 
Hepatitis C Virus 
HER-2/neu 
Human Epidermal Receptor-2/neurological 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 24 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
HIV 
Human Immunodeficiency Virus 
HLA 
Human Leukocyte Antigen 
HR 
Hazard Ratio 
HRQoL 
Health Related Quality of Life 
HTL 
Helper T-lymphocyte 
ICH 
International Conference on Harmonization 
ICI 
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor 
IDMC 
Independent Data Monitoring Committee 
IFN 
Interferon 
IND 
Investigational New Drug 
INR 
International Normalized Ratio 
irAE 
Immune-related Adverse Event 
IRB 
Institutional Review Board 
ITT 
Intent to treat 
IUD 
intrauterine device 
IV 
Intravenous or intravenously 
IVD 
In Vitro Diagnostics Device 
IVRS/IWRS 
Interactive voice/web response system 
LDH 
Lactate Dehydrogenase 
LLT 
Low level terms 
MAGE 2/3 
Melanoma Antigens 2/3 
MedDRA 
Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities 
MRI 
Magnetic Resonance Imaging 
NE 
Not evaluable 
NSCLC 
Non Small Cell Lung Cancer 
ORR 
Objective response rate 
OS 
Overall survival 
p53 
A nuclear –regulatory protein 
PADRE 
Pan-DR-Epitope 
PBMCs 
Peripheral-blood mononuclear cells 
PCSA 
Potential clinically significant abnormality 
PD 
Pharmacodynamics 
PD 
Progressive disease 
PET 
Positon Emission Tomography 
PFS 
Progression free survival 
PR  
Partial response 
PR 
Pulse Rate 
PRO 
Patient reported outcomes 
PT 
Preferred Term 
QLQ-C30 and 
QLQ-LC13 
Lung cancer module in EORTC QLQ 
QoL 
Quality of life 
RANK-L 
Receptor Activator of Nuclear Factor Kappa B ligand 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 25 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
RECIST 
Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 
rIL 
Recombinant Interleukin 
RNA 
Ribonucleic Acid 
ROS1 
c-ros oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase 
SAE 
Serious Adverse Event 
SAP 
Statistical analysis plan  
SD 
Standard Deviation 
SD 
Stable disease 
SE 
Standard Error 
SOC 
System Organ Class 
TAA 
Tumor-associated antigen 
TKI 
Tyrosine-Kinase Inhibitor 
TSH 
Thyroid Stimulation Hormone 
TTD 
Time to deterioration 
ULN 
Upper limit of normal 
WES 
Whole-Exome sequencing 
WHO 
World Health Organization 
WOCBP 
Women of childbearing potential 
WT 
Wild type 
  
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 26 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
1 
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE  
1.1 
Target indication 
Worldwide, lung cancer has the highest incidence (2.09 million) and mortality (1.76 million) 
among all cancers (Globocan 2018; 30). It is the leading cause of cancer death among males in 
both more and less developed countries, and has surpassed breast cancer as the leading cause of 
cancer death among females in more developed countries (30). Cancer stage at diagnosis 
determines treatment options and has a strong influence on the length of survival. In the SEER 
database (39), 57% of patients are diagnosed with advanced stage (metastatic) disease, with a 5y-
overall survival (OS) of 4.2%. For the overall population 5y OS is 17.4%. Lung cancer is 
diagnosed at a median age of 70 years.  
Non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) account for 85%–90% of lung cancers, while small-cell 
lung cancer (SCLC) has been decreasing in frequency in many countries over the last two 
decades (39).  
Tumor subtypes are considered in therapeutic decisions. Adenocarcinoma is the most common 
histologic subtype. Approximately 63% of advanced NSCLC are diagnosed as adenocarcinoma, 
17% as squamous, and 20% as not otherwise specified (37).  
 
Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for non-selected 
patients with advanced NSCLC who have a good performance status. Platinum-based doublet 
chemotherapy prolongs survival and improves quality of life (QoL) in patients with PS 0–2. For 
most patients, four cycles of chemotherapy are recommended, notably when maintenance 
treatment is considered, with a maximum of six cycles. Several regimens of first-line treatment 
have shown comparable efficacy. Cisplatin compared to carboplatin globally has reported better 
response rate (RR) and in the subgroup of patients with non-squamous histology when cisplatin 
is added to third-generation regimens has reported better OS. There is no single platinum-based 
doublet standard chemotherapy. Pemetrexed use should be restricted to non-squamous NSCLC 
and bevacizumab combined with paclitaxel–carboplatin regimen improves OS in patients with 
non-squamous histology and PS 0– 1, and may be offered after exclusion of contraindications 
(65).  
 
Personalized treatment has changed the diagnostic and treatment approach in NSCLC and could 
have an impact on patients’ outcome (44) as 30% of advanced NSCLC have some kind of 
actionable oncogenic driver mutation. The most common are sensitizing EGFR mutation (around 
17% in non-Asian population), ALK-rearrangements (8%) and others such as ROS1-
rearrangements. These oncogenic drivers are almost always mutually exclusive in patients with 
NSCLC. Targeted agents currently approved for the treatment of NSCLC and include the first-
generation, reversible EGFR-targeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) erlotinib and gefitinib; 
the second-generation irreversible EGFR-TKI, afatinib; and the ALK inhibitor, crizotinib. New 
treatments indicated for acquired resistance are being tested.   
 
Erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed are approved second-line therapies for advanced NSCLC 
patients who progress after first-line treatment (65). The OS for these second line therapies 
ranged from 5.5 to 8.3 for chemotherapy and 5.3 to 6.7 for erlotinib (15, 24, 34, 73). Some 
differences exist among these therapies. Pemetrexed has shown a similar efficacy to docetaxel in 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 27 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
second-line setting but with a significantly better toxicity profile (34). Efficacy of pemetrexed 
compared to docetaxel according to histology has been reviewed (71) and this favored 
pemetrexed specifically in large cell carcinoma, although this histologic category has been 
revised subsequently (77). The TITAN trial reported that erlotinib was equivalent to pemetrexed 
or docetaxel in refractory patients (progression during first-line chemotherapy) unselected for 
EGFR status (15). In molecularly selected wild-type (wt) EGFR population, the TAILOR trial 
showed that docetaxel was superior to erlotinib as second-line therapy with respect to OS and 
progression free survival (PFS) (24). However, in the subset analysis of EGFR-wt tumors, the 
DELTA trial failed to demonstrate a gain in OS for docetaxel vs. erlotinib (42), reinforcing 
erlotinib as a potential second-line treatment option independently of EGFR status.  
Currently, the efficacy of approved drugs for second-line treatment in NSCLC or their response 
rate are limited and new treatment options are awaited.  
 
Tumor angiogenesis is critical for tumor progression. Recently two randomized Phase III trials 
have tested the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapies in second-line for advanced NSCLC. The 
LUME-lung 1 trial (64) was conducted in 1314 patients and demonstrated that docetaxel plus a 
multi-antiangiogenic (VEGFR, PDGFR, FGFR) angiokinase inhibitor, nintedanib, improved 
PFS, the primary endpoint of the trial (3.4 mo. Vs. 2.7 mo., HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.68-0.79, 
p=0.0019). Although an OS benefit was not noted in the study population (10.1 mo. Vs. 9.1 mo., 
HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.83-1.05, p=0.27), in the hierarchical analysis, nintedanib plus docetaxel 
significantly improved OS in the subgroup of adenocarcinomas (12.6 mo. Vs. 10.3 mo., HR 0.83, 
95%CI 0.7-0.99, p=0.0359), as well as in those adenocarcinoma tumors with a more aggressive 
behavior (defined progression within 9 months of starting prior first-line therapy; 10.9 mo. Vs. 
7.9 mo., HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.6-0.92, p=0.0073). Toxicity grade 3 or higher was more common in 
combination arm than monotherapy (31.3% vs. 26.7%, mainly diarrhea, and reversible increase 
in transaminases) (64), however, it did not have an impact on patient self-reported QoL (56). The 
OS benefit with nintedanib and docetaxel may have been optimized by the fact that the 
population included in the trial was highly selected (the study excluded patients with brain 
metastasis or radiological evidence of blood vessel involvement or cavitation or with hemoptysis 
or thrombosis; and median age was only 60). These results have led to the approval of nintedanib 
in Europe, not in the US (as of April 2015) as second-line treatment in combination with 
docetaxel in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients.  
 
Another product, ramucirumab, a monoclonal antibody anti VEGFR-2 was tested in the REVEL 
trial (25, 61). A total of 1253 patients were included in this Phase III study and the addition of 
ramucirumab, to standard therapy with docetaxel improved OS, the primary endpoint of the trial, 
(10.5 mo. Vs. 9.1 mo., HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.75-0.98, p=0.023), PFS (4.5 mo. Vs. 3 mo., HR 0.76, 
95%CI 0.68-0.86, p<0.0001) and overall response rate (ORR: 23% vs. 14%, p <0.001), without 
detrimental effect on quality of life. Ramucirumab has been approved in this indication by FDA 
but not by EMA (as of April 2015). 
 
Immunotherapeutic approach has been tested in the treatment of NSCLC. Several Immune 
checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) exist (such as CTLA-4 and programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor) 
which dampen the T-cell immune response to antigens expressed by tumor cells. Checkpoint 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 28 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
inhibition with Ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody against CTLA-4, has been tested in NSCLC 
and reported a significant improvement in immune-related PFS compared to placebo when 
administered concomitantly with chemotherapy (47). The PD-1 receptor is another checkpoint 
molecule expressed on activated T cells and engaged by ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, which are 
expressed by tumor cells and infiltrating immune cells.  Tumor PD-L1 expression is prevalent in 
NSCLC, and the interaction of PD-1 with the PD-L1 and PD-L2 ligands inhibits T-cell activation 
and promotes tumor immune escape. In 2015, two randomized Phase III trials have reported the 
efficacy of nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody antiPD-1, in advanced NSCLC 
patients who had disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy. In squamous 
NSCLC subtype, 272 patients were randomized to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or 
docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks). Nivolumab reported a significant improvement in OS over 
docetaxel (9.2 months vs. 6 months, p<0.001), with 1-y OS of 42% versus 24%, respectively. 
The response rates were also significantly improved with nivolumab compared with docetaxel, 
20% vs. 9%, respectively (p=0.008) (10). Nivolumab has been approved by FDA and EMA for 
2nd line treatment of stage IV squamous cell NSCLC following results of this trial. In the second 
Phase III trial, 582 non-squamous patients were randomized to nivolumab or docetaxel at the 
same schedule. Nivolumab significantly improved OS (12.2 months vs. 9.4 months, p= 0.0015), 
1-yOS (51% vs. 39%) and median duration of response (17.1 months vs. 5.6 months) compared 
to docetaxel, respectively (60). In both trials the toxicity profile was in favor of nivolumab. Of 
note, in squamous subtype, the expression PD-L1 was neither prognostic nor predictive of 
benefit with nivolumab. However, in non-squamous histology, PD-L1 expression was a 
predictive marker of efficacy of nivolumab. The full results of this trial (8) led to approval of 
Nivolumab by FDA in non-squamous NSCLC as well. These results reinforce immunotherapy as 
a new strategy in the treatment of NSCLC patients. 
 
Other ICIs have been tested in NSCLC. Pembrolizumab, an anti-PD1 inhibitor, has been tested 
in a phase I study in advanced NSCLC patients.  Pembrolizumab reported an objective response 
rate of 19.4% with a median duration of response of 12.5 months, with an acceptable toxicity 
profile. In those patients with high expression of PD-L1 (expression in at least 50% of tumor 
cells) the response rate was 45.2% with a median PFS of 6.3 months, suggesting that the 
expression of PD-L1 correlated with improved the efficacy of pembrolizumab (26). The updated 
results of this trial in 101 treatment-naïve PD-L1+ NSCLC patients reported an ORR of 24% and 
a median PFS of 6 months with no significant between-dose differences, with the greatest 
efficacy observed in patients with PD-L1 staging in ≥ 50% of tumor cells (70).  Preliminary 
results of pembrolizumab in a Phase II trial in 10 advanced NSCLC patients with untreated 
asymptomatic brain metastasis has reported a 44% and 34% of brain and systemic response rate, 
respectively (31). The results of the Keynote 010 trial led to approval of pembrolizumab in 
patients with NSCLC with PD-L1 expression on at least 1% of tumor cells as both doses tested 
improved OS over docetaxel with a favorable benefit risk ratio (36). 
 
Two anti-PD-L1 antibodies, atezolizumab (MPDL3280A) and durvalumab (MEDI4736), have 
been tested in NSCLC. Updated results of atezolizumab in a phase I trial with 88 advanced 
NSCLC patients, reported an ORR of 21%, with a median duration of response of 67 weeks and 
1-year OS of 82%.  PD-L1 expression in the tumor microenvironment appeared to be a 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 29 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
predictive biomarker for MPDL3280 clinical efficacy (38). In a single arm Phase II study in 205 
PD-L1 selected patients with NSCLC, atezolizumab have reported clinical efficacy in both 
chemo-naïve and previously treated patients (ORR 29% and 17%, respectively) and some 
evidence of clinical efficacy in previously treated patients with asymptomatic brain metastases 
(75). In a randomized Phase II trial (POLAR study) with 287 previously treated NSCLC patients, 
atezolizumab has been compared to docetaxel. Atezolizumab has reported a trend toward OS 
improvement (11.4 months vs. 9.5 months, HR 0.77; 95 CI 0.55-1,06, p=0.11) with an improved 
overall survival benefit observed with increasing PD-L1 expression (76). The complete results of 
the POPLAR study were published later by Fehrenbacher et al (19). 
 
Eventually the OAK Phase III study in 2nd or 3rd line therapy of advanced NSCLC showed 
improved median OS (13.8 vs 9.6 months) with atezolizumab compared to docetaxel (68). 
In 198 NSCLC patients, MEDI4736 administered at 10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks until 
unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or for up to 12 months, has reported an ORR of 16% 
(27% in PD-L1+ and 5% in PD-L1-), and DCR at 12 weeks of 42%. The ORR was higher in 
squamous (21%) than non-squamous (13%) patients. The duration of response ranged from 0.1 
to 54.4 weeks. Preliminary OS data suggests that PD-L1+ patients appear to have improved OS 
compared with patients with PD-L1- tumors (NA vs. 8.9 months) (69). 
 
All of these results suggest immunotherapy as an important therapeutic approach in NSCLC 
patients and thus our study will consider previous checkpoint inhibitor therapy as a stratification 
criterion for randomization.  
 
New results have been published and address the possible benefit of using immune checkpoint 
inhibitors in 1st line therapy of advanced NSCLC. These results are conflicting with very positive 
results for anti PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1 expression over 50% 
of tumor cells (66) but not with anti PD-1 therapy with nivolumab in patients included whatever 
was the level of PD-L1 expression (28). Yet, various combination therapies may be beneficial 
with reports by Hellmann et al (35) or Langer et al (45). Thus, it has been advised by the 
Steering Committee of our study during its December 13th 2015 session that there should be an 
amendment to the current protocol to allow for inclusion of patients treated with checkpoint 
inhibitors alone or in combination as 1st line therapy and that patient should anyhow be offered 
also platinum-based chemotherapy (1st or 2nd line) before entering the trial. This led to version 
3.0 of the protocol.  
 
Numerous studies evaluating ICIs as stand-alone and in combination are ongoing in early stage. 
In 2017, durvalumab as maintenance treatment for one year after radical treatment with 
concurrent chemo-radiotherapy in locally advanced unresectable NSCLC showed an 
improvement in median time to death or distant metastasis of 23.2 months in durvalumab arm vs. 
14.6 months in placebo arm (1). 
 
In 2019, immunotherapies play an important role in the treatment of NSCLC (62). Since 2015, 
four anti PD-(L)1 monoclonal antibodies (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and 
durvalumab), alone and in combination with various compounds (i.e. ipilimumab, or 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 30 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
chemotherapy ± bevacizumab), have consistently demonstrated a superiority of overall survival 
in first and second-line treatment in advanced NSCLC and in locally advanced unresectable 
NSCLC.  Overall, in advanced NSCLC, a meaningful improvement of long-term OS rate at 3 
and 5 years of 25% is maintained with ICIs (62).  
 
This major improvement in therapy, albeit with limited response rate (10, 60) when ICI are used 
as monotherapy, led us to consider that, where available, checkpoint inhibition would be offered 
before moving to investigational therapy and thus that the current Phase II/III target should 
include 2nd or 3rd line therapy in patients with no therapeutic alternative after failure of platinum 
and immune checkpoint inhibition. In 2018, data of durvalumab + tremelimumab were reported 
in 78 immunotherapy-pretreated advanced NSCLC patients (27). 94% of patients received ≥ 2 
lines of prior therapy including PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors. 40 (51%) patients “relapsed” after ICI 
(defined as responders, then progression; prior median time to progression of 7 mo) and 38 
(49%) were “refractory” to previous ICI (defined as no response; prior median time to 
progression of 2.6 mo). The combination durvalumab + tremelimumab was manageable. Severe 
(Grade 3 and 4) related AEs occurred in 28% of patients, with diarrhea (6%) being most 
common. 5 patients (6%) discontinued due to a treatment-related AE. No treatment-related 
deaths were observed. Objective response rate was reported in 4 (5.1%) patients [2(5%) patients 
in relapsed group, 2(5.3%) patients in refractory group]. Median progression-free survival (PFS) 
was 1.8 mo (95% CI; 1.6-2.5) [2.5 mo (95% CI; 1.6-3.5) in relapsed group, 1.7 mo (95% CI; 1.6-
1.7) in refractory group]. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.4 mo (95% CI; 6.2-10.4) [8.5 mo 
(95% CI; 4.0-14.3) in relapsed group, 8.3 mo (95% CI; 6.0-10.4) in refractory group. OS rate at 
12 months was 34.1% (37.5% in relapsed group, 30.1% in refractory group). 
 
These limited data comfort our current statistical assumption that an OS-rate at 12 months of 
40% is a relevant efficacy target in this population. However, the continuation of the study in 
Step 2 which plans to demonstrate a better survival of OSE2101 over the control group (HR 0.7), 
will be discussed at the end of Step 1 between the steering  committee (SC) and the Sponsor 
based on the recommendations of the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC). Since the 
start of the study in 2015, there have been major forward advances in the management of 
NSCLC. The decision of continuing the study in Step 2 (Phase 3) will consider the expected 
benefit of OSE2101 as well the relevance of the specific design of the Phase 3 in regards of the 
state of the art in the management of advanced NSCLC known at time of the analysis (see 
Section 6.7).   
 
Moreover, different vaccines have been designed for specific peptide epitopes in NSCLC (79). In 
the adjuvant setting, the Phase III MAGRIT trial did not report improvement in disease free 
survival with the recMAGE-A3 + AS15 cancer immunotherapeutic (MAGE-A3 CI) as adjuvant 
therapy compared with placebo in patients with stage IB-IIIA completely resected MAGE-A3-
positive NSCLC, even in the population who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (78). In 
locally advanced disease, the Phase III START trial, randomly assigned 1,513 patients with 
unresectable stage IIIB NSCLC following definitive chemoradiation to L-BLP25 (liposomal 
vaccine) with best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The trial failed to meet its 
primary endpoint of improved OS with L-BLP25 (25.6 vs. 22.3 months for placebo; P=0.123) 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 31 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
(13). In advanced disease, different vaccines have been tested such as Belagenpumatucel-L (54), 
EGF vaccine (32), TG4010 vaccine (TIME trial) (63) or IDO vaccine (40). However, 
heterogeneity of tumor-associated antigen (TAA) expression, the potential for tumor associated 
antigen (TAA) loss, and variability of the human T-cell repertoire suggest that effective cancer 
T-specific immunotherapies require induction of a wide breadth of cytotoxic T lymphocytes 
(CTL) specificities. This can best be achieved with T-specific immunotherapies targeting 
multiple TAAs. 
1.2 
OSE2101  
The OSE2101 T-specific immunotherapy was designed to induce CTLs against five TAAs 
frequently overexpressed in NSCLC (i.e. carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA], p53, HER-2/neu, and 
melanoma antigens MAGE2 and 3). These TAAs have been used alone in previous studies 
involving NSCLC patients. OSE2101 is composed of 10 synthetic peptides from these TAAs, 
nine of the peptides representing CTL epitopes and one pan-DR epitope. Each CTL epitope is 
restricted by HLA-A2.1 and at least one other member of the HLA-A2 superfamily of major 
histocompatibility complex class I molecules. HLA-A2 phenotype is expressed by approximately 
45% of the general population as well as cancer patients. These epitopes being HLA-A2 
restricted means that they can bind only HLA-A2 molecules to be presented to the T-lymphocyte 
and thus, can only be effective in patients having HLA-A2 phenotype.  
 
The pan-DR epitope (PADRE) is a rationally designed helper T-lymphocyte (HTL) epitope 
included to augment the magnitude and duration of CTL responses (5). The innovation is to 
associate epitopes designed and modified chemically (analogs), of different tumor antigens in the 
same combination. Some of these analogs will increase the HLA-A2 binding and others will 
increase the T cell receptor binding. 
 
It was previously demonstrated that all of the epitopes selected were immunogenic. The utility of 
the analog peptides was further documented, as the CTLs generated were capable of recognizing 
wild-type epitopes expressed on tumor cell lines. Moreover, others have demonstrated 
measurable recall or post-vaccination CTL responses against most of the nine CTL epitopes 
(including the wild-type versions of analogs in the current product). The immunogenicity of 
OSE2101 after in vivo immunization was also demonstrated in HLA-A2.1/Kb transgenic mice, 
which express the human HLA-A2.1 molecule (refer to investigator brochure) 
 
OSE2101 clinical trials 
 
In two phase I trials in stage IIB-IIIA NSCLC (NCT00054899) and stage III colon cancer 
(NCT00054912) patients, subcutaneous OSE2101 was administered at 5 mg peptide/dose at 3-
week schedule for a total of 6 doses. The objectives were to evaluate the safety and 
immunogenicity of OSE2101 measured by IFN-γ ELISPOT assays. A total of 16 out of 24 
enrolled patients completed six injections over 18 weeks (6 out of 10 NSCLC patients, and 10 
out of 14 colon cancer patients). 
  
The most common adverse event in the 24 patients who received at least one dose of the 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 32 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
OSE2101 was reaction at the site of injection (erythema, pain, granuloma, and induration). Other 
side effects were: fatigue, rigors, nausea, vomiting, arthralgia, myalgia, pain in the extremities 
and dyspnea. Only 1 out of 24 patients reported an immune-related adverse event with a cytokine 
release reaction (fever, chills, chest pain, nausea and apnea) that was resolved within 24 hours of 
hospitalization.  
A strong CTL response was observed in the majority of patients tested.  
Immune response was defined in the protocol as one (or more) epitope-specific response greater 
than two standard deviations above background values as assessed by the ELISPOT assay. 15 
out of 16 patients receiving 6 injections were responding (93%) indicating that the T-specific 
immunotherapy was immunogenic and effective at inducing strong and broad CTL responses in 
a high frequency of patients (only one patient out of the 16 failed to respond to the T-specific 
immunotherapy, the expression of a less cross-reactive subtype in the HLA-A2 supertype family, 
HLA-A*0207, most likely accounted for the lack of immunogenicity in this patient). With 
respect to breadth of responses, eight of the 15 patients generated CTL responses to over half 
(five or more) of the epitopes in OSE2101 and, on average, each patient induced CTL responses 
to approximately four epitopes. 
 
In NSCLC patients, HLA-A2 is expressed as in the general population (22, 74) and is thought to 
be between 40 and 50%. Interestingly, HLA-A2 positivity appears as being an independent 
negative prognostic factor in cancers (48) and also in NSCLC: the role of HLA-A2 measured by 
blood sampling has been established by different and independent teams in large series of 
patients. Serological HLA-A2 expression appears as an independent risk factor of lymph node 
involvement and distant metastasis (12, 51, 47). However, a more recent analysis has shown that 
the HLA-A2 status was not identified as a prognostic factor in a large advanced NSCLC 
population treated with platinum-based chemotherapy (84). 
 
A Phase II, open-label, multicenter, single dose-group, multiple administration study of 
OSE2101 in patients with HLA-A2 positive advanced NSCLC was performed (NCT00104780) 
(4, 53, 54). 
The study was designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy (response and survival), and 
immunogenicity of OSE2101 in patients with advanced NSCLC who were HLA-A2 positive. 
The T-specific immunotherapy was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 5 mg every 3 
weeks for the first 15 weeks, then every 2 months through year 1, then quarterly through year 2, 
for a total of 13 doses. 
Patients were to be followed at three months after the last injection. Survival status was then to 
be ascertained every three months through year three then annually until year five.  
Tumor assessment was performed at baseline with reassessment at weeks 9 and 18 and at months 
6, 9, and 12. Leukapheresis was performed before vaccination (at screening) and at weeks 9 and 
18 to obtain sufficient cells to conduct the immunogenicity assays. Hematology, electrolytes, 
liver, other organ functions, urinalysis, and antinuclear antibody titer were assessed. Toxicity 
was monitored and graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. 
All patients signed the protocol-specific local institutional review board approved informed 
consent form. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors were used to evaluate response. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 33 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Eligible patients for this study were 18 years or older with histologic confirmation of stage IIIB 
or IV or recurrent NSCLC. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 
performance status of 0 or 1, an absolute granulocyte count ≥ 1,500/µL, platelet count 
≥100,000/µL, hemoglobin ≥ 10 g/dL, total bilirubin ≤ 2 mg/dL, AST and ALT 2 ≤ 5 times the 
upper limit of normal, and serum creatinine ≤ 2 times the upper limit of normal. Patients with 
brain metastases were eligible if the disease was clinically stable for at least 2 months before 
study entry. 
A second group of patients who were HLA-A2 negative when screened for the study were 
identified to use as an observational comparator group. The patients were assessed for survival 
via access to the social security death index. 
 
Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Progression-free survival was to 
be determined from time of patient registration to date of progression, death or last assessment of 
tumor response.  
 
To measure CTL responses, 2*106 peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs)/well (three to 
four wells per epitope) were stimulated in vitro with each peptide (10 µg/mL). Ten U/mL of rIL-
2 was added after 24 hours. After 10 days of culture, the in vitro–expanded PBMCs were tested 
for epitope-specific (T-specific immunotherapy epitope and wild-type epitope of an analog) CTL 
responses, measured by an 18-hour interferon gamma ELISPOT assay. 
Immune response relationship to survival was done by comparing the number of epitopes with 
measurable enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay (ELISPOT) responses in relation to 
survival using the log-rank statistic. 
 
Results:  
A total of 135 patients were enrolled; 64 patients were positive for HLA-A2 and 72 patients were 
HLA-A2 negative with the information provided only for survival. 
 
The 64 HLA-A2 positive patients were treated with one or more dose(s) of OSE2101 and 
represent the ITT population and the safety population.  Of these 64 treated patients, 31 (48%) 
completed the treatment phase and 11 (36%) subsequently completed the follow-up phase. 
 
The majority of the early withdrawals from the treatment phase (27%, 17/64 patients) as well as 
from the continuation and follow-up phases (19%, 12/64) were due to disease progression and/or 
decline in health status. Eight patients (13%) completed all phases of the study. Four patients 
(6%) withdrew from the study due to an AE.  
The characteristics of the 64 HLA-A2 positive patients were as follows: 
• Median age 64 (26-87) 
• Male 55%; Female 45% 
• Caucasian 83%, African American 9%, Asian 8% 
The majority of patients (43/64, 67%) had Stage IV NSCLC at inclusion. The median number of 
days since first diagnosis was 416 (range of 74 to 1921 days). 
Prior treatment lines for OSE2101 treated patients were: 
• one previous line in 31% of patients; 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 34 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• two previous lines: 28%  
• 3 or more previous lines (up to 6 lines): 37.5% 
92% of the treated population had previously received a platinum-based chemotherapy and 34% 
a TKI (gefinitib or erlotinib). 
6 patients (9.4 %) had received previous radiotherapy for brain metastasis. 
18 patients were considered as progressive disease at entry, representing 28% of this treated 
OSE2101 population.  
The HLA-A2-negative non-treated population demographics were similar to the HLA-A2 
positive treated population: 72 patients: age 65 (33- 91); male 37 (51%), female 35 (49%); 
Caucasian 57 (79%). One out of the 72 patients was lost of follow-up. 
 
Overall survival 
Median survival for HLA-A2-positive treated patients was 17.3 months. In the HLA-A2-
negative non-treated group, the median survival was 12.0 months.  
One-year survival in OSE2101 treated patients was 60%, compared to 49% in the HLA-A2-
negative group (53). The two-year and three-year survival estimates for OSE2101 treated 
patients were 39% and 27%. 
 
Clinical evaluation on the 64 HLA-A2+ treated patients (ITT population) 
One patient had a complete response and one a partial response.  Stable disease of 3 months or 
greater was observed in 54 (86%) additional patients, translating into a clinical benefit in 89% of 
patients.  Seventeen (27%) patients continued treatment for one year and demonstrated no 
evidence of progressive disease. Fourteen (22%) patients completed two years of dosing and 
remained without evidence of progressive disease.   
Progression free survival was 285 days (median time to progression) 
 
Immune Response 
Immune response was assessed in 33 treated patients. 
 
All 9 epitopes were immunogenic in at least 1 patient. Five epitopes showed strong responses 
that cross-reacted with wild type (WT) peptide. In analyzing the strongest 5 epitopes, 91% of 
patients demonstrated CTL epitope response to at least one antigen. Eighty-five percent 
demonstrated responses to 2 or more, 64% to 3 or more, 39% to 4 or more, and 18% to 5 or 
more.  
 
Correlation with survival was demonstrated in patients generating immune response.  
Longer survival was correlated with a higher number of positive epitopes (response was assessed 
by ELISPOT for the 5 strongest, CEA24, CEA605, HER2.369, MAGE2.157 and MAGE3.112). 
The Log Rank test showed decreased survival among those with a low immune response level 
compared to those with a medium or high immune response level (p<0.001).  
• Low: 0-1-epitopes: 406 ± 58 days of survival (n=5; 95% CI for mean 292 -520)  
• Medium: 2 to 3-epitopes: 778 ± 72 days of survival (n=15; 95% CI for mean 637 -919)  
• High: 4 to 5-epitopes: 875 ± 67 days of survival (n=13; 95% CI for mean 743- 1007).  
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 35 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Interferon-γ producing helper T cells against PADRE were detected in 18 of 33 (55%) patients 
tested in a direct ELISA assay.  
The durability of the CTL induction was also demonstrated by responses to 4 of 5 epitopes in 3 
of 4 patients tested at 12 months.  
 
In conclusion, the OS difference observed is 17.3 months of median OS in the OSE2101 treated 
group versus 12 months in the observational HLA-A2 negative group.  The OS rate at one year 
was 59% in the treated HLA-A2 positive group versus 49% in the observational HLA-A2 
negative group. The HLA-A2 observational group represents a “worst case” control group given 
that the prognosis is superior to the treated HLA-A2 positive group.  The data collected from the 
observational group is adequate to allow a meaningful comparison of one-year OS to the 
OSE2101 treated group. The median survival achieved is important for the OSE2101 Phase II 
highly pretreated population (65.5% received more than 2 lines, 92% received previous 
platinum-based chemotherapy).  The median survival for the three registered treatments 
(docetaxel, pemetrexed and erlotinib) after first line therapy is approximately 8 months and the 
one-year survival rate is 33%. In the OSE2101 Phase II, longer survival was significantly 
correlated with a higher number of positive epitopes.  Furthermore, the long–term survival 
achieved at 4 years for the treated patients was complemented by a favorable safety profile. 
 
These OSE2101 clinical data support a recommendation that OSE2101 move forward to a Phase 
III trial in HLA-A2 positive patients with advanced NSCLC who have previously failed first or 
subsequent line of therapy. 
 
Additional information on OSE2101 is available in the investigator’s brochure.   
 
1.3 
Design considerations  
Target indication: 
Based on the Phase II OSE2101 results and ESMO and ASCO treatment guidelines (2, 3, 65, 
62), the targeted population in a Phase III trial should be patients with stage III unsuitable for 
radiotherapy or metastatic stage IV NSCLC in second- or third-line treatment. Since 2015, 
immunotherapies (PD-(L)1 ± CTL-A4 inhibitors) play an important role in the treatment of 
NSCLC with a meaningful improvement of long-term OS rate at 3 and 5 years of 25% in 
advanced disease. More recently in 2017, durvalumab as maintenance treatment for one year 
after radical treatment with concurrent chemo-radiotherapy in locally advanced unresectable 
NSCLC shown an improvement in median time to death or distant metastasis of 23.2 months in 
durvalumab arm vs. 14.6 months in placebo arm (1). This major improvement in therapy, albeit 
with limited response rate (10, 60) when used as monotherapy, led us to consider that, where 
available, checkpoint inhibition would be offered before moving to investigational therapy and 
thus that the Phase III target should include 2nd or 3rd line therapy in patients with no therapeutic 
alternative after failure of platinum and immune checkpoint inhibition. 
 
Therapy: 
Reference therapy should be available and approved alike in the US and Europe as the trial 
extent needed to reach these 2 regions and thus only docetaxel and pemetrexed meet this 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 37 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Randomization: 
This Phase III study needs to be randomized but cannot be blinded as study treatment and 
reference therapies have different routes of administration, need concomitant therapy that would 
not be allowed for OSE2101 (steroids) and safety profile would easily help to recognize 
treatment allocated. Thus, the study will be open-labelled (not blind). 
The design of the study needs to consider prognostic factors in the randomization process. 
Although both patients with squamous and non-squamous NSCLC were included in the Phase II 
study for OSE2101, histology is a key prognostic factor as reference therapies do not have 
efficacy over the full range of NSCLC histologic subtypes. Pemetrexed for instance is not 
approved in squamous NSCLC, survival with docetaxel seems longer in non-squamous than in 
squamous cancer (10, 60) and some treatments (64) have positive results in non-squamous and 
negative in squamous. 
Best response to chemotherapy is documented as a prognostic factor (59) although patients will 
only be included in the trial once 1st line chemotherapy failed. 
Last, previous treatment with checkpoint inhibitors needs to be considered as 2nd or 3rd line 
therapy patients. They will be selected after failure of checkpoint-inhibitor regimens. Interaction 
between checkpoints inhibitors and T-specific immunotherapy with OSE2101 will have to be 
considered, supporting stratification as well on this criterion. 
 
Thus, randomization will be stratified by:  
• histology (squamous vs. non-squamous),  
• best response to first line treatment (objective response: complete or partial response, vs. no 
objective response: stabilization or progressive disease), and 
• before protocol v4.0 only: previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (yes vs. 
no). 
• from protocol v4.0: line rank of previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitor (first 
line vs. second line). 
 
Target endpoints: 
As recommended in current FDA and EMA (18, 21) guidelines the primary endpoint will be 
overall survival, secondary endpoint will be linked to assessment of tumor response with a 
cancer vaccine (adding post progression survival and time to ECOG deterioration as secondary 
endpoints) but a specific attention will also be paid to quality of life as patient reported outcome 
and 
analyzed 
per 
EORTC 
guidelines 
(https://www.eortc.org/app/uploads/sites/2/2018/02/SCmanual.pdf) and the FDA Guidance on 
June 
2021 
“Core 
Patient-Reported 
Outcomes 
in 
Cancer 
Clinical 
Trials” 
(https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/core-patient-
reported-outcomes-cancer-clinical-trials). 
 
2 
STUDY OBJECTIVES 
Step 1 (Phase II): 2:1 randomized non-comparative one stage Fleming Phase II 
Primary objective 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 38 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• To evaluate the overall survival (OS) rate at 12 months in HLA-A2 positive patients with 
advanced NSCLC as 2nd or 3rd line therapy after failure of checkpoint-inhibitor regimens 
Secondary objectives 
• To describe secondary measures of clinical efficacy including OS (median), disease control 
rate (DCR) at 6 and 12 months, Health-related Quality of life (QoL), progression free 
survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and evaluate duration of response (DR) 
• To assess the safety and tolerability 
• To describe patient reported outcomes (PRO) disease/treatment-related symptoms of lung 
cancer 
 
Step 2 (conditional Phase III): 2:1 comparative randomized Phase III 
Primary objective 
• To demonstrate that OSE2101 is superior to control treatment with respect to OS in HLA-A2 
positive patients with advanced NSCLC as 2nd or 3rd line therapy after failure of checkpoint-
inhibitor regimens; primary population will be the Population of Interest (PoI) defined as 
patients with secondary resistance to ICI and ICI 2nd line; sensitivity analysis will be done in 
all patients  
Secondary objectives 
• To compare secondary measures of clinical efficacy including Post Progression Survival 
(PPS), Time to worsening ECOG PS deterioration, Health-related QoL, DCR at 6 and 12 
months, and PFS 
• To assess the safety and tolerability of OSE2101 compared to the control treatment 
Exploratory objectives 
• To compare other efficacy criteria (ORR, DR), other QoL criteria, time to next lung cancer 
therapy and COVID-19 impact in both treatment arms. 
 
3 
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 
3.1 
Ethics and Good Clinical Practice 
The investigator must ensure that this study is conducted in full conformance with the principles 
of the “Declaration of Helsinki” and its amendments, and with the laws and regulations of the 
country in which the clinical research is conducted. This study must follow the ICH/GCP 
guidelines and applicable regulations and laws, including if applicable, the European Directive 
on Clinical Trials and the Code of Federal Regulations. The investigator agrees to the terms and 
conditions relating to this study as defined in the protocol, CRF and any other protocol-related 
documents.  
The investigator fully understands that any changes without previous agreement with the sponsor 
would constitute a violation of the protocol, including any ancillary studies or procedures 
performed on study subjects/patients (other than those procedures necessary for the wellbeing of 
the subjects/patients). 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 39 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
3.2 
Ethics Committee/ Institutional Review Board 
The investigator will submit this protocol and any related document provided to the subject (such 
as subject information used to obtain informed consent) to an EC/IRB. Approval from the EC/ 
IRB must be obtained before starting the study, and should be documented in a dated letter to the 
investigator, clearly identifying the trial, the documents reviewed and the date of approval.  
A list of members participating in the meeting must be provided, including the functions of these 
members. If study staff were present, it must be clear that none of these persons voted. 
Modifications made to the protocol after receipt of the EC/IRB approval must also be submitted 
as amendments by the investigator to the EC/IRB in accordance with local procedures and 
regulations (see section 7.1.1). 
 
3.3 
Informed consent and subject information 
It is the responsibility of the investigator to obtain signed informed consent from each of the 
subjects participating in this study before any study-mandated procedure, and after adequate 
explanation of the aims, methods, objectives and potential hazards of the study. The investigator 
must also explain to the subjects that they are completely free to refuse to enter the study or to 
withdraw from it at any time for any reason. Appropriate forms for documenting written 
informed consent will be provided to the site prior to the study. The Informed Consent Form and 
Subject Information Sheet will be provided in the local language with validated translations as 
appropriate. One signed informed consent form will be kept by the subject, and one will be filed 
by the investigator in the investigator’s file. 
 
3.4 
Governance of the study 
A Steering Committee has been appointed by OSE Immunotherapeutics; it is comprised of 
investigators (national coordinators). Representatives of OSE Immunotherapeutics will attend the 
Steering Committee meetings. The Steering Committee is responsible for scientific validity of 
the protocol and will assess the study quality and conduct on a regular basis.  
An Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) will review the safety and tolerability data 
and assess the risk/benefit ratio of the investigational drugs on a regular basis and give 
recommendations to the Steering Committee and the sponsor regarding continuation of the study. 
 
4 
INVESTIGATIONAL PLAN 
4.1 
Overall Study Design and Plan   
➢ This is an open-label, multicenter, controlled, randomized, parallel group, 2-step design 
Phase II/III trial of OSE2101 (Arm A – experimental treatment) versus docetaxel or 
pemetrexed (Arm B – control treatments) as second or third line treatment in HLA-A2 
positive patients with advanced NSCLC.  
➢ Patients will be recruited and monitored in experienced oncology/pulmonology centers. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 40 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
➢ Randomization to Arms A and B and will be stratified according to:  
o histology (squamous vs. non-squamous),  
o best response to first line treatment (objective response: complete or partial 
response, vs. no objective response: stabilization or progressive disease), and 
o and for new patients from version 4.0 of the protocol the 3rd stratification factor 
will be previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (used in 1st line vs. 
used in 2nd line). 
Treatment allocation will be made by IVRS/IWRS. 
➢ The total study duration for an individual subject will depend on the survival of the 
subject, including the following periods:  
o Pre-screening: HLA-A2 testing (using PCR methods) can be done at any time 
before inclusion (a specific consent form is available). 
o Screening: 1 to 35 days before treatment administration. 
o Randomization: treatment allocation and baseline for OS calculations. 
o Treatment:  
− For OSE2101 (Arm A): Day 1 each 21-day cycle for 6 cycles, then every 
8 weeks for the remainder of year one and, finally every 12 weeks beyond 
year one (see Figure 2: Schedule of OSE2101 administration) 
− For docetaxel or pemetrexed (Arm B): Day 1 each 21-day cycle (i.e. every 
3 weeks)  
− In both arms, treatment cycles will be repeated until unequivocal RECIST 
1.1-defined disease progression as determined by the investigator, 
unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Should pseudo progression 
or delayed response to treatment suspected in arm A, investigator may 
continue treatment beyond the time of RECIST-defined progression, if the 
patient is perceived to be experiencing clinical benefit. 
o End of treatment: 4 weeks after the last treatment administration to obtain 
assessments from the 4 previous weeks. 
o Post-treatment follow-up: every 2 months after discontinuation of treatment for 
the post-treatment survival status. 
➢ The study key time points are the following: 
o Randomization: when screening is completed, baseline for OS calculation  
o Day 1 Cycle 1 for treatment administration (performed in a time to allow for 
premedication if needed) and baseline for schedule of on-treatment tumor 
assessments. 
o Tumor assessments every 6 (± 1) weeks 
o Survival assessments after treatment stop every 2 months. 
➢ Study duration 
The study design is built as a 2-step design. Analysis of the 1st step will decide whether 
the 2nd step is clinically relevant and analysis of the combined population included in 
Step 1 and 2 is planned when the target number of events is reached. However, the final 
analysis will exclude the 38 patients with previous ICI treatment randomized before the 
recruitment hold.  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 41 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
4.2 
Study Population 
4.2.1 Subject population 
Patients will be enrolled into the clinical study after having been checked for their eligibility 
during the screening period.  
4.2.2 Inclusion criteria 
Protection of study subjects and compliance 
1. Signed and dated informed consent document indicating that the patient has been informed 
of all the pertinent aspects of the trial prior to enrollment 
2. Willingness and ability to comply with scheduled visits, treatment plans, laboratory tests, 
and other study procedures 
Demography 
3. Female or male, 18 years of age or older 
Cancer Diagnosis and treatment  
4. Histologically or cytologically proven diagnosis of NSCLC that is locally advanced 
(stage III) unsuitable for radiotherapy or metastatic (stage IV) according to the 8th edition of 
tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) in Lung Cancer published by the International Union 
Against Cancer and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (11)  
5. Subjects with disease recurrence or progression after therapy with an immune checkpoint 
inhibitor and platinum-based chemotherapy: 
• either 1st line chemotherapy followed by 2nd line checkpoint inhibitor 
• or 1st line combination of checkpoint inhibitor and chemotherapy 
Patients with progression during or within 12 months after the end of ICI as sequential or 
concomitant platinum-based chemotherapy ± radiation for locally advanced disease (stage 
III) are eligible 
6. Subjects with measurable or non-measurable lesions 
7. Subjects must express HLA-A2 phenotype as assessed serologically 
8. Subjects must be considered suitable for chemotherapy with either single-agent pemetrexed 
or docetaxel 
9. Subjects with brain metastases are eligible if treated (whole brain radiotherapy, stereotaxic 
radiotherapy, surgery) at least 3 weeks prior to initiation of study treatment and have no 
symptoms related to brain metastases for at least 2 weeks before initiation of study 
treatment and are not taking any forbidden medications (see Section 4.3.5 of the protocol)  
10. Any prior chemotherapy, immunotherapy, hormonal therapy, radiation therapy or surgeries 
must have been completed at least 3 weeks prior to initiation of study treatment 
11. Any toxicity from prior therapy must have recovered to ≤ Grade 1 (except alopecia) 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 42 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Clinical status 
12. ECOG performance status 0-1 
13. Adequate organ function as defined by all the following criteria:  
• Albuminemia > 25g/L 
• Serum aspartate transaminase (AST) and serum alanine transaminase (ALT) 1.5 x 
upper limit of normal (ULN) with alkaline phosphatase  2.5 x ULN, or AST and 
ALT  5 x ULN if liver function abnormalities are due to liver metastases 
• Total serum bilirubin  1.5 x ULN  
• Absolute neutrophil count (ANC)  1500/L  
• Platelets  100000/L 
• Hemoglobin  9.0 g/dL (in the absence of transfusion within 2 weeks from before 
randomization) 
• Creatinine clearance (based on modified Cockcroft-Gault formula) ≥ 45 ml/min. 
 
4.2.3 Exclusion criteria 
Cancer Diagnosis and treatment 
1. Small-cell lung cancer/mixed NSCLC with small cell component or other neuroendocrine 
lung cancers (typical and atypical carcinoids, large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas) 
2. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma histology, and who had docetaxel as part of their 
prior chemotherapy will not be eligible for this trial 
3. Current or previous treatment with investigational therapy in another therapeutic clinical 
trial (interrupted less than 4 weeks before study treatment initiation) 
4. Patients whose tumor harbors EGFR gene mutation that sensitizes tumors to TKI (EGFR 
exon 18-21) or ALK rearrangement 
5. Ongoing immunotherapy (checkpoint inhibition, antigen immunotherapy that would be 
scheduled to continue concomitantly to the study) 
6. Spinal cord compression (unless treated with the patient attaining good pain control and 
stable or recovered neurologic function), carcinomatous meningitis, or leptomeningeal 
disease 
7. Patients with squamous cell histology or non-squamous cell histology previously treated by 
pemetrexed with a contraindication for docetaxel with grade ≥ 2 neuropathy or 
hypersensitivity reaction to medications formulated with polysorbate 80 (Tween 80) as they 
could be randomly assigned to Arm B 
Medical history and clinical status 
8. Patients with a condition requiring systemic treatment with either corticosteroids or other 
immunosuppressive medications 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 43 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
9. Treatment with corticosteroids in the last 3-week period before inclusion, except for topical, 
ocular, intra-articular, intranasal, and inhaled corticosteroids with minimal systemic 
absorption (e.g. with a dose ≤ 500 microgram beclomethasone equivalent for inhaled 
steroids), or steroid doses ≤ 10 mg daily prednisone equivalent which are permitted 
10. A recognized immunodeficiency disease including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 
infection 
and 
other 
cellular 
immunodeficiencies, 
hypogammaglobulinemia 
or 
dysgammaglobulinemia; 
subjects 
who 
have 
hereditary, 
congenital 
or 
acquired 
immunodeficiencies 
11. Patients with auto-immune disease, with the exception of type I diabetes or treated 
hypothyroidism 
12. Patients with interstitial lung disease 
13. Patients with active B or C hepatitis 
14. Other malignancy: patients will not be eligible if they have evidence of other active 
invasive cancer(s) (other than NSCLC) within 5 years prior to screening (except 
appropriately treated non-melanoma skin cancer or localized cervical cancer, or other local 
tumors considered cured (e.g. localized and presumed cured prostate cancer) 
15. Other severe acute or chronic medical or psychiatric conditions, or laboratory abnormalities 
that would impart, in the judgment of the investigator and/or sponsor, excess risk associated 
with study participation or study drug administration, and which would, therefore, make the 
patient inappropriate for entry into this study 
16. Female patients must be surgically sterile or be postmenopausal, or must agree to use 
effective contraception during the period of the trial and for at least 90 days after 
completion of treatment (See Appendix 4: Guidance on Contraception) 
17. Male patients sexually active with a woman of childbearing potential must be surgically 
sterile or must agree to use effective contraception during the period of the trial and for at 
least 90 days after completion of treatment. The decision of effective contraception will be 
based on the judgment of the principal investigator (See Appendix 4: Guidance on 
Contraception) 
18. Breastfeeding women 
19. Women with a positive serum pregnancy test at screening 
 
4.3 
Study Drugs 
4.3.1 Description, packaging and labelling 
The investigational drug OSE2101 will be provided to the site in vials containing OSE2101 
1 mg/mL suspension for emulsion for subcutaneous (sc) injection. It is manufactured in 
accordance with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) as required by the current GCP. It is 
packaged and labelled in accordance with GMP and local regulations. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 44 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Two kits (one for OSE2101 and one for Montanide), corresponding to a single administration, 
will be provided to the sites. Each OSE2101 kit will contain 1 vial of OSE2101 and all ancillary 
materials to prepare the full treatment for one single administration.  
 
Control treatments (i.e. docetaxel and pemetrexed) will be market-approved presentations. 
Suppliers may vary according to country/center. 
 
4.3.2 Storage  
The investigational drug OSE2101 will be provided by the Sponsor as vials to be stored at 
-20°C/-4°F protected from light and the adjuvant Montanide ISA51TM will be provided as vials 
to be stored at 5°C/41°F.  
 
Control treatments must be stored at room temperature according to manufacturer’s 
recommendations. 
 
4.3.3 Study drug administration 
Study treatment administration in Arm A (OSE2101) 
Study treatment to be injected will be prepared (emulsification) by the pharmacist within one 
hour of administration, according to a specific study drugs preparation manual.  
Patients randomized to OSE2101 will receive 1 mL of OSE2101 administered subcutaneously on 
Day 1 every three weeks for six cycles, then every eight weeks for the remainder of year one 
and, finally every twelve weeks beyond year one until unequivocal RECIST 1.1-defined disease 
progression as determined by the investigator, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. 
Should pseudo progression or delayed response to treatment suspected in arm A, investigator 
may continue treatment beyond the time of RECIST-defined progression, if the patient is 
perceived to be experiencing clinical benefit. (Figure 2: Schedule of OSE2101 administration). 
 
It is intended that all OSE2101 injections be given at the same site (either the anterior thigh or 
deltoid region of the non-dominant arm).  
If pain or granuloma formation prevents using the same site, other areas may be used. If the 1-
mL injection cannot be given by a single injection, then it may be divided into two injections, 
preferably in the same lymph node drainage area. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 45 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Figure 2: Schedule of OSE2101 administration 
 
 
Patients are to be monitored for at least 4 hours after each injection, in order to detect any 
immediate allergic reaction or later symptoms related to possible cytokine release syndrome with 
appropriate equipment and treatment which may be needed for immediate intervention.  
 
Patients should be instructed to the risk of infrequent and delayed flu-like syndrome, malaise, 
fever, low blood pressure which would need to make contact with the investigator (refer to 
5.8 Management of adverse events, dosing adaptations and risk minimization strategy and the 
Investigator's Brochure). 
 
The investigator or his/her designee will administer the study drugs to the patients, exercising 
accepted medical practices. Under no circumstances will the investigator allow study drugs to be 
used otherwise than as directed by this clinical study protocol. All study drug administrations 
will be done under direct medical supervision.  
 
Study treatment administration in Arm B (control treatment) 
Patients randomized to docetaxel will receive standard approved NSCLC dose: 75 mg/m2 in 
1-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Docetaxel will be prepared as per the manufacturer’s 
recommendations. Patients will also be required to take dexamethasone, 8 mg orally, twice daily, 
the day before, the day of and the day after docetaxel dosing. Prophylactic G-CSF may be used 
to mitigate the risk of hematological toxicities at the discretion of the investigator. 
 
Patients randomized to pemetrexed will receive standard approved NSCLC dose: 500 mg/m2 in 
10-minute infusion every 3 weeks. Pemetrexed will be prepared as per the manufacturer’s 
recommendations.  Patients will also be required to take folic acid, 350-1000 g orally daily 
beginning approximately 1 to 2 weeks before the first dose of pemetrexed and continuing daily 
until 3 weeks after the last dose of pemetrexed. Vitamin B12, 1000 g, will be injected 
intramuscularly approximately 1 to 2 weeks before the first dose of pemetrexed and will be 
repeated approximately every 9 weeks until discontinuation.  Patients will also be required to 
take dexamethasone, 4 mg orally, twice daily, the day before, the day of and the day after 
pemetrexed dosing. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 46 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Cross-over in Arm B is not permitted 
Patients in Arm B (docetaxel or pemetrexed) cannot receive OSE2101 at time of treatment 
interruption whichever the cause. 
 
4.3.4 Treatment Exposure and Compliance 
Records of study drug used, and dosages administered will be kept during the study. Study drug 
accountability will be performed on an ongoing basis by the study staff and checked by the 
monitor during site visits and at the completion of the study.  
 
4.3.5 Concomitant medications 
Patients in Arm A with OSE2101 
Authorized: 
Subjects can use topical, ocular, intra-articular, intranasal, and inhaled corticosteroids (with 
minimal systemic absorption) with a dose ≤ 500 microgram beclomethasone equivalent. Steroid 
doses ≤ 10 mg daily prednisone equivalent are permitted.   
 
Systemic steroids are only allowed for a brief (less than 1 week) course when prophylaxis (e.g., 
contrast dye allergy) or for acute treatment of non-autoimmune conditions (e.g., delayed-type 
hypersensitivity reaction caused by a contact allergen). 
 
Precautions: 
The potential for overlapping toxicities with radiotherapy and OSE2101 is not known currently: 
therefore, palliative radiotherapy is not recommended while receiving OSE2101. 
If palliative radiotherapy is required, then OSE2101 should be withheld for at least 3 days 
before, during, and 1 week after radiation. Subjects should be closely monitored for any potential 
toxicity during and after receiving radiotherapy, and AEs considered related to radiotherapy 
should resolve to Grade 1 prior to resuming OSE2101. 
 
Patients in Arm B 
Patients in Arm B will require premedication as per product information (refer to 3.3.3 study 
treatment administration in Arm B). Unless started earlier for other reasons, the premedication 
should start before day 1 of each cycle (i.e. day 1 of each cycle will be injection day for 
chemotherapy).  
➢ Patients in Arm B with docetaxel 
Mandatory/Authorized: 
Patients will be required to take dexamethasone, 8 mg orally, twice daily, the day before, the day 
of and the day after docetaxel dosing. Intramuscular or intraperitoneal administration of 
dexamethasone with the same total dose as oral dexamethasone, or equivalent corticosteroids, 
will be allowed per country regulations. Prophylactic G-CSF may be used to mitigate the risk of 
hematological toxicities. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 47 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Prohibited 
The following strong CYP3A4 inhibitors should be avoided for subjects receiving docetaxel 
during the study. This includes (but is not limited to): Ketoconazole, Itraconazole, 
Clarithromycin, 
Atazanvir, 
Indinavir, 
Nefazodone, 
Nelfinavir, 
Ritonavir, 
Saquinavir, 
Telithromycin, Voriconazole. 
 
➢ Patients in Arm B with Pemetrexed 
Mandatory/Authorized: 
Patients will be required to take folic acid, 350-1000 g orally daily beginning approximately 1 
to 2 weeks before the first dose of pemetrexed and continuing daily until 3 weeks after the last 
dose of pemetrexed.  
Vitamin B12, 1000 g, will be injected intramuscularly approximately 1 to 2 weeks before the 
first dose of pemetrexed and will be repeated approximately every 9 weeks until discontinuation. 
Patients will also be required to take dexamethasone, 4 mg orally, twice daily, the day before, the 
day of and the day after pemetrexed dosing. Intramuscular or intraperitoneal administration of 
dexamethasone with the same total dose as oral dexamethasone will be allowed per country 
regulations. 
 
Precautions: 
Refer to product labelling/SPC 
 
Patients in Arm A or Arm B 
Authorized palliative radiotherapy 
Only non-target bone lesions that do not include lung tissue in the planned radiation field or CNS 
lesions may receive palliative radiotherapy while on study treatment.  
Details of palliative radiotherapy should be documented in the source records and electronic case 
report form (eCRF). Details in the source records should include: dates of treatment, anatomical 
site, dose administered and fractionation schedule, and adverse events. Subjects requiring 
palliative radiotherapy should be assessed for disease progression. Subjects considered as having 
progressive disease should be considered for discontinuing study treatment, except if the patient 
is perceived to be experiencing clinical benefit.  
 
Prohibited for all patients 
The following are prohibited for all subjects during the study (unless utilized to treat a  
drug-related adverse event): 
➢ Immunosuppressive agents 
➢ Immunosuppressive doses of systemic corticosteroids (except as stated above in 
“allowed concomitant medication”) 
➢ Any concurrent antineoplastic therapy (i.e., chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, 
immunotherapy, surgical resection of lesions, non-palliative radiation therapy, or 
standard or investigational agents for treatment of NSCLC). Unless a localised 
progression with a global control of the disease with a clinical benefit for the patient and 
under discretion of the investigator, may warrant continuing study treatment should be 
discussed with the sponsor. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 48 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Authorized 
Concomitant palliative and supportive care for disease related symptoms (including 
bisphosphonates and RANK-L inhibitors) is allowed if initiated prior to first dose of study 
treatment (prior radiotherapy must have been completed at least 3 weeks prior to initiation of 
study treatment). 
 
4.3.6 Study instructions, restrictions and exclusion period 
Subjects with active, known or suspected autoimmune disease cannot be enrolled. Subjects with 
type I diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism only requiring hormone replacement, skin disorders 
(such as vitiligo, psoriasis, or alopecia) not requiring systemic treatment, or conditions not 
expected to recur in the absence of an external trigger are permitted to enroll. 
 
4.4 
Study premature discontinuation and withdrawal 
4.4.1  Premature discontinuation 
Subjects who will prematurely discontinue the study for example for an AE will undergo 
whenever possible the study assessments scheduled at the end of treatment visit.  
 
A subject will be considered as withdrawn from the study if, and only if, he/she has withdrawn 
his/her consent. The potential follow-up of subjects after their withdrawal of consent will depend 
upon local regulations or specific agreement with the subjects. However, subjects who withdraw 
their consent after first study drug administration will be advised to undergo the study 
assessments scheduled at the end of treatment visit. They will be advised that participation to the 
end of treatment visit is voluntary but is in their best interest.  
If a subject was withdrawn before completing the study, the reason for withdrawal must be 
entered on the appropriate case report form (eCRF) page. 
 
In this study, overall survival is a key endpoint of the study. Post treatment study follow-up is of 
critical importance and is essential to preserving subject safety and the integrity of the study. 
Subjects who discontinue study treatment must continue to be followed for collection of outcome 
and/or survival follow-up data as required until death or the conclusion of the study. Tumor 
assessments should be continued until documented RECIST 1.1 disease progression. Cancer 
treatment received after discontinuation of study treatment must be recorded as well. 
 
Subjects should notify the investigator of the decision to withdraw consent from future follow-up 
in writing, whenever possible. The withdrawal of consent should be explained in detail in the 
medical records by the investigator, as to whether the withdrawal is from further treatment with 
study drug only or also from study procedures and/or post treatment study follow-up, and entered 
on the appropriate CRF page.  
 
In the event that vital status (whether the subject is alive or dead) is being measured, publicly 
available information should be used to determine vital status only as appropriately directed in 
accordance with local law. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 49 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
4.4.2 Lost to Follow Up 
A subject will be considered as lost to follow-up only after having exhausted all means of 
contact; all reasonable efforts must be made to locate subjects to determine and report their 
ongoing vital status. 
Lost to follow-up is defined by the inability to reach the subject after a minimum of three 
documented phone calls, faxes or emails as well as lack of response by the subject to one 
registered mail/letter. All attempts should be documented in the subject’s medical records. If it is 
determined that the subject has died, the site will use permissible local methods to obtain the date 
and cause of death. 
If investigator’s use of third-party representative to assist in the follow-up portion of the study 
has been included in the subject’s informed consent, then the investigator may use a Sponsor 
retained third-party representative to assist site staff with obtaining subject’s contact information 
or other public vital status data necessary to complete the follow-up portion of the study. If after 
all attempts, the subject remains lost to follow-up, then the last known alive date as determined 
by the investigator should be reported and documented in the subject’s medical records. 
 
4.5 
Treatment Assignment 
4.5.1 Identification of subjects 
The identification of subjects in this study is based on the obligation for pseudonomysation.  
Eligible subjects will be assigned by the investigator a unique study number identifying the 
country, the site and the patient.  
4.5.2 Randomization 
Treatment assignment will be done through an IVRS/IWRS system. Phone number / Web 
address and information required for randomization (identification of the patient/center, criteria 
for inclusion, stratification and criteria for selection of appropriate Arm B treatment) will be 
specified in the study manual.  
Subjects will receive OSE2101 (Arm A) or docetaxel or pemetrexed (according to histology and 
previous treatment, refer to Figure 1) (Arm B).  
Before protocol 4.0, the randomization ratio was 1:1. From protocol 4.0, the randomization is 
2:1. 
Patients should be treated as soon as possible with the allocated treatment, and preferably within 
15 days after randomization. 
 
4.6 
Study Endpoints 
4.6.1 Efficacy endpoints 
Primary efficacy endpoint:  
• 
OS:  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 50 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
o In Step 1: OS rate at 12 months in experimental Arm A (OSE2101) in 84 
evaluable patients exposed to OSE2101 
o In Step 2: comparison of OS between experimental Arm A (OSE2101) and 
control Arm B (docetaxel or pemetrexed) when 278 events observed; due to early 
study discontinuation (219 patients included instead of 363 patients), statistical 
hypothesis was revised with a comparison between experimental Arm A and 
control Arm B in the PoI (refer statistical methodology section) 
 
Secondary efficacy endpoints (in Steps 1 & 2): 
• 
DCR at 6 and 12 months based on RECIST 1.1 
• 
QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ questionnaire): “Global health status/QoL” score based on 
questions 29 (How would you rate your overall health during the past week?) and 30 
(How would you rate your overall quality of life during the past week?) (in Step 1 only) 
• 
QLQ-LC13 (lung cancer module from EORTC QLQ questionnaire): time to 1st ≥ 10-
point deterioration in chest pain score (question 40), dyspnea score (question 33, 34, 35) 
or cough score (question 31) (in Step 1 only) 
• 
Post Progression Survival  
• 
Time to worsening of ECOG PS  
• 
QLQ-C30 Global health status score change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• 
QLQ-C30 Functional scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• 
QLQ-C30 Symptom scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only) 
• 
QLQ-LC13 Symptom scores change from baseline (in Step 2 only 
• 
PFS based on RECIST1.1 
• 
ORR (in Step 1 only) 
• 
DR (in Step 1 only) 
Exploratory efficacy endpoints: 
In Step 2 only: 
• 
ORR 
• 
DR 
• 
All the other scores of QoL 
• 
COVID-19 impact 
In Steps 1: 
• 
TTD in patient reported chest pain 
• 
TTD in patient reported dyspnea 
• 
TTD in patient reported cough 
In Steps 1 & 2: 
• 
Time to next lung cancer therapy 
 
4.6.2 Safety and tolerability endpoints 
• 
Incidence, severity, seriousness and relationship to study treatments of adverse events 
(AE) and immune-related adverse events (irAE) and any laboratory abnormalities. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 51 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
4.6.3 Exploratory translational endpoints 
Patients who agreed to participate in this exploratory translational study, will have to sign a 
specific inform consent. Patient can agree to participate in all or some parts of the translational 
study. Patient can refuse to participate in the translational study without compromising his/her 
participation in the main study.  
The predicted mode of action of OSE2101 includes to increase the tumor associated antigen 
(TAA) presentation of the multiple neoepitope OSE2101 vaccine and to increase the priming and 
activation of T cell in the intent to increase the recognition of cancer cell by specific T cells (5, 
72). 
 
The main objectives of the translational research in the present study are to explore biomarkers 
and pharmacodynamic parameters before and after the start of study treatment (OSE2101 or 
chemotherapy) in a population of NSCLC patients who progressed after ICI treatment (41, 67, 
72). 
Therefore, the following exploratory translational studies will be done: 
 
In blood samples: 
• Pre-, on-treatment and after treatment collection of peripheric blood mononuclear cells 
(PBMCs) for: 
o Immunophenotyping  
o OSE2101 vaccine antigen-specific T-cell frequency  
• Pre-, on-treatment and after treatment collection of liquid biopsies (e.g. cell free DNA 
(cfDNA)): 
o Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) and/or other mutation of interest (e.g. gene 
profiling of OSE2101 vaccine TAA) 
Blood samples will be taken at baseline, then every 6 weeks until Cycle 7 (e.g. Day 1 of Cycles 
3, 5 and 7), then every 12 weeks (e.g. at time of CT scan) until end of treatment and/or 
progression in all arms (see flow charts Table 1).  
In tumor tissue samples: 
• Specimens from archiving tumor biopsies (at first diagnosis and/or at any time before 
study entry) will be collected.  
• If possible, a new tumor biopsy will be collected within 35 days prior to the first study 
treatment administration (during the screening period). An archiving tumor biopsy 
collected before the screening period is acceptable, should the biopsy be collected after 
the end of ICI treatment. A second tumor biopsy (e.g. in the same tumor site) will be 
undertaken between cycle 3 and cycle 6 and/or at time of the disease progression; Of 
note, a blood sample will be collected for Whole-Exome sequencing (WES) for: 
o Determination of HLA class I expression in tumor (e.g. HLA-A2 and Beta-2 
microglobulin) 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 52 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
o Tumor and tumor microenvironment (TME) characterization by multiplex IHC 
and gene profiling (i.e. CD8-exhausted T cells, TIL infiltration…)  
 
Handling and shipping of blood and tumor samples for biomarkers analysis 
All blood and tumor samples will be stored in certified biobanks before being submitted to 
central laboratories for analysis. The procedure for collection, handling and shipping of the 
samples will be provided in a separate manual. 
Blood and tumor tissue banking for future biomarker analyses 
If the patient agrees, remaining specimens after analysis will be biobanked for future biomarker 
research and drug development projects, e.g. to identify patients that are more likely to benefit 
from a treatment or experience an adverse event (AE), or to gain a mechanistic or genetic 
understanding of drug effects and thereby. All sample will be stored at an external biobanking 
facility contracted by the Sponsor.  
 
Participation in biobanking is voluntary and not a prerequisite for participation in the trial or in 
the translational study. Biobanking will only occur after patient agreed for biobanking and 
having signed the specific informed consent in accordance with local ethical and regulatory 
requirements. Samples and/or data may be transferred to third parties and other countries as 
specified in the informed consent form (ICF). 
 
4.7 
Study Assessment Procedures 
The study assessments and their timing are depicted in Table 1 (Arm A) and Table 2 (Arm B). 
Informed consent must be obtained before any study related procedure. All assessments should 
be performed prior to dosing with study treatment unless otherwise indicated. All cycles are 21 
days in duration.  
4.7.1  Screening assessments  
Screening assessments and procedures must be completed within 35 days of randomization, in 
accordance with Table 1 and Table 2: 
➢ A complete medical history including oncology history (information on prior treatments 
and regimen) and concomitant medications  
➢ HLA-A2 testing (if there are local results with PCR methods, they can be used for 
inclusion, but a central determination is required posteriori. If PCR methods is not 
available on local sites, a central determination of HLA-A2 testing is mandatory) 
➢ EGFR & ALK determination, PD-L1 status: if there is not documented results in 
subject’s medical file, a central determination is recommended if tumor tissue is 
available (see section 4.7.3) 
➢ Tumor assessments: CT scan of thorax, abdomen and brain CT or brain MRI. CT scan of 
the pelvis will be performed only upon request according to clinical suspicion. In case of 
clinical suspicion of bone metastasis out of the area reported by CT scan, imaging test 
will be performed under discretion of the investigator. If imaging were realized as part as 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 53 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
routine practice before patient signed the ICF, these radiologic exams can be considered 
as baseline assessments if performed within 35 days of randomization 
➢ Assessment of pretreatment signs and symptoms from the screening visit (at least from 
14 days before randomization) 
➢ Vital signs  
➢ Physical examination  
➢ ECOG performance status  
➢ The safety laboratory (within 14 days prior to randomization):  
o Hematology: blood for complete blood count (CBC) with differential, including 
neutrophil and lymphocyte count  
o Biochemistry: serum for urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium, calcium, 
magnesium, phosphate, chloride, bicarbonate, glucose, LDH, bilirubin, ALT, 
AST, gamma GT, alkaline phosphatase, total proteins, albumin, TSH, free T3 and 
free T4  
o Coagulation: aPTT, PT/INR, fibrinogen  
o Virology: Hepatitis B (HBV HbsAg) and Hepatitis C (HCV RNA), HIV test 
➢ Female subjects with child-bearing potential are required to have a negative serum 
pregnancy test at screening. The test should be repeated whenever one menstrual cycle is 
missed during treatment or a potential pregnancy is otherwise suspected. 
Clinically relevant findings that exist prior to study treatment start must be recorded on the 
relevant Medical History CRF page. 
Results of a test performed prior to the subject signing consent as part of routine clinical 
management are acceptable in lieu of a screening test if performed within the specified 
timeframe. 
 
4.7.2 HLA-A2 testing 
HLA-A2 testing can be done at any time before inclusion to screen potential patients. Remaining 
DNA will be stored until the end of the study for further HLA-A2 testing as necessary. A 
specific informed consent will be signed for this pre-screening.  
HLA-A genotype will be determined centrally by PCR in all patients (laboratory to be specified 
in laboratory manual). If there are local results with PCR methods, they can be used for 
inclusion, but a central determination will be done posteriori. If PCR methods is not available on 
local sites, a central determination of HLA-A2 testing is mandatory. HLA-A2 positive phenotype 
is mandatory for inclusion. 
  
This test is done on serum; one 4mL blood sample will be collected on an EDTA tube by 
venipuncture. Serum will be sent to central laboratory at ambient temperature. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 54 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
All details on sample preparation and shipment will be described in the laboratory manual. 
 
For patients who agreed (optional): 
In order to be able to address future scientific questions, pre-screened patients will be asked to 
voluntarily donate remaining biospecimens for banking. If the patient agrees, banked samples 
may be used for future biomarker research and drug development projects (e.g. for future 
development a companion diagnostic). 
 
4.7.3 EGFR and ALK determination, PD-L1 expression at screening 
EGFR and ALK negative determination must be known before randomization. Patients must 
have their tumor screened for the absence of EGFR gene mutation that sensitizes tumors to TKI 
(EGFR exon 18-21) or ALK rearrangement. As per current recommendations EGFR and ALK 
determination need to be done only in patients with non-squamous cancer or never/light smokers 
(<15 pack*years) with squamous cancer.  
PD-L1 expression will be documented if local test has been done or, if remaining tumor tissue 
for central determination is possible.  
 
ALK analysis  
ALK testing will be performed in local laboratories with validated tests. If not available on site, a 
central determination will be performed by a selected central laboratory, should tumor tissue 
available. 
Samples will be FFPE blocks or slides. 
 
EGFR analysis  
EGFR testing will be performed in local laboratories with validated tests. If not available on site, 
a central determination will be performed by a selected central laboratory, should tumor tissue 
available. 
Biopsy samples will be FFPE blocks. 
 
PD-L1 expression 
PD-L1 testing will be performed in local laboratories with validated tests. If not available on site, 
a central determination will be performed by a selected central laboratory, should tumor tissue be 
available. 
 
Preparation and shipment details will be described in the laboratory manual. 
 
4.7.4 Tumor assessments 
CT scan of chest and abdomen and CT scan or MRI of the brain will be performed at screening. 
CT scan of the pelvis will be performed only upon request at screening according to clinical 
suspicion or during follow-up according to clinical suspicion or for monitoring purpose of 
identified target/non-target lesions. In case of clinical suspicion of bone metastasis out of the 
area included by the basal CT scan, radiological test will be performed under discretion of the 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 55 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
investigator. Then CT scan will be performed every 6 weeks after randomization with 1 week of 
allowance even it is between 2 study visits. Brain imaging must be included in subsequent tumor 
assessments if a patient has brain metastases, otherwise brain will only be evaluated when 
clinically indicated. For Germany, with respect to brain metastases, MRI should be the privileged 
imaging technic and CT should only be considered when there are contra-indications to MRI. 
Specific tests for bone metastasis are required every 12 weeks only if bone metastases are 
present at baseline or are diagnosed later, at investigator discretion. CT scan or MRI, where 
appropriate, should also be performed whenever disease progression is suspected (e.g. 
symptomatic deterioration). 
If imaging were realized as part as routine practice before patient signed the ICF, these 
radiologic exams can be considered as baseline assessments if performed within 35 days of 
randomization.   
 
4.7.5 Quality of life  
The questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-LC13 (specific to lung cancer) will be used in this 
study (see Appendix 2). These questionnaires must be self-administered by the patient on his/her 
own. These questionnaires will be proposed in the local language to the patient at each study 
visit. A member of the onsite clinical study team can help the patient if he/she does not 
understand the question but must not suggest or impose any answer. 
 
The investigator will ensure that the questionnaires are complete and ask the patient to complete 
them should there be any missing answers. 
 
4.7.6 Safety laboratory assessments 
The safety parameters (Complete blood count with differential, Serum chemistry BUN or serum 
urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, phosphate, chloride, bicarbonate, 
glucose, LDH, total bilirubin, ALT, AST, gamma GT, alkaline phosphatase, total proteins, 
albumin, TSH, free T3 and free T4, aPTT, PT/INR, fibrinogen) will be measured by the local 
laboratories of investigational sites. All laboratories will provide OSE Immunotherapeutics or its 
designee with the name, professional degree and curriculum vitae of the laboratory director, the 
laboratory certification documents, validations methods, normal ranges, and all other appropriate 
documents. These laboratory references must be forwarded to OSE Immunotherapeutics or its 
designee before study start and updated whenever necessary.  
 
4.7.7 Vital signs 
It includes body temperature, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation. 
Blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) will be recorded after 10 minutes resting in supine 
position. Oxygen saturation will be measured by pulse oximetry.  
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 56 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
4.7.8 Physical examination 
A complete physical examination including an examination of major body systems, height 
(baseline visit only) and weight is performed during the study. 
 
4.7.9 ECG 
Standard digital 12-lead ECG (at least 3 complexes for each standard lead) will be recorded with 
the subject in the supine position for a 10-minute period. ECG will include date, time, subject's 
identification, and physician's signature, and will be kept as source document. 
 
4.7.10 Day 1 of study treatment cycle assessments 
These assessments must be done before study drug administration in accordance with Tables 
1&2. Clinically relevant findings meeting the definition of an AE must be recorded on an AE 
page of the CRF. 
 
4.7.11 End of treatment / withdrawal assessments 
These assessments must be obtained for the 4 previous weeks on study, meaning this visit is 
occurring 4 weeks after the last study drug administration. 
 
4.7.12 Post treatment follow-up assessments 
Monitoring of patients continues after the end of study treatment: 
• Tumor assessments should be continued until documented RECIST 1.1 disease 
progression (Arm A or B). 
• Survival status shall be recorded. Post study-treatment survival status will be collected 
every 2 months until death; telephone contact is acceptable. Date and reason of death will 
be recorded. 
• Assessment of adverse events and hospitalizations: Subjects must be followed for adverse 
events until 28 days after the last study treatment administration, or until all serious or 
study drug-related toxicities have resolved or are determined to be “chronic” or “stable”, 
whichever is later. Hospitalizations will be recorded until the last day of study drug 
administration. 
• Collection of subsequent anticancer therapies after study drug discontinuation. 
 
4.8 
Post-study access to study treatment 
At the conclusion of the study, subjects treated with OSE2101 who continue to have clinical 
benefit will be offered to continue treatment with OSE2101 at the request of the investigator and 
the patient either via an extension of the study, a rollover study requiring approval by responsible 
health authority and ethics committee, or through local procedures for compassionate use at the 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 57 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
discretion of the sponsor. The sponsor reserves the right to terminate access to study drug if any 
of the following occur:  
a) the marketing application is rejected by responsible Health Authority;  
b) the study is terminated due to safety concerns or development of the product is stopped or 
development strategy modified (e.g. other indication, population, and/or combination 
approach);  
c) the subject can obtain medication from a government sponsored or private health 
program; or  
d) therapeutic alternatives become available in the local market. 
 
5 
SAFETY DEFINITIONS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 
5.1 
Reporting of adverse events 
All observed or volunteered AEs regardless of treatment group or suspected causal relationship 
to the investigational medicinal product(s) are to be reported by the investigator.  
For all AEs, the investigator must pursue and obtain information adequate to determine the 
outcome of the AE, assess whether it meets the criteria for classification as a SAE requiring 
immediate notification to OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designated representative, and 
determine the causality of the AE. For AEs with a causal relationship to the investigational 
medicinal product, follow-up by the investigator is required until the event or its sequelae resolve 
or stabilize at a level acceptable to the investigator, and OSE Immunotherapeutics concurs with 
that assessment. 
 
5.2 
Reporting period 
All SAEs require immediate notification to OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designated 
representative beginning from the time that the subject/patient provides informed consent, which 
is obtained prior to the subject’s participation in the clinical trial, i.e., prior to undergoing any 
trial-related procedure and/or receiving an investigational medicinal product, through the study 
treatment period until the last injection and including 28 calendar days after the final 
administration of the investigational medicinal product.   
Any SAE occurring any time after the end of treatment visit must be promptly reported if a 
causal relationship to investigational product is suspected. These SAEs will only be entered in 
the drug safety database, and hence will not affect study closure. 
All AEs (serious and non-serious) must be recorded on an AE specific CRF page from the time 
of consent through last subject visit. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 58 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
5.3 
Assessment of causality  
The investigator’s assessment of causality (drug relationship) must be provided for all AEs 
(serious and non-serious). An investigator’s causality assessment is the determination of whether 
there exists a reasonable possibility that the investigational medicinal product caused or 
contributed to an AE.  If the investigator’s final determination of causality is unknown and the 
investigator does not know whether or not investigational product caused the event, then the 
event will be handled as “related to investigational product” for reporting purposes. If the 
investigator's causality assessment is "unknown but not related to investigational product", this 
should be clearly documented on trial records. 
In addition, if the investigator determines a SAE is associated with trial procedures, the 
investigator must record this causal relationship in the source documents and CRF, as 
appropriate, and report such an assessment in accordance with the SAE reporting requirements, 
if applicable. 
Guidelines to determine whether an event might be considered related include (but are not 
limited to) the following:  
• The event occurred in close temporal relationship to study drug administration. 
• The event abated (diminished) or disappeared when treatment with the study drug was 
down-titrated, interrupted, or discontinued.  
• The event re-occurred when treatment was re-introduced. 
• Environmental factors such as clinical state and other treatments could equally have 
caused the event. 
 
5.4 
Definitions of Adverse Events 
An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or healthy subject administered an 
investigational medicinal product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with 
this treatment. 
 
An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory 
finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of an investigational medicinal 
product, whether or not considered related to the investigational medicinal product. 
Examples of adverse events include but are not limited to:   
• Clinically significant symptoms and signs. 
• Clinically significant changes in physical examination findings. 
• Hypersensitivity. 
• Increase in frequency or intensity of a pre-existing episodic disease or medical condition. 
• Lack of efficacy in the acute treatment of a life-threatening disease. 
• Disease or medical condition detected or diagnosed after study drug administration even 
though it may have been present prior to the start of the study. 
• Events considered by the investigator to be related to study-mandated procedures.  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 59 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• Clinically significant abnormal test findings. 
 
The criteria for determining whether an abnormal objective test finding (e.g., laboratory test, 
ECG) should be reported as an AE are as follows:  
 
Test result is associated with accompanying signs or symptoms; and/or requires additional 
diagnostic testing or medical/surgical intervention; and/or leads to a change in study drug trial 
dosing (outside of protocol-stipulated dose adjustments), dose reduction, interruption or 
permanent discontinuation; and/or significant additional concomitant drug treatment, or other 
therapy; and/or is considered to be an AE by the investigator or sponsor. 
 
Merely repeating an abnormal test, in the absence of any of the above conditions, does not 
constitute an AE.  Any abnormal test result that is determined to be an error does not require 
reporting as an AE. 
 
Additionally, AEs may include the signs or symptoms resulting from: 
• Drug overdose. 
• Drug withdrawal. 
• Drug abuse. 
• Drug misuse. 
• Drug interactions. 
• Drug dependency. 
• Extravasation. 
 
Diagnostic and therapeutic non-invasive and invasive procedures, such as surgery, endoscopy, 
tooth extraction, transfusion should not be reported as AEs.  However, the medical condition for 
which the procedure was performed should be reported if it meets the definition of an AE.  
For example, an acute appendicitis should be reported as the AE, and the resulting appendectomy 
should be recorded as treatment of the AE. 
 
5.5 
Severity of adverse events 
The NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events will be used for assessing severity 
of adverse events reporting according to version CTCAE v5.0 (52). 
A grading (severity) scale is provided for each AE term. 
 
Components and Organization SOC 
System Organ Class, the highest level of the MedDRA hierarchy, is identified by anatomical or 
physiological system, etiology, or purpose (e.g., SOC Investigations for laboratory test results). 
CTCAE terms are grouped by MedDRA Primary SOCs. Within each SOC, AEs are listed and 
accompanied by descriptions of severity (Grade). 
CTCAE Terms 
An Adverse Event (AE) is any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal 
laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medical 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 60 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
treatment or procedure that may or may not be considered related to the medical treatment or 
procedure. An AE is a term that is a unique representation of a specific event used for medical 
documentation and scientific analyses. 
Each CTCAE v5.0 term is a MedDRA LLT (Lowest Level Term). 
 
Definitions 
A brief definition is provided to clarify the meaning of each AE term. 
 
Grades 
Grade refers to the severity of the AE. The CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique 
clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on this general guideline: 
Grade 1 Mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; 
intervention not indicated. 
Grade 2 Moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate 
instrumental activities of daily living (ADL) *. 
Grade 3 Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or 
prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self-care ADL**. 
Grade 4 Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. 
Grade 5 Death related to AE.  
A Semi-colon indicates ‘or’ within the description of the grade. A single dash (-) indicates a 
grade is not available. Not all Grades are appropriate for all AEs. Therefore, some AEs are listed 
with fewer than five options for Grade selection. 
 
Grade 5 
Grade 5 (Death) is not appropriate for some AEs and therefore is not an option. 
 
Activities of Daily Living (ADL) 
*Instrumental ADL refer to preparing meals, shopping for groceries or clothes, using the 
telephone, managing money, etc. 
**Self-care ADL refer to bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking 
medications, and not bedridden. 
 
5.6 
Serious Adverse Events 
5.6.1 Definition 
A SAE or serious adverse drug reaction is any untoward medical occurrence at any dose that: 
• Results in death. 
• Is life-threatening; Life-threatening refers to an event in which the subject/patient was at 
immediate risk of death at the time of the event. It does not refer to an event that 
hypothetically might have caused death if it were more severe. 
• Requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; 
• Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; 
• Results in congenital anomaly/birth defect. 
• Important medical event. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 61 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
 
Medical judgment should be exercised in determining whether an event is an important medical 
event to be reported as a SAE. An important medical event may not be immediately life-
threatening and/or result in death or hospitalization.  However, if it is determined that the event 
may jeopardize the subject and/or may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of 
the other outcomes listed in the definition above. 
 
Examples of such events are intensive treatment in an emergency room or at home for allergic 
bronchospasm; blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in hospitalization; or 
development of drug dependency or drug abuse. 
 
5.6.2 Hospitalization - Prolongation of existing hospitalization 
Hospitalization is defined as an overnight stay in a hospital unit and/or emergency room.  
An additional overnight stay defines a prolongation of existing hospitalization. 
All AEs associated with hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization are considered serious. 
Admission also includes transfer within the hospital to an acute/intensive care unit (e.g., from a 
medical floor to a coronary care unit). 
Hospitalization does not include the following: 
• Rehabilitation facilities. 
• Hospice facilities. 
• Nursing homes. 
• Routine emergency room admissions. 
• Same day surgeries (as outpatient/same day/ambulatory procedures). 
 
Hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization in the absence of a precipitating, clinical AE is 
not in itself a SAE.  Examples include:  
• Planned hospitalization for a pre-existing disease or medical condition that did not 
worsen, e.g., hospitalization for chemotherapy for cancer, elective hip replacement for 
arthritis, coronary angiography for a patient with stable angina pectoris. 
• Admission for treatment of a preexisting condition not associated with the development 
of a new adverse event or with a worsening of the preexisting condition (e.g., for work-up 
of persistent pre-treatment lab abnormality); 
• Social admission (e.g., subject has no place to sleep). 
• Administrative admission (e.g., for yearly physical exam). 
• Optional admission not associated with a precipitating clinical adverse event (e.g., for 
elective cosmetic surgery); 
• Protocol-specified admission during a clinical trial (e.g., for a procedure required by the 
trial protocol).  
 
5.6.3 Serious Adverse Events related to study-mandated procedures  
They are defined as SAEs that appear to have a reasonable possibility of causal relationship (i.e., 
a relationship cannot be ruled out) to study-mandated procedures (excluding administration of 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 62 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
study drug) such as an event related to the discontinuation of subject's previous treatment during 
a washout period, or complication of a mandated invasive procedure (e.g., blood sampling), or 
car accident on the way to the hospital for a study visit. 
 
5.7 
Reporting of serious and non-serious adverse events  
5.7.1 Reporting requirements 
Each AE is to be assessed to determine if it meets the criteria for SAE.  If a SAE occurs, 
expedited reporting will follow local and international regulations, as appropriate. 
All SAEs must be recorded on SAE forms, irrespective of the study drug received by the subject, 
whether or not this event is considered by the investigator to be related to study drug. These SAE 
forms must be faxed or scanned to the Clinical Research Organisation (CRO) in charge of 
pharmacovigilance for OSE Immunotherapeutics: 
STRAGEN SERVICES 
fax: +33 (0) 4 78 42 55 71 or email: OsePV@stragen.fr 
All AEs will be reported on the AE page(s) of the CRF. The SAE form and the AE CRF page 
must be completed in a consistent manner (e.g., same AE date, terms and drug relationship). 
 
5.7.2 Serious adverse event reporting requirements 
All SAEs must be reported by the investigator to Stragen Services in charge of 
pharmacovigilance within 24 hours of awareness of the event by the investigator. If the SAE is 
fatal or life-threatening, notification to Stragen Services must be made immediately, irrespective 
of the extent of available AE information.  This timeframe also applies to additional new 
information (follow-up) on previously forwarded SAE reports. Stragen Services acknowledges 
the receipt of the SAE information by email to the investigational site within one working day. In 
the absence of email acknowledging the receipt or in case of issue in sending the fax or email, 
the investigator shall contact Stragen Services by any means for ensuring the receipt of SAE 
information at the earliest opportunity. 
In the rare case that the investigator does not become aware of the occurrence of a SAE 
immediately (e.g., if an outpatient trial subject initially seeks treatment elsewhere), the 
investigator is to report the event within 24 hours after learning of it and document the time of 
his/her first awareness of the AE. 
For all SAEs, the investigator is obligated to pursue and provide information to Stragen Services 
in accordance with the timeframes for reporting specified above.  In addition, an investigator 
may be requested by Stragen Services to obtain specific additional follow-up information in an 
expedited fashion.  This information may be more detailed than that captured on the AE case 
report form. In general, this will include a description of the AE in sufficient detail to allow for a 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 63 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
complete medical assessment of the case and independent determination of possible causality.  
Information on other possible causes of the event, such as concomitant medications and illnesses 
must be provided.  In the case of a subject death, a summary of available autopsy findings must 
be submitted as soon as possible to Stragen Services.  
REFERENCE SAFETY INFORMATION 
The reference safety information (RSI) to guide for expedited reporting of Suspected Unexpected 
Serious Adverse Reaction is Investigator's Brochure for OSE2101 and the EU Summary of 
Product Characteristics for pemetrexed and docetaxel available at SUSAR processing date. 
 
5.8 
Management of adverse events, dosing adaptations and risk minimization strategy  
 
OSE2101 
Skin/injection site reactions 
• If grade 1 local toxicity [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as tenderness ± associated 
symptoms (e.g. warmth, erythema, itching)] or grade 2 local toxicity [defined per NCI 
CTCAE v5.0 as pain, lipodystrophy, edema, phlebitis]:  
o apply a hot or cold compress to the injection site and consider giving an analgesic 
or antipruritic medication.  
o It is intended that all injections be given at the same site: either the anterior thigh 
or deltoid region of the non-dominant arm (see section 4.3.3). If pain or 
granuloma formation limit dosing in a patient despite measures such as pain 
medication or local hot or cold compresses, other areas may be used. If the 1-mL 
injection cannot be given by a single injection, then it may be divided into two 
injections, preferably in the same lymph node drainage area.  
• If grade 3 local toxicity [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as ulceration or necrosis; severe 
tissue damage; operative intervention indicated] or grade 4 local toxicity (defined per 
NCI CTCAE v5.0 as life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention needed], local 
toxicity shall be considered dose limiting, and the patient will not to receive further 
injections. 
 
Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) 
CRS has been reported in the completed Phase I and Phase II studies. In 88 patients exposed to 
OSE2101 in these completed studies, 2 cases of CRS (1 grade 2, 1 grade 3) have been reported in 
2 patients (2.3%). Both adverse effects were resolutive.  
CRS caused by T cell-engaging therapies is related to elevation in effector cytokines, such as 
interferon gamma (Maude 2014, Lee 2014) and abnormal elevation in cytokines associated with 
macrophage activation and hemophagocytic syndrome, such as interleukin 6 and 10 (Lee 2014). 
CRS is a constellation of inflammatory symptoms resulting from cytokine elevations associated 
with T cell engagement and proliferation. In most patients, CRS symptoms are mild and flulike, 
with fevers and myalgias. However, some patients experience a severe inflammatory syndrome, 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 64 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
including vascular leak, hypotension, pulmonary edema, and coagulopathy, resulting in multi-
organ system failure. 
Serious adverse events that may be associated with CRS include pyrexia, headache, nausea, 
asthenia, hypotension, increased alanine aminotransferase, increased aspartate aminotransferase, 
and increased total bilirubin. These events may lead to treatment discontinuation. 
Disseminated intravascular coagulation, capillary leak syndrome, and hemophagocytic lympho-
histiocytosis/macrophage activation syndrome have been reported in the setting of CRS.  
Patients will be closely monitored for signs or symptoms of these events. Management of these 
events may require either temporary interruption or discontinuation of OSE2101, corticosteroids 
and other symptomatic treatments.  
 
The risk minimization strategy of CRS consists of: 
• As a first step, patients should be monitored at least 4h after injection and be informed of 
possible later symptoms like flu-like syndrome, malaise, fever, low blood pressure which 
would need to make contact with the investigator. 
• Should symptoms occur, CRS should be classified according to CTCAE 5.0 or other 
adapted classification (Lee 2014) in order to adapt treatment strategy (Lee 2014).  
Per NCI CTCAE v5.0 definition, CRS is a disorder characterized by fever, tachypnea, headache, 
tachycardia, hypotension, rash, and/or hypoxia caused by the release of cytokines. Also consider 
reporting other organ dysfunctions including neurological toxicities such as psychiatric disorders 
(e.g. hallucinations or confusion), nervous system disorders (e.g. seizure, dysphasia, tremor, or 
headache). 
Overall, in every grade of CRS, a vigilant supportive care including empiric treatment of 
concurrent bacterial infections and maintenance of adequate hydration and blood pressure. 
Immunosuppression should be used in all patients with grade 3 or 4 CRS and instituted earlier in 
patients with extensive comorbidities or older age (Lee 2014): 
• Grade 1 [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as fever ± constitutional symptoms]: vigilant 
support care, assess for infection (e.g. treat fever and neutropenia if present, monitor fluid 
balance, antipyretics, analgesics as needed). 
• Grade 2 [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as hypotension responds to fluid, hypoxia 
responding to <40% oxygen]: vigilant supportive care, monitor cardiac and other organ 
function closely, consider corticosteroids or other specific therapy according to 
comorbidities and expected benefit vs. cancer treatment needs. 
• Grade 3 [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as hypotension managed with one pressor; 
hypoxia requiring ≥ 40% oxygen] and Grade 4 [defined per NCI CTCAE v5.0 as life-
threatening consequences, urgent intervention needed]: vigilant supportive care and 
intensive care monitoring for Grade 4 events, adapted vasopressor support and oxygen; 
specific treatment required : corticosteroids and/or tocilizumab (humanized monoclonal 
antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor (Actemra®) which has been FDA-approved 
for grade 3 or grade 4 CRS induced by CAR-T cell therapy, although off-label in Europe 
and off-label for other indications than CAR-T cell). 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 65 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• Decision to continue subsequent injections of OSE2101 shall be taken considering 
condition of the patient, response to therapy with OSE2101 and alternate anticancer 
treatment options and the severity of CRS. 
o In grade 1 and 2 CRS, continuation of OSE2101 may be considered under strict 
surveillance if patient is having benefit of OSE2101 therapy; it has been reported 
that CRS did not systematically recur at subsequent injections in an instance 
where grade 2 CRS was reported with OSE2101 
o In grade 3 and 4 CRS, treatment with OSE2101 shall not be continued and 
alternate cancer therapy should be considered. Patient trial assessments shall 
continue as scheduled in the protocol. In case of reversible grade 3 CRS, if the 
investigator considers the patient to be experiencing clinical benefit with 
OSE2101, continuation of OSE2101 may be considered under strict surveillance 
after discussion and approval of the Sponsor. In case of grade 4 CRS, OSE2101 
will be permanently discontinued. 
 
Figure 3: Treatment algorithm for management of cytokine release syndrome (per Lee, 
2014) 
 
 
Anaphylactic and severe immunoallergic reactions 
Anaphylactic reaction should be treated with immediate adrenaline subcutaneous injection 
followed by intensive care management.  

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 66 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Immunoallergic reactions will require corticosteroids.  
In case of anaphylactic and severe (grade 3 and 4) immunoallergic reactions, OSE2101 will be 
permanently discontinued. 
 
OSE2101 dosing adaptation 
There will be no dose reduction of OSE2101. 
 
Treatment administration of OSE2101 may be delayed allowing enough time for recovery from 
toxicity. Toxicities must have improved to NCI CTCAE Grade ≤ 1 prior to re-treatment or NCI 
CTCAE as of baseline.  
A patient who has not received any study drug(s) for > 16 weeks since last OSE2101 
administration, should be permanently discontinued from study treatment. 
 
Pemetrexed 
Monitoring  
Complete blood cell counts, including platelet counts, should be performed on all patients 
receiving pemetrexed. Patients should be monitored for nadir and recovery, which were tested in 
the clinical study before each dose and on days 8 and 15 of each cycle. Patients should not begin 
a new cycle of treatment unless the ANC is ≥1500 cells/mm3, the platelet count is ≥100,000 
cells/mm3, and creatinine clearance is ≥45 mL/min. Periodic chemistry tests should be performed 
to evaluate renal and hepatic function.  
 
Dose Reduction Recommendations  
Dose adjustments at the start of a subsequent cycle should be based on nadir hematologic counts 
or maximum non-hematologic toxicity from the preceding cycle of therapy. Treatment may be 
delayed allowing sufficient time for recovery. Upon recovery, patients should be retreated using 
the guidelines in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5, which are suitable for using pemetrexed as a 
single-agent or in combination with cisplatin.  
 
Table 3: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed – Hematologic Toxicities 
Nadir Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <500/mm3 and 
nadir platelets ≥50,000/mm3 
75% of previous dose 
Nadir platelets <50,000/mm3 without bleeding regardless 
of nadir ANC 
75% of previous dose 
Nadir platelets <50,000/mm3 with bleeding, regardless of 
nadir ANC 
50% of previous dose 
If patients develop non-hematologic toxicities (excluding neurotoxicity) ≥ Grade 3, treatment 
should be withheld until resolution to less than or equal to the patient’s pre-therapy value. 
Treatment should be resumed according to guidelines in Table 4.  
Table 4: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed – Non-hematologic Toxicities 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 67 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
 
Dose of pemetrexed 
(mg/m2) 
Any Grade 3 or 4 toxicities except mucositis  
75% of previous dose  
Any diarrhea requiring hospitalization (irrespective of Grade) or 
Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea  
75% of previous dose  
Grade 3 or 4 mucositis  
50% of previous dose  
In the event of neurotoxicity, the recommended dose adjustments for pemetrexed are described 
in Table 5. Patients should discontinue therapy if Grade 3 or 4 neurotoxicity is experienced. 
 
Table 5: Dose Reduction for Pemetrexed - Neurotoxicity CTC Grade 
 
Dose of pemetrexed (mg/m2)  
0-1  
100% of previous dose  
2  
100% of previous dose  
 
Discontinuation Recommendation  
Pemetrexed therapy should be discontinued if a patient experiences any hematologic or non-
hematologic Grade 3 or 4 toxicity after 2 dose reductions or immediately if Grade 3 or 4 
neurotoxicity is observed.  
 
Renal Impaired Patients  
In clinical studies, patients with creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min required no dose adjustments 
other than those recommended for all patients. Insufficient numbers of patients with creatinine 
clearance below 45 mL/min have been treated to make dosage recommendations for this group 
of patients. Therefore, pemetrexed should not be administered to patients whose creatinine 
clearance is <45 mL/min using the standard Cockcroft and Gault formula (below) or GFR 
measured by Tc99m-DTPA serum clearance method:  
 
[140 - Age in years] × Actual Body Weight (kg) = mL/min 
Males: 72 × Serum Creatinine (mg/dL)  
Females: Estimated creatinine clearance for males × 0.85  
Caution should be exercised when administering pemetrexed concurrently with NSAIDs to 
patients whose creatinine clearance is <80 mL/min. 
 
Docetaxel 
Patients who are dosed initially at 75 mg/m2 
and who experience either febrile neutropenia, 
neutrophils <500 cells/mm3 
for more than one week, severe or cumulative cutaneous reactions, or 
other grade 3/4 non-hematological toxicities during docetaxel treatment should have treatment 
withheld until resolution of the toxicity and then resumed at 55 mg/m2. Patients who develop 
≥grade 3 peripheral neuropathy should have Docetaxel Injection, USP treatment discontinued 
entirely. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 68 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Pemetrexed and docetaxel adaptation 
Dose reduction of pemetrexed and docetaxel will follow the guidance’s as their respective SCPs. 
Treatment administration may be delayed allowing sufficient time for recovery from toxicity. 
 
A patient who has not received any study drug(s) for > 6 weeks (e.g. equivalent to 2 cycles of 21 
days) since last study drug administration should be discontinued from study treatment. 
 
6 
STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSES 
6.1 
Statistical Analysis Plan 
A statistical analysis plan (SAP) will be written and finalized before the database lock.  
The SAP will provide full details of analyses, data displays and algorithms to be used for data 
derivations.  
The SAP will include the definition of major and minor protocol deviations and the link of major 
protocol deviations to the analysis sets. Major and minor protocol deviations will be identified 
before the study closure.  
The final SAP v2.2 was finalized on 23-july-2021 before the database lock. This SAP also 
details the subgroup analyses and variables used to define subgroups, and precisely describes the 
hierarchical order to test secondary endpoints. 
6.2 
Analysis Sets 
Three different analysis sets are defined for the patients with previous treatment with ICI. 
The primary population will be a Population of Interest (PoI) identified during Step-1 analysis 
consisting of patients from the 2d line ICI stratification factor with secondary resistance to ICI 
(i.e. duration of ICI ≥ 12 weeks) having shown a benefit over SoC and being proposed as the 
main population for final analysis. Sensitivity analyses on primary endpoint (OS) will be done in 
all population (Kluger et al., 2020). 
Subjects not having a valid or substituted post-baseline value for a particular endpoint are 
excluded from the relevant analysis sets.  
➢ Safety set 
This analysis set includes all patients who were randomized and received at least one dose of 
study treatment. Patients will be analyzed in the group according to the treatment they actually 
received. All safety data analyses will be analyzed using the safety set. 
➢  Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set 
This analysis set includes all randomized patients. Patients will be analyzed in the group as 
randomized. All efficacy data analyses will be analyzed using the ITT set. 
➢ Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) set for testing the null hypothesis of the one 
stage Fleming Phase II design (at end of Step 1) 
For testing the null hypothesis of the one stage Fleming Phase II design at the end of Step 1 
(Phase II part), this analysis set includes all patients of the ITT set, enrolled up to the end of 
Step 1, who received at least one dose of OSE2101 and are evaluable at 12 months after 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 69 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
randomization, “evaluable” meaning either known alive for at least 12 months or having 
experienced death within 12 months. Patients will be analyzed in the group according to the 
treatment they actually received. 
➢ Per-protocol set  
This analysis set includes all patients of the ITT set who did not violate the protocol in a way that 
might affect the evaluation of the effect of the study drugs on the main endpoints,  
i.e., without major protocol deviations. Major protocol deviations will be defined in the SAP. 
Selected sensitivity efficacy data analyses will be performed using the per-protocol set.  
➢ Per protocol set for testing the null hypothesis of the one stage Fleming Phase II 
design (at end of Step 1) 
This analysis set includes all patients of the mITT set (for testing the null hypothesis of the one 
stage Fleming Phase II design) who have no major protocol deviations and comply with the 
revised inclusion criterion #5. Major protocol deviations will be defined in the SAP. Selected 
sensitivity efficacy data analyses will be performed using the per-protocol set. 
Nota bene: In addition, patients without previous treatment with ICI (included before 
recruitment hold) will be described separately. 
 
6.3 
Sample size  
Step 1 - Phase II 
The primary objective of Step 1 is to evaluate the overall survival rate after 12 months in 
OSE2101 arm. The following hypotheses are considered: 
- H0 (null): 25% of overall survival rate at 12 months (uninteresting to pursue any further 
investigation) 
- H1 (alternative): 40% of overall survival rate at 12 months (clinically relevant to discuss the 
interest of further investigation in a Phase III comparative trial). 
According to the previous hypotheses and a Fleming one step Phase II design with a 2.5% one-
sided type I error and a power of 80%, 84 evaluable patients have to be enrolled in the arm A. 
Fleming decision rules:  
Amongst the first 84 evaluable patients: 
To reject H0 we have to observe at least 30 (35.7%) patients alive at 12 months, then it will be 
interesting to run the next step of Phase III comparative trial.  
If less than 30 patients are alive at 12 months, H0 will not be rejected and it will be considered 
uninteresting to pursue any further investigation. 
The probability to conclude for inefficacy whereas the true rate is 40% is β=18.1%. 
The probability to conclude for efficacy whereas the true rate is 25% is α=1.9%. 
In order to limit the total number of patients needed in Step 1, a 2:1 randomization ratio to 
receive OSE2101 (Arm A) or pemetrexed or docetaxel (Arm B) will be used for new patients 
recruited when version 4.0 of the protocol comes into effect. A total of 38 patients with previous 
ICI treatment have been recruited before protocol version 4.0, from whom 18 patients 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 70 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
randomized in arm A (OSE2101), thus 84 - 18 = 66 new patients need to be recruited in arm A 
(OSE2101). Based on a 2:1 randomization ratio, 66/2 = 33 new patients need to be randomized 
in arm B, leading to a total of 99 new evaluable patients. With an expected 7% rate of patients 
not evaluable at 12 months or withdrawn, a total of 108 new patients will be randomized for 
Step 1. 
The analysis of the Phase II data will take place once 84 subjects of the OSE2101 arm are 
evaluable for survival at 12 months (meaning that death was observed within 12 months or that 
the patient has a follow-up time of 12 months or more). With this sample size, the lower limit of 
the exact binomial two-sided 95% confidence interval will be above 25% as soon as at least 30 
subjects will be alive at 12 months. In the situation where exactly 30 subjects out of 84 would be 
seen alive at 12 months, the observed survival rate at 12 months would be 35.7%, which seems 
reasonable in light of the 34.1% overall survival rate at 12 months published for 78 patients on 
durvalumab plus tremelimuab after failure to previous ICI (27). 
It may be noted that as soon as 55 deaths within 12 months are observed by the IDMC, there is 
no need to wait for 84 evaluable patients at 12 months since there is no possibility left to reach 
30 or more patients alive at 12 months among 84 patients evaluable at 12 months. Conversely as 
soon as 30 patients or more are observed alive at 12 months by the IDMC in patients evaluable at 
12 months, there is no need to wait for 84 patients evaluable at 12 months since the number of 
patients alive at 12 months cannot decrease with the additional observations (and since the lower 
limit of the 95% confidence interval is already above 25%). 
 
Step 2 - Phase III 
For Step 2, the same 2:1 randomization ratio will be continued. All the 38 patients randomized 
before the recruitment hold in the subgroup of patients with previous ICI treatment and all new 
patients included in Step 1 / Phase II will be followed during Step 2 /Phase III. However, the 
final analysis of Phase II/Phase III will exclude the 38 patients with previous ICI treatment 
randomized before protocol version 4.0. 
In order to reach a power of 80% for the two-sided log rank test at the 5% significance level 
when assuming a median OS of 7 months for the control and 10 months for the experimental 
arm, a total of 278 events is required. If the new patients (randomized since version 4.0 of the 
protocol came into effect) are uniformly included over an accrual period of 36 months followed 
by a follow-up of 6 months after the last inclusion, observing 278 events requires a total of 363 
new patients. The actual number of new patients may be reduced if the 278 events are observed 
earlier (this is an event-driven study). Both counts exclude the 38 patients enrolled before 
protocol 4.0. 
 
Step-1 analysis was reviewed by the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) in March 
2020. Step-1 data showed that the predefined thresholds of 12 months-OS rate in OSE2101 arm 
was achieved. At this time, the IDMC was concerned about the impact of the COVID-19 
pandemic on the primary endpoint of the study (OS), on the risk on data integrity and 
recommended to stop accrual early. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 71 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
The Sponsor decided to stop the accrual in April 2020. At that date, 219 patients have been 
enrolled instead of 363 patients and planned to be followed for survival up to mid-January 2021. 
From Step-1 analysis, a population of interest (PoI) consisting of patients from the 2d line ICI 
stratification factor with secondary resistance to ICI (duration of ICI ≥ 12 weeks) was identified 
as having a benefit over SoC and being proposed as the main population for final analysis 
(Kluger et al., 2020). 
Due to early study discontinuation due to COVID-19 (219 patients included instead of 363 
patients), the power decreased to 62% with the same hypotheses (HR=0.70). 
Considering Step 1 results in the PoI, the following hypotheses have been proposed for final 
analysis: 
Assuming a HR of 0.55 observed in PoI in Step-1 and a median OS of 7 months in SoC 
(unchanged as initially planned), a total of 90 events in the PoI will provide a power of 80% and 
a 2-sided logrank test at a 5% two-sided level, if the patients are included over an accrual period 
of 48 months followed by a follow-up of 6 months after the last inclusion. 
6.4 
Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints  
The primary endpoint is OS, defined as time from randomization to death, will be summarized 
on the ITT set using the Kaplan-Meier method and displayed graphically. The median event time 
for each treatment arm and the corresponding 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) will be 
provided.  A 2-sided log-rank test stratified for the same stratification factors as used for the 
randomization will be used to compare OS between the two treatment arms. The Cox regression 
model, stratified for the same stratification factors, will be fitted, and the estimated hazard ratio 
and 2-sided 95% CI will be provided. 
2-sided unstratified log-rank test and an unstratified Cox regression model will also be used as 
secondary analyses for OS. 
Subgroups analyses of OS will be performed to determine whether treatment effect is consistent 
among subgroups. The hazard ratios (obtained via a separate unstratified Cox model within each 
subgroup) and their 95% confidence intervals will be displayed as a forest-plot, the test of 
interaction between treatment and subgroup will be derived from an unstratified Cox model 
applied on the whole study population. The following variables will be used to define subgroups: 
• histology (squamous vs. non-squamous),  
• initial response to first line treatment (objective response, that is either complete or partial 
response, vs. no objective response, that is either stabilization or progressive disease)  
• line rank of ICI therapy (2nd line vs. 1st line). 
• best response to ICI (objective response, vs no objective response) 
• presence vs absence of brain metastases 
• tumor stage (III vs. IV) 
• previous number of systemic treatment lines (1 vs. 2 or more) 
• gender (male vs female) 
• age (< 75 vs. ≥ 75) 
• Smoking status: never, former or current smoker 
• baseline ECOG score (0 vs. 1) 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 72 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
• duration of PFS since previous treatment (shorter or longer than 6 months) 
Additionally, a Cox regression model, stratified for the same stratification factors as used for the 
randomization, will be used to explore the potential influences of the other factors (those 
defining subgroups in the text above) on the primary OS endpoint. The full list of subgroups of 
interest will finalized before database lock and detailed in the SAP. 
The 6-months survival probability will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and a 2-
sided 95% CI for the log [-log(6-months survival probability)] will be calculated using a normal 
approximation and then back transformed to give a confidence interval for the 6-months survival 
probability itself.  The 1-year survival probability will be estimated similarly. 
Once the primary objective will be established (significant result on OS), each of the secondary 
efficacy endpoints will be tested at 5% significance level using a further hierarchical order (OS 
(PP), PPS, Time to worsening of ECOG PS, QLQ-C30 Global health status score change from 
baseline, QLQ-C30 Functional scores change from baseline, QLQ-C30 Symptom scores change 
from baseline, QLQ-LC13 Symptom scores change from baseline, DCR at 6 months, DCR at 12 
months, , followed by PFS) in order to control the overall type I error. If the primary objective is 
not established, these endpoints will still be analyzed but interpreted as exploratory endpoints, 
similarly if one secondary endpoint in the sequence is not significant, the lower rank secondary 
endpoint(s) will be considered exploratory. 
Based on the randomized patients with measurable lesions at baseline, the best response (CR, 
PR, SD or PD) will be determined by radiology review for each patient and will be summarized 
by treatment arm.  Assessment of response will be made using RECIST version 1.1 (Appendix 
1). Then DCR at 6 and 12 months will be calculated as the number of patients remaining within 
CR, PR or SD responses within the considered time period divided by the total number of 
randomized patients with measurable lesions at baseline in each treatment group. DCR will be 
analyzed as described for ORR. The corresponding exact 2-sided 95% confidence interval will 
be calculated. The Mantel Haenszel test will be used to compare DCR at 6 months between the 
treatment arms, using the randomization strata, the corresponding odds-ratio will be provided 
with its 95% confidence interval.  In addition, the difference in DCR at 6 months between the 
two treatments will be provided and its 95% confidence interval will be calculated based on the 
normal approximation. 
The secondary efficacy endpoints associated with HRQoL will be the change from baseline in 
the EORTC QLQ-C30 “Global health status/QoL” score (based on questions 29 and 30), for 
EORTC QLQ-C30 functional scores, and for EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C13 symptoms 
according to repeated measures mixed-effects modeling. 
The composite endpoint time to 1st ≥ 10-point deterioration in EORTC QLQ-LC13 “Chest pain 
symptom” score (based on question 40), “Dyspnea symptom” score (based on questions 33, 34, 
35) or “Coughing symptom” score (based on question 31), whichever happens first. Scores will 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 73 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
be derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 questionnaires items according 
to the respective scoring manuals. 
PFS, defined as time from randomization to the first documented disease progression or death 
whichever occurs first, will be analyzed similarly as described for OS. A log-rank test, stratified 
by the same stratification factors as used for the randomization, will be used in analyzing PFS. 
 
PPS, defined as time from the first documented disease progression in patients having 
experienced a progression to death, will be analyzed similarly as described for OS. 
Time to worsening of ECOG PS, defined as the time from randomization to the earliest time 
when the ECOG becomes greater than 1 ignoring all assessments performed after the analysis 
cut-off date. Patients who die without having recorded an ECOG >1 will be assigned an ECOG = 
5 (Dead) at the time of death. Patients without worsening ECOG will be censored at the last time 
when an ECOG value was recorded. By protocol, ECOG is not collected anymore when a 
subject discontinues study treatment while the time between study treatment discontinuation and 
death can be quite long, an additional analysis without imputation for death will be performed. 
This analysis will exclude patients without any post-baseline ECOG assessment and censor 
patients without observed ECOG worsening at their last ECOG assessment. The endpoint will be 
analyzed as described for the PFS. 
 
6.5 
Exploratory efficacy endpoints 
ORR will be calculated as the number of patients with a best response of CR or PR divided by 
the total number of randomized patients with measurable lesions at baseline in each treatment 
group. ORR will be analyzed as described for DCR at 6 months. 
DR will be calculated for the subgroup of patients with objective disease response and 
summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method. 
The 3 endpoints TTD in patient reported pain (QLQ-LC13 “Chest pain symptom” score), TTD in 
patient reported dyspnea (QLQ-LC13 “Dyspnea symptom” score), and TTD to patient reported 
cough (QLQ-LC13 “Coughing symptom” score), will be defined as the time from randomization 
to the earliest time the patient’s score shows a 10-point or higher increase after baseline (7, 6). 
Patients will be censored at the last time when they completed an assessment for chest pain, 
dyspnea and cough if they have not deteriorated. A 10 point or higher change in the score is 
perceived by patients as clinically significant (58). TTD of each these 3 pre-specified symptoms 
(chest pain, dyspnea, and cough) scales will be summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods. The 
estimated Kaplan-Meier plots will be provided for each symptom and the unstratified log-rank 
test will be the primary method to compare the time to first deterioration between the two 
treatment groups. The median time and the corresponding 2-sided 95% CI also will be provided. 
The Hochberg procedure will be used to adjust for multiplicity of the three pre-specified 
symptoms. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 74 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Patient reported HRQoL will also be assessed in a detailed manner in the SAP. Summary 
statistics (mean [and SE], median, range and 95% CI) will be reported by treatment arm and visit 
for the items and scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 questionnaires. The mean 
change from baseline (and 95% CI) will also be reported.  Line charts depicting the means and 
mean changes of subscales over time will be provided for each treatment arm. The number and 
proportion of patients who improved, worsened, or remained stable for each of the symptom and 
functional domains, global QOL, and single items of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC-13 
questionnaires will be summarized in a table and compared between the two treatment arms. 
Additional analyses may be performed such as repeated measures mixed-effects modeling. 
Time to next lung cancer therapy, defined as time from randomization to the first recording a 
lung cancer therapy, will be analyzed similarly as described for OS. A log-rank test, stratified by 
the same stratification factors as used for the randomization, will be used. 
COVID-19 Impact: it is proposed to test COVID-19 impact in the ITT population following 
FDA Guidance (Updated January 27, 2021 then August 2021 on “Conduct of Clinical Trials of 
Medical Products During COVID-19 Public Health Emergency: Guidance for Industry, 
Investigators, and Institutional Review Boards.” and “Statistical Considerations for Clinical 
Trials During the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency: Guidance for Industry” June 2020. The 
complete description of COVID-19 impact analyses is described in the SAP.  
 
6.6 
Safety and tolerability endpoints 
All AEs and SAEs will be coded using the MedDRA dictionary. All AEs will be tabulated by 
system organ class (SOC), preferred terms (PT) and low-level terms (LLT) within each SOC. 
The incidence of subjects who experienced AEs coded with the same preferred term will be 
tabulated (in descending order according to the incidence in the investigational study drug 
group). Adverse events will also be tabulated by severity and by relationship to study drug. 
Summary tables will be accompanied by individual subject listings.  
AEs corresponding to hypersensitivity reactions will be considered as adverse events of special 
interest and will be detailed in additional summary tables. 
SAEs occurring after study drug initiation will be listed and summarized similarly to AEs, while 
SAEs occurring before study drug initiation (only those related to study- mandated procedures) 
will be listed only. 
The same analyses will also be conducted on the irAEs. 
Vital signs (blood pressure and pulse rate) and ECG will be summarized by descriptive statistics 
by treatment group. Individual subject listings of vital signs and ECG data will be provided.  
Values for safety laboratory parameters will be summarized by descriptive statistics by treatment 
group. Individual subject listings will be provided.  
 
6.7 
Interim analysis  
No interim analysis of the primary endpoint will be performed. 
However, OS rate at 12 months will be analyzed on Arm A at end of Step 1 by the IDMC, before 
a decision to continue Step 2 can be made by the Steering Committee after recommendation by 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 75 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
the IDMC. The decision of moving forward in Step 2 (Phase III) will consider the expected 
benefit of OSE2101 as well the relevance of the specific design of the Phase III with regards to 
the state-of-the-art in the management of advanced NSCLC known at time of the analysis. 
6.8 
Exposure to study drugs 
Exposure 
to 
study 
drugs 
will 
be 
described 
in 
terms 
of 
administered 
doses.  
The exposure will be tabulated using the usual location and scale statistics.  
 
6.9 
Baseline Parameters and Concomitant Medications 
Continuous demographic variables (age, height, weight) will be summarized by descriptive 
statistics (mean, median, SD, minimum, maximum and number of available observations). 
Individual subject listings will be provided. 
Qualitative demographic characteristics (gender) will be summarized by counts and percentages. 
Other subject characteristics (medical history, physical examination findings, previous and 
concomitant medications) will only be listed. 
Previous and concomitant medications will be coded according to the WHO drug code and the 
ATC code. They will be summarized by type (i.e., previous and concomitant) by tabulating the 
number and percentages of subjects having received each medication. 
 
7 
PROCEDURES AND QUALITY ASSURANCE  
7.1 
Procedures 
7.1.1 Protocol amendments 
Any change to a protocol has to be considered as an amendment as soon as these documents 
have been submitted to Ethics Committee (ECs)/Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Health 
Authorities. Therefore, an amendment could occur before or after the approval of these 
documents by ECs/IRBs and Health Authorities. Potential amendments must be approved by the 
Sponsor after discussion within the Steering Committee, as appropriate. 
Changes in the core Subject Information sheet and Informed Consent form requested by 
ECs/IRBs are not considered as amendments, as long as they do not significantly affect the 
protocol. 
➢ Non-substantial amendment 
Administrative or logistical minor changes require a non-substantial amendment. Such changes 
include but are not limited to changes in study staff or contact details, change in laboratory 
normal ranges, or minor changes in the packaging of study drug, etc.  
The implementation of a non-substantial amendment could be done with or without (according to 
national regulations) notification to the appropriate ECs/IRBs and Health Authorities. It does not 
require their approval or to be signed by the investigators.  
➢ Substantial amendment 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 76 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Significant changes require a substantial amendment. They include but are not limited to: new 
data affecting the safety of subjects/patients, change of the objectives/endpoints of the study, 
eligibility criteria, dose regimen, study assessments/procedures, treatment or study duration, with 
or without the need to modify the Subject Information and Informed Consent. 
Substantial amendments are to be approved by the appropriate ECs/IRBs and in some countries 
by the Health Authorities. The implementation of a substantial amendment can only occur after 
formal approval by the appropriate ECs/IRBs and/or Health Authorities and must be signed by 
the investigators. 
➢ Urgent amendment 
An urgent amendment might become necessary to preserve the safety of the subjects included in 
the study. The requirements for approval should in no way prevent any immediate action being 
taken by the Investigator or OSE Immunotherapeutics in the best interest of the subjects. 
Therefore, if deemed necessary, an investigator can implement an immediate change to the 
protocol for safety reasons. This means that, by exception, the implementation of urgent 
amendments will occur before submission to and approval by ECs/IRBs and Health Authorities.  
In such cases, the investigator must notify OSE Immunotherapeutics within 24 hours. A related 
substantial amendment will be written within 10 working days by OSE Immunotherapeutics and 
submitted to the appropriate ECs/IRBs and Health Authorities. 
7.1.2 Monitoring 
The OSE Immunotherapeutics monitor(s) or its designee will contact and visit the investigator 
regularly and will be allowed, on request, to have access to all source documents needed to 
verify the entries in the eCRF and other protocol- related documents; provided that subject 
confidentiality is maintained in agreement with local regulations. It will be the monitor's 
responsibility to inspect the eCRF at regular intervals throughout the study, to verify the 
adherence to the protocol and the completeness, consistency and accuracy of the data being 
entered in them. OSE Immunotherapeutics monitoring standards require full verification for the 
presence of informed consent, adherence to the inclusion/exclusion criteria, documentation of 
SAEs and the recording of the main safety and tolerability and efficacy endpoints.  
The investigator must ensure that subjects' anonymity will be maintained. On eCRFs or other 
documents submitted to OSE Immunotherapeutics, subjects should not be identified by their 
names, but by birth date (upon local regulation) and number. The investigator must keep a 
subject/patient log showing the subject’s number, name, date of birth and address or any other 
locally accepted identifiers. Documents identifying the subjects/patients (e.g., signed informed 
consent forms) must not be sent to OSE Immunotherapeutics and must be kept by the 
investigator in strict confidence. 
The investigator and co-investigators agree to cooperate with the monitor(s) to ensure that any 
issues detected in the course of monitoring visits are resolved. If the subject is hospitalized or 
dies in a hospital other than the study center, the investigator is in charge of contacting this 
hospital in order to document this SAE. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 77 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
The investigator will supply OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designee on request with any 
required background data from the study documentation or clinic records. This is particularly 
important when errors in data transcription are suspected. In case of special problems and/or 
governmental queries, it is also necessary to have access to the complete study records, provided 
that patient confidentiality is protected. 
An initiation visit will be performed before the first subject is included. Monitoring visits and 
contacts will occur at regular intervals thereafter. A close-out visit will be performed after the 
database lock and resolution of all pending queries and follow-up of ongoing AEs/SAEs. 
 
7.1.3 Data management 
7.1.3.1 
Data collection 
An eCRF must be completed and signed by the principal investigator or co-investigator only 
when a patient has been randomized. This also applies to those subjects who prematurely 
discontinue the study. If a subject withdraws from the study, the reason must be noted on the 
eCRF. The eCRFs are to be completed on an ongoing basis.  
 
7.1.3.2 Database management and quality control 
All study data will be entered into the study database, according to validated procedures 
described in specific data management documents. Subsequently, the data will be systematically 
checked using specific quality control procedures. When the database will be declared complete, 
clean and accurate, it will be locked. Any changes to the database after that time can only be 
made by joint written agreement between the Clinical Research Physician and the Trial 
Statistician. 
 
7.1.4 Recording of data and retention of documents 
The investigator will maintain adequate and accurate records to enable the conduct of the study 
to be fully documented and the study data to be subsequently verified. These documents will be 
classified into two different categories: investigator's file, and subject clinical source documents. 
The investigator's file will contain the protocol/amendments, FDA form 1572 for studies 
conducted under an US IND, financial disclosure form, EC/IRBs and Health Authority approval 
with correspondence, informed consent forms, drug records, staff curriculum vitae and 
authorization 
forms, 
screening 
and 
enrollment 
logs, 
and 
other 
appropriate 
documents/correspondence as per ICH/GCP guidelines and local regulations. Electronic filing of 
eCRF must also occur. 
Subject clinical source documents include, but are not limited to subject hospital/clinic records, 
physician's and nurse's notes, appointment book, original laboratory reports, ECG, X-ray, 
pathology and special assessment reports, consultant letters, etc. 
These two categories of documents must be kept on file by the investigator for as long as needed 
to comply with national and international regulations (2 years after the last marketing 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 78 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
authorization in an ICH/GCP region or following local requirements is it is a longer period).  
No study document should be destroyed without prior written approval from OSE 
Immunotherapeutics or its designee. Should the investigator wish to assign the study records to 
another party, or move them to another location, OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designee must 
be notified in advance. 
When source documents are required for the continued care of the patient, appropriate copies 
should be made for storing outside of the site. 
 
7.1.5 Audit 
OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designee may conduct audits of clinical research activities in 
accordance with its internal Quality System to evaluate compliance with the protocol and the 
principles of ICH/GCP related guidelines. Health Authorities may also wish to conduct an 
inspection (during the study or after its completion). Should an inspection be requested by Health 
Authorities, the investigator must inform OSE Immunotherapeutics or its designee immediately 
that such request has been made. 
The investigator will permit such audits by OSE Immunotherapeutics (and its designee) or 
Health Authorities and facilitate them by providing access to the relevant source documents. 
7.1.6 Publication of study results 
The clinical study report will be signed by the chair of the Steering Committee. 
In accordance with standard editorial and ethical practice, results of OSE Immunotherapeutics 
sponsored studies will be published. 
Authors will be defined as meeting requirements of the International Committee of Medical 
Journal Editors. The list of authors will consider for ranking Committee members, investigators 
according to the number of inclusions, region representation. Other contributions may be 
acknowledged. 
The data collected during this study are confidential and proprietary to the sponsor. Any 
publications or abstracts arising from this study require approval by the sponsor prior to 
publication or presentation and must adhere to the sponsor’s publication requirements as set forth 
in the approved clinical trial agreement (CTA). All draft publications, including abstracts or 
detailed summaries of any proposed presentations, must be submitted to the sponsor at the 
earliest practicable time for review, but at any event not less than 30 days before submission or 
presentation unless otherwise set forth in the CTA. Sponsor shall have the right to delete any 
confidential or proprietary information contained in any proposed presentation or abstract and 
may delay publication for up to 60 days for purposes of filing a patent application. 
 
7.1.7 Disclosure and confidentiality 
By signing the protocol, the investigator agrees to keep all information provided by OSE 
Immunotherapeutics in strict confidence and to request similar confidentiality from his/her staff 
and the EC/IRB. Study documents provided by OSE Immunotherapeutics (Investigators' 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 79 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Brochure, protocol, CRF and any other protocol-related documents) will be stored appropriately 
to ensure their confidentiality. The information provided by OSE Immunotherapeutics to the 
investigator may not be disclosed to others without direct written authorization from OSE 
Immunotherapeutics, except to the extent necessary to obtain informed consent from subjects 
who wish to participate in the trial. 
Furthermore, the investigator agrees that the sponsor is allowed to enter and utilize his/her 
professional contact details in an electronic database for internal purposes and for submission to 
worldwide Health Authorities. 
 
7.1.8 Premature termination or suspension of the study 
Both OSE Immunotherapeutics and the investigator reserve the right to terminate the study at 
any time.  
If a study is prematurely terminated or suspended, OSE Immunotherapeutics will promptly 
inform the investigator, the ECs/IRBs and Health Authorities, as appropriate, and provide the 
reason(s) for the termination or suspension. If the study is prematurely terminated or suspended 
for any reason, the investigator in agreement with OSE Immunotherapeutics should promptly 
inform the enrolled subjects and ensure their appropriate treatment and follow-up. 
In addition, if the investigator terminates or suspends a study without prior agreement of the 
sponsor, the investigator should promptly inform OSE Immunotherapeutics and the EC/IRB, and 
should provide the sponsor and the EC/IRB with a detailed written explanation of the termination 
or suspension. 
If the EC/IRB terminates or suspends its approval/favorable opinion of a study, the investigator 
should promptly notify OSE Immunotherapeutics and provide OSE Immunotherapeutics with a 
detailed written explanation of the termination or suspension. 
 
7.2 
Insurance and Compensation to subjects and investigators 
The sponsor is providing insurance in order to indemnify (legal and financial coverage) the 
investigator/center against claims arising from the study, except for claims that arise from 
malpractice and/or negligence. The compensation of the subject in the event of study-related 
injuries will comply with the applicable regulations. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 80 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
8 
REFERENCES 
1. Antonia SJ, Villegas A, Daniel D, Vicente D, Murakami S, Hui R, et al. Durvalumab after 
Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 
377:1919-1929. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709937. 
2. Azzoli CG, Baker S, Temin S, Pao W, Aliff T, Brahmer J, et al. American Society of Clinical 
Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell 
Lung Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27(36):6251-66. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.5622. 
3. Azzoli CG, Temin S, Aliff T, Baker S, Brahmer J, Johnson DH, et al. 2011 Focused Update 
of 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on 
Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(28), 3825–
31. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.34.2774. 
4. Barve M, Bender J, Senzer N, Cunningham C, Greco FA, McCune D, et al. Induction of 
immune responses and clinical efficacy in a Phase II trial of IDM-2101, a 10-epitope 
cytotoxic T-lymphocyte vaccine, in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 
2008;26(27):4418‑25. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6462. 
5. Beebe M, Qin M, Moi M, Wu S, Heiati H, Walker L, et al. Formulation and characterization 
of a ten-peptide single-vial vaccine, EP-2101, designed to induce cytotoxic T-lymphocyte 
responses for cancer immunotherapy. Hum Vaccin. 2008;4(3):210‑8. 
6. Blackhall F, Kim DW, Besse B, Nokihara H, Han JY, Wilner KD, et al. Patient-reported 
outcomes and quality of life in PROFILE 1007: a randomized trial of crizotinib compared 
with chemotherapy in previously treated patients with ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell 
lung cancer. Erratum. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(11):1657. 
7. Blackhall F, Kim DW, Besse B, Nokihara H, Han JY, Wilner KD, Reisman A, et al. Patient-
reported outcomes and quality of life in PROFILE 1007: a randomized trial of crizotinib 
compared with chemotherapy in previously treated patients with ALK-positive advanced non-
small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(11):1625-33. doi: 10.1097/JTO. 
8. Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, Spigel DR, Steins M, Ready NE, et al. Nivolumab versus 
Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 
2015;373(17):1627-39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643. 
9. Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, Spigel DR, Steins M, Ready NE, et al. Nivolumab versus 
Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015 
Oct 22;373(17):1627-39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643. Epub 2015 Sep 27. 
10. Brahmer J, Reckamp KL, Baas P, Crinò L, Eberhardt WE, Poddubskaya E, et al. Nivolumab 
versus Docetaxel in Advanced Squamous-Cell Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 
2015;373(2):123-35. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504627. 
11. Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. Union for International Cancer Control. TNM 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 81 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
Classification of Malignant Tumours, 8th edition 1–241. ISBN: 978-1-119-26356-2 
12. Bulut I, Meral M, Kaynar H, Pirim I, Bilici M, Gorguner M. Analysis of HLA class I and II 
alleles regarding to lymph node and distant metastasis in patients with non-small cell lung 
cancer. Lung Cancer. 2009;66(2):231‑6. 
13. Butts C, Socinski MA, Mitchell PL, Thatcher N, Havel L, Krzakowski M, et al. Tecemotide 
(L-BLP25) versus placebo after chemoradiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer 
(START): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(1):59-68. doi: 
10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70510-2. 
14. Catakovic K, Klieser E, Neureiter D, Geisberger R. T cell exhaustion: from 
pathophysiological basics to tumor immunotherapy. Cell Commun Signal. 2017 Jan 
5;15(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12964-016-0160-z. 
15. Ciuleanu T, Stelmakh L, Cicenas S, Miliauskas S, Grigorescu AC, Hillenbach C, et al. 
Efficacy and safety of erlotinib versus chemotherapy in second-line treatment of patients with 
advanced, non-small-cell lung cancer with poor prognosis (TITAN): a randomised 
multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(3):300‑8. doi: 10.1016/S1470-
2045(11)70385-0. 
16. Denny JT, Burr AT, Balzer F, Tse JT, Denny JE, Chyu D. Methylene blue treatment for 
cytokine release syndrome-associated vasoplegia following a renal transplant with rATG 
infusion: A case report and literature review. Exp Ther Med.2015;9(5):1915-1920 
17. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response 
evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 
2009;45(2):228-47. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. 
18. European Medicine Agency. Guideline on the evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in 
man. EMA/CHMP/205/95/rev.4 December 2011. [Accessed 19 July 2015]. Available at: 
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2013/01/WC5
00137128.pdf 
19. Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Kowanetz M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres J, et al. 
Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer 
(POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 
2016;387(10030):1837-46. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00587-0. 
20. Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Kowanetz M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres J, et al. 
Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer 
(POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016 Apr 
30;387(10030):1837-46. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00587-0. 
21. Food and Drug Administration, US Departement of Health and Human Services. Clinical trial 
endpoints for the approval of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Drugs and Biologics – Guidance 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 82 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
for industry April 2015. [Accessed 19 July 2015]. Available at: 
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/UCM259421.pdf 
22. Ford CH, Newman CE, Mackintosh P. HLA frequency and prognosis in lung cancer. Br J 
Cancer. 1981;43(5):610‑4. 
23. Gandara DR, Von Pawel J, Sullivan RN, Helland A, Han JY, Aix SP, et al. Impact of 
atezolizumab (atezo) treatment beyond disease progression (TBP) in advanced NSCLC: 
Results from the randomized Phase III OAK study. J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr 9001) 
24. Garassino MC, Martelli O, Broggini M, Farina G, Veronese S, Rulli E, et al. Erlotinib versus 
docetaxel as second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and 
wild-type EGFR tumours (TAILOR): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 
2013;14(10):981‑8. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70310-3. 
25. Garon EB, Ciuleanu TE, Arrieta O, Prabhash K, Syrigos KN, Goksel T, et al. Ramucirumab 
plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small 
cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicenter, 
double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9944):665-73. doi: 10.1016/S0140-
6736(14)60845-X. 
26. Garon EB, Rizvi NA, Hui R, Leighl N, Balmanoukian AS, Eder JP, et al. Pembrolizumab for 
the Treatment of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(21):2018-28. doi: 
10.1056/NEJMoa1501824. 
27. Garon EB, Spira AI, Goldberg SB, Chaft JE, Papadimitrakopoulou V, Antonia SJ, et al. 
Safety and activity of durvalumab + tremelimumab in immunotherapy (IMT)-pretreated 
advanced NSCLC patients. ASCO 2018; Abstract 9041. 
28. Gettinger S, Rizvi NA, Chow LQ, Borghaei H, Brahmer J, Ready N, et al. Nivolumab 
Monotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J Clin 
Oncol. 2016 Sep 1;34(25):2980-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.9929. 
29. Girard N, Molinier O, Audigier‐Valette C, Cadranel J, Monnet I, Hureaux J, et al. IFCT‐1502 
CLINIVO: Real‐life experience with nivolumab in patients with advanced NSCLC. IASLC 
18th WCLC 2017 Abstract 9371. 
30. Globocan 2018; Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, Vol. XI (electronic version). Lyon: 
International Agency for Research on Cancer. Available from: http://ci5.iarc.fr, [accessed 28 
March 2019]. 
31. Goldberg SH, Gettinger SN, Mahajan A et al. Activity and safety of pembrolizumab in 
patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with untreated brain metastasis. J Clin 
Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstr 8035) 
32. Gonzalez Marinello GM, Santos ES, Raez LE. Epidermal growth factor vaccine in non-small-
cell lung cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2012;12(4):439-45. doi: 10.1586/era.12.24. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 83 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
33. Hanna N, Johnson D, Temin S, Baker S Jr, Brahmer J, Ellis PM, et al. Systemic Therapy for 
Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical 
Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Oct 20;35(30):3484-3515. 
doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.74.6065. 
34. Hanna N, Shepherd FA, Fossella FV, Pereira JR, De Marinis F, von Pawel J, et al. 
Randomized Phase III trial of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell 
lung cancer previously treated with chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(9):1589‑97. 
35. Hellmann MD, Rizvi NA, Goldman JW, Gettinger SN, Borghaei H, Brahmer JR, et al. 
Nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer 
(CheckMate 012): results of an open-label, phase 1, multicohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2016. 
pii: S1470-2045(16)30624-6. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30624-6. 
36. Herbst RS, Baas P, Kim DW, Felip E, Pérez-Gracia JL, Han JY, et al. Pembrolizumab versus 
docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer 
(KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1540-50. doi: 
10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01281-7. 
37. Ho C, Tong KM, Ramsden K, Ionescu DN, Laskin J. Histologic classification of non-small-
cell lung cancer over time: reducing the rates of not-otherwise-specified. Curr Oncol. 
2015;22(3):e164-70. doi: 10.3747/co.22.2339. 
38. Horn L, Spiegel R, Gettinger SN et al. Clinical activity, safety and predictive biomarkers of 
the engineered antibody MPDL3280 (anti-PD-L1) in non-small-cell lung cancer: update from 
a phase Ia study. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstr 8029) 
39. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Miller D, Altekruse SF, et al. SEER Cancer 
Statistics Review, 1975-2012, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, 
http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2012/, based on November 2014 SEER data submission, 
posted to the SEER web site, April 2015 
40. Iversen TZ, Engell-Noerregaard L, Ellebaek E, Andersen R, Larsen SK, Bjoern J, et al. Long-
lasting disease stabilization in the absence of toxicity in metastatic lung cancer patients 
vaccinated with an epitope derived from indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase. Clin Cancer Res. 2014 
Jan 1;20(1):221-32. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1560. 
41. Jenkins RW, Barbie DA, Flaherty KT. Mechanisms of resistance to immune checkpoint 
inhibitors. British Journal of Cancer (2018) 118, 9–16. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.434 
42. Kawaguchi T, Ando M, Asami K, Okano Y, Fukuda M, Nakagawa H, et al. Randomized 
Phase III trial of erlotinib versus docetaxel as second- or third-line therapy in patients with 
advanced non-small cell lung cancer: docetaxel and erlotinib lung cancer trial (DELTA). J 
Clin Oncol. 2014;32(18):1902-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.4694. 
43. Kluger, H.M., Tawbi, H.A., Ascierto, M.L., Bowden, M., Callahan, M.K., Cha, E., Chen, 
H.X., Drake, C.G., Feltquate, D.M., Ferris, R.L., et al. (2020). Defining tumor resistance to 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 84 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
PD-1 pathway blockade: recommendations from the first meeting of the SITC 
Immunotherapy Resistance Taskforce. J. Immunother. Cancer 8, e000398. 
 
44. Kris MG, Johnson BE, Berry LD, Kwiatkowski DJ, Iafrate AJ, Wistuba II, et al. Using 
multiplexed assays of oncogenic drivers in lung cancers to select targeted drugs. JAMA. 
2014;311(19):1998-2006. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.3741 
45. Langer CJ, Gadgeel SM, Borghaei H, Papadimitrakopoulou VA, Patnaik A, Powell SF, et al. 
Carboplatin and pemetrexed with or without pembrolizumab for advanced, non-squamous 
non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, phase 2 cohort of the open-label KEYNOTE-021 
study. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1497-1508. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30498-3. 
46. Lee DW, Gardner R, Porter DL, Louis CU, Ahmed N, Jensen M, et al. Current concepts in 
the diagnosis and management of cytokine release syndrome. Blood. 2014 Jul 10;124(2):188-
95. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-05-552729. 
47. Lynch TJ, Bondarenko I, Luft A, Serwatowski P, Barlesi F, Chacko R, et al. Ipilimumab in 
combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment in stage IIIB/IV non-small-
cell lung cancer: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicenter Phase II study. J Clin 
Oncol 2012; 30(17): 2046-54. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.4032. 
48. Masucci GV, Andersson E, Villabona L, Helgadottir H, Bergfeldt K, Cavallo F, et al. 
Survival of the fittest or best adapted: HLA-dependent tumor development. J Nucleic Acids 
Investig [Internet]. 1 mars 2010 [Accessed 23 sept 2013];1(1). Available at: 
http://www.pagepress.org/journals/index.php/jnai/article/view/1654. 
49. Maude SL, Barrett D, Teachey DT, Grupp SA. Managing cytokine release syndrome 
associated with novel T cell-engaging therapies. Cancer J. 2014;20(2):119-22. doi: 
10.1097/PPO.0000000000000035. 
50. Mezquita L, Charrier M, Faivre L, Dupraz L, Luezac B, Remon J, et al. Prognostic value of 
HLA-A2 status in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 112 (2017) 10-
15. 
51. Nagata Y, Hanagiri T, Mizukami M, Kuroda K, Shigematsu Y, Baba T, et al. Clinical 
significance of HLA class I alleles on postoperative prognosis of lung cancer patients in 
Japan. Lung Cancer. 2009;65(1):91‑7. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.10.012. 
52. NCI Enterprise Vocabulary Services. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 
(CTCAE). Available at: http://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/ 
53. Nemunaitis J, Cunningham, C ,Bender, J, Ishioka, G, Maples, P, Pappen, B, et al. Phase II  
trial of a 10-epitope CTL vaccine, IDM-2101, in metastatic NSCLC patients: Induction of 
immune responses and clinical efficacy. International Society for Biological Therapy of 
Cancer 2007, p 891-2. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 85 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
54. Nemunaitis J, Nemunaitis M, Senzer N, Snitz P, Bedell C, Kumar P, et al. Phase II trial of 
Belagenpumatucel-L, a TGF-beta2 antisense gene modified allogeneic tumor vaccine in 
advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Cancer Gene Ther. 2009;16(8):620-4. 
doi: 10.1038/cgt.2009.15. 
55. Novello S, Barlesi F, Califano R, Cufer T, Ekman S, Levra MG, et al. Metastatic non-small-
cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.  
Ann Oncol. 2016 Sep;27(suppl 5):v1-v27. 
56. Novello S, Kaiser R, Mellemgaard A, Douillard JY, Orlov S, Krzakowski M, et al. Analysis 
of patient-reported outcomes from the LUME-lung 1 trial: a randomized, double-blind, 
placebo-cotrolled, Phase III study of second-line nintedanib in patients with advanced non-
small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(3):317-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.11.015. 
57. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET, Carbone PP. 
Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 
1982;5(6):649-55. 
58. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J. Interpreting the significance of changes in 
health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(1):139‑44. 
59. Paesmans M, Sculier JP, Libert P, Bureau G, Dabouis G, Thiriaux J, et al. Response to 
chemotherapy has predictive value for further survival of patients with advanced non-small 
cell lung cancer: 10 years experience of the European Lung Cancer Working Party. Eur J 
Cancer. 1997;33(14):2326-32. 
60. Paz-Ares L, Horn L, Borghaei H, Spigel DR, Steins M, Ready N, et al. Phase III, randomized 
trial (CheckMate 057) of nivolumab (NIVO) versus docetaxel (DOC) in advanced non-
squamous cell (non-SQ) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol 33; 2015 (suppl; 
abstr LBA109). 
61. Paz-Ares L, Perol M, Ciuleanu T-E, Kowalyszyn RD, Reck M, Lewanski CR, et al. 
Exploratory analysis of safety by histology and efficacy in a nonsquamous NSCLC subgroup 
in REVEL: a randomized Phase III study of ramucirumab (RAM) plus docetaxel (DOC) vs 
DOC for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J clin Oncol 
2015;33 (suppl. abstract 8055). 
62. Planchard D, Popat S, Kerr K, Novello S, Smit EF, Faivre-Finn C, et al. Metastatic non-small 
cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. 
Annals of Oncology 29 (Supplement 4): iv192–iv237, 2018 doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy275.  
63. Quoix E, Losconzy G, Fogel F et al. TIME, a phase 2B/3 study evaluating TG4010 in 
combination with first line therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Phase 
2b results. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: Abstract 1055 PD. 
64. Reck M, Kaiser R, Mellemgaard A, Douillard JY, Orlov S, Krzakowski M, et al. Docetaxel 
plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 86 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 
Oncol. 2014 ;15(2):143-55. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70586-2. 
65. Reck M, Popat S, Reinmuth N, De Ruysscher D, Kerr KM, Peters S; ESMO Guidelines 
Working Group. Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for 
diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014;25 Suppl 3:iii27-39. doi: 
10.1093/annonc/mdu199. 
66. Reck M, Rodríguez-Abreu D, Robinson AG, Hui R, Csőszi T, Fülöp A, et al. Pembrolizumab 
versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 
2016;375:1823-33. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606774. 
67. Remon J, Lacroix L, Jovelet C, Caramella C, Howarth K, Plagnol V, et al. Real-World Utility 
of an Amplicon-Based Next-Generation Sequencing Liquid Biopsy for Broad Molecular 
Profiling in Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. ascopubs.org/journal/po 
[Internet]. 6 March 2019 [Accessed on 11 March 2019]. Available at: 
https://doi.org/10.1200/PO.18.00211. 
68. Rittmeyer A, Barlesi F, Waterkamp D, Park K, Ciardiello F, von Pawel J, et al. Atezolizumab 
versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a 
phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016. pii: S0140-
6736(16)32517-X. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32517-X. 
69. Rizvi N, Brahmer J, Ou SH et al. Safety and clinical activityof MEDI4736, an anti-
programmed cell death-ligand (PD-L1) antibody in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J 
Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstr 8032) 
70. Rizvi NA, Garon E, Leighl N et al. Optimizing PD-L1 as biomarker of response with 
pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for PD-L1 positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: 
updated data from KEYNOTE-001. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstr 8026) 
71. Scagliotti G, Hanna N, Fossella F, Sugarman K, Blatter J, Peterson P, et al. The Differential 
Efficacy of Pemetrexed According to NSCLC Histology: A Review of Two Phase III Studies 
The Oncologist 2009;14:253–263 
72. Sharma P, Hu-Lieskovan S, Wargo JA, Ribas A. Primary, Adaptive, and Acquired Resistance 
to Cancer Immunotherapy. Cell. 2017 Feb 9;168(4):707-723. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.017. 
73. Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, Tan EH, Hirsh V, Thongprasert S, et al. 
Erlotinib in Previously Treated Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 
2005;353(2):123‑32. 
74. So T, Takenoyama M, Sugaya M, Yasuda M, Eifuku R, Yoshimatsu T, et al. Unfavorable 
prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma associated with HLA-A2.  
Lung Cancer 2001;32(1):39‑46. 
75. Spigel DR, Chaft JE, Gettinger SN et al. Clinical activity and safety from a Phase II study 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 87 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
(FIR) of MPDL3280 (anti-PDL1) in PD-L1-selected patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.  
J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstract 8028) 
76. Spira AI, Park K, Mazières J et al. Efficacy, safety and predictive biomarkers results from a 
randomized Phase II study comparing MPDL3280A vs docetaxel in 2/3L NSCLC (POLAR). 
J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (suppl; abstr 8010) 
77. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi, M, et al. International Association for the Study of Lung 
Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International 
Multidisciplinary Classification of Lung Adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6(2): 244–
285. doi:10.1097/JTO.0b013e318206a221 
78. Vansteenkiste JF, Cho B, Vanakesa T, De Pas T, Zielinski M, Kim MS, et al. MAGRIT, a 
double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III study to assess the efficacy of the 
recmage-a3 + as15 cancer immunotherapeutic as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected 
mage-a3-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Ann Oncol 2014;25(suppl_4): iv409-
iv416. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu347. 
79. Yamaguchi Y, Yamaue H, Okusaka T, Okuno K, Suzuki H, Fujioka T, et al. Guidance for 
Peptide Vaccines for the Treatment of Cancer, The Japanese Society for Biological Therapy. 
Guidance for peptide vaccines for the treatment of cancer. Cancer Sci. 2014;105(7):924-31. 
doi: 10.1111/cas.12443. 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 88 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
9 
APPENDICES 
 
 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 89 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
APPENDIX 1: RECIST 1.1 CRITERIA 
 
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, 
Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubinstein L, Shankar L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J. 
New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). 
Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228-47. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. 
 
 
This Appendix has been excerpted from the full RECIST 1.1 criteria. For information pertaining 
to RECIST 1.1 criteria not contained in the study protocol or in this Appendix, please refer to the 
full publication (17). 
 
 
1 ASSESSMENT OF OVERALL TUMOR BURDEN AND MEASURABLE 
DISEASE 
To assess objective response or future progression, it is necessary to estimate the overall tumor 
burden at baseline and use this as a comparator for subsequent measurements. Measurable 
disease is defined by the presence of at least one measurable lesion. 
 
1.1 Measurability of tumor 
At baseline, tumor lesions/lymph nodes will be categorized measurable or non-measurable as 
follows. All baseline evaluations should be performed as close as possible to the treatment start 
and never more than 4 weeks before the beginning of the treatment. 
Measurable lesions must be accurately measured in at least one dimension (longest diameter 
inthe plane of the measurement to be recorded) with a minimum size of: 
➢ 10 mm by CT scan - (CT scan slice thickness no greater than 5 mm) 
➢ 10 mm caliper measurement by clinical exam (lesions which cannot be accurately 
measured with calipers should be recorded as non-measurable) 
➢ 20 mm by chest x-ray 
➢ Malignant lymph nodes: To be considered pathologically enlarged and measurable, a 
lymphnode must be  15 mm in short axis when assessed by CT scan (CT scan slice 
thickness recommended to be no greater than 5 mm). At baseline and in follow-up, only 
the short axiswill be measured and followed. 
All measurements should be recorded in metric notation, using calipers if clinically assessed. 
Special considerations regarding lesion measurability 
 
Bone lesions: 
➢ Bone scan, PET scan or plain films are not considered adequate imaging techniques to 
measure bone lesions. However, these techniques can be used to confirm the presence or 
disappearance of bone lesions. 
➢ Lytic bone lesions or mixed lytic-blastic lesions, with identifiable soft tissue components, 
that can be evaluated by cross sectional imaging techniques such as CT or MRI can be 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 90 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
considered as measurable lesions if the soft tissue component meets the definition 
ofmeasurability described above. 
➢ Blastic bone lesions are non-measurable. 
 
 
Cystic lesions: 
➢ Lesions that meet the criteria for radiographically defined simple cysts should not be 
considered as malignant lesions (neither measurable nor non-measurable) since they are, 
by definition, simple cysts. 
➢ Cystic lesions’ thought to represent cystic metastases can be considered as measurable 
lesions, if they meet the definition of measurability described above. However, if non-
cystic lesions are present in the same patient, these are preferred for selection as target 
lesions. 
 
Lesions with prior local treatment: 
Tumor lesions situated in a previously irradiated area, or in an area subjected to other loco-
regional therapy, are usually not considered measurable unless there has been demonstrated 
progression in the lesion. 
 
Non-measurable lesions are all other lesions, including small lesions (longest diameter 
< 10 mm or pathological lymph nodes with  10 to < 15 mm short axis), as well as non-
measurable lesions. Lesions considered non-measurable include: leptomeningeal disease, ascites, 
pleural or pericardial effusion, inflammatory breast disease, lymphangitic involvement of skin or 
lung, abdominal masses/abdominal organomegaly identified by physical exam that is not 
measurable by reproducible imaging techniques. 
 
1.2 Method of assessment 
The same method of assessment and the same technique should be used to characterize each 
identified and reported lesion at baseline and during follow-up. Imaging based evaluation should 
always be performed rather than clinical examination unless the lesion(s) being followed cannot 
be imaged but are assessable by clinical examination. 
CT, MRI: CT is the best currently available and reproducible method to measure lesions selected 
for response assessment. Measurability of lesions on CT scan is based on the assumption that CT 
slice thickness is 5 mm or less. When CT scans have slice thickness greater than 5 mm, the 
minimum size for a measurable lesion should be twice the slice thickness. 
 
Chest x-ray: Chest CT is preferred over chest x-ray, particularly when progression is an 
important endpoint, since CT is more sensitive than x-ray, particularly in identifying new lesions. 
However, lesions on chest x-ray may be considered measurable if they are clearly defined and 
surrounded by aerated lung. 
 
Clinical lesions: Clinical lesions will only be considered measurable when they are superficial 
and  10 mm diameter as assessed using calipers. For the case of skin lesions, documentation by 
color photography including a ruler to estimate the size of the lesion is suggested. As noted 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 91 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
above, when lesions can be evaluated by both clinical exam and imaging, imaging evaluation 
should be undertaken since it is more objective and may be reviewed at the end of the study. 
 
Ultrasound: Ultrasound is not useful in assessment of lesion size and should not be used as a 
method of measurement. If new lesions are identified by ultrasound in the course of the study, 
confirmation by CT or MRI is advised. 
 
Endoscopy, laparoscopy: The utilization of these techniques for objective tumor evaluation is 
not advised. 
Tumor markers: Tumor markers alone cannot be used to assess objective tumor response. 
 
 
2 BASELINE DOCUMENTATION OF ‘TARGET’ AND ‘NON-TARGET’ 
LESIONS 
 
Target lesions: When more than one measurable lesion is present at baseline all lesions up to a 
maximum of five lesions total (and a maximum of two lesions per organ) representative of all 
involved organs should be identified as target lesions and will be recorded and measured at 
baseline. Target lesions should be selected on the basis of their size (lesions with the longest 
diameter), be representative of all involved organs, and should lend themselves to reproducible 
repeated measurements. 
Lymph nodes merit special mention since they are normal anatomical structures which may be 
visible by imaging even if not involved by tumor. Pathological nodes which are defined as 
measurable and may be identified as target lesions must meet the criterion of a short axis of 
 15 mm by CT scan. Only the short axis of these nodes will contribute to the baseline sum.  
 
All other pathological nodes (those with short axis  10 mm but < 15 mm) should be considered 
non-target lesions. Nodes that have a short axis < 10 mm are considered non-pathological and 
should not be recorded or followed. A sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short 
axis for nodal lesions) for all target lesions will be calculated and reported as the baseline sum 
diameters. The baseline sum diameters will be used as reference to further characterize any 
objective tumor regression in the measurable dimension of the disease. 
 
Non-target lesions: All other lesions (or sites of disease) including pathological lymph nodes 
should be identified as non-target lesions and should also be recorded at baseline. Measurements 
are not required and these lesions should be followed as ‘present’, ‘absent’, or ‘unequivocal 
progression’. In addition, it is possible to record multiple non-target lesions involving the same 
organ as a single item on the case record form (eg, ‘multiple enlarged pelvic lymph nodes’ or 
‘multiple liver metastases’). 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 92 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
3 TUMOR RESPONSE EVALUATION AND RESPONSE CRITERIA 
3.1 Evaluation of target lesions 
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes 
(whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to < 10 mm. 
 
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking 
as reference the baseline sum diameters. 
 
Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, 
taking as reference the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the 
smallest on study). In addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an 
absolute increase of at least 5 mm.  
Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression. 
 
Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufficient shrinkage from the baseline study to qualify for PR nor 
sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taking as reference the smallest sum diameters while on 
study. 
Special notes on the assessment of target lesions 
➢ Lymph nodes: Lymph nodes identified as target lesions should always have the actual 
short axis measurement recorded and should be measured in the same anatomical plane 
as the baseline examination, even if the nodes regress to below 10 mm on study. This 
means that when lymph nodes are included as target lesions, the ‘sum’ of lesions may not 
be zero even if complete response criteria are met, since a normal lymph node is defined 
as having a short axis of < 10 mm. 
➢ Target lesions that become ‘too small to measure’: All lesions (nodal and non-nodal) 
recorded at baseline should have their actual measurements recorded at each subsequent 
evaluation, even when very small (e.g., 2 mm). If the radiologist is able to provide an 
actual measure, that should be recorded, even if it is below 5 mm. 
 
However, when such a lesion becomes difficult to assign an exact measure to then: 
(i) if it is the opinion of the radiologist that the lesion has likely disappeared, the measurement 
should be recorded as 0 mm. 
 
(ii) if the lesion is believed to be present and is faintly seen but too small to measure, a default 
value of 5 mm should be assigned (note: in case of a lymph node believed to be present and 
faintly seen but too small to measure, a default value of 5 mm should be assigned in this 
circumstance as well). This default value is derived from the 5 mm CT slice thickness (but 
should not be changed with varying CT slice thickness). 
 
Lesions that split or coalesce on treatment: When non-nodal lesions ‘fragment’, the longest 
diameters of the fragmented portions should be added together to calculate the target lesion sum. 
Similarly, as lesions coalesce, a plane between them may be maintained that would aid in 
obtaining maximal diameter measurements of each individual lesion. If the lesions have 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 93 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
coalesced such that they are no longer separable, the vector of the longest diameter in this 
instance should be the maximal longest diameter for the ‘coalesced lesion’. 
3.2 Evaluation of non-target lesions 
While some non-target lesions may actually be measurable, they need not be measured and 
instead should be assessed only qualitatively at the time points specified in the protocol. 
 
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor 
marker level. All lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size (< 10 mm short axis). 
Non-CR/Non-PD: Persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor 
marker level above the normal limits. 
 
Progressive Disease (PD): Unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions.  
(Note: the appearance of one or more new lesions is also considered progression). 
➢ The concept of progression of non-target disease requires additional explanation as 
follows: 
➢ When the patient also has measurable disease: To achieve ‘unequivocal progression’ on 
the basis of the non-target disease, there must be an overall level of substantial worsening 
in non-target disease such that, even in presence of SD or PR in target disease, the overall 
tumor burden has increased sufficiently to merit discontinuation of therapy. A modest 
‘increase’ in the size of one or more non-target lesions is usually not sufficient to qualify 
for unequivocal progression status. 
➢ When the patient has only non-measurable disease: To achieve ‘unequivocal progression’ 
on the basis of the non-target disease, there must be an overall level of substantial 
worsening such that the overall tumor burden has increased sufficiently to merit 
discontinuation of therapy. A modest ‘increase’ in the size of one or more non-target 
lesions is usually not sufficient to qualify for unequivocal progression status. Because 
worsening in non-target disease cannot be easily quantified (by definition: if all lesions 
are non-measurable) a useful test that can be applied when assessing patients for 
unequivocal progression is to consider if the increase in overall disease burden based on 
the change in non-measurable disease is comparable in magnitude to the increase that 
would be required to declare PD for measurable disease: ie, an increase in tumor burden 
representing an additional 73% increase in ‘volume’ (which is equivalent to a 20% 
increase diameter in a measurable lesion). Examples include 
an increase in a pleural effusion from ‘trace’ to ‘large’, an increase in lymphangitic 
disease from localized to widespread, or may be described in protocols as ‘sufficient to 
require a change in therapy’. If ‘unequivocal progression’ is seen, the patient should be 
considered to have had overall PD at that point. 
 
3.3 New lesions 
The appearance of new malignant lesions denotes disease progression. The finding of a new 
lesion should be unequivocal: ie, not attributable to differences in scanning technique, change in 
imaging modality or findings thought to represent something other than tumor (for example, 
some ‘new’ bone lesions may be simply healing or flare of pre-existing lesions). This is 
particularly important when the patient’s baseline lesions show partial or complete response. For 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 94 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
example, necrosis of a liver lesion may be reported on a CT scan report as a ‘new’ cystic 
lesion,which it is not. A lesion identified on a follow-up study in an anatomical location that was 
not scanned at baseline is considered a new lesion and will indicate disease progression. An 
example of this is the patient who has visceral disease at baseline and while on study has a CT or 
MRI brain ordered which reveals metastases. The patient’s brain metastases are considered to be 
constitute PD even if he/she did not have brain imaging at baseline.If a new lesion is equivocal, 
for example because of its small size, continued therapy and follow-up evaluation will clarify if 
it represents new disease. If repeat scans confirm that there is a new lesion, then progression 
should be declared using the date of the initial scan. 
 
3.4 Tumor markers 
Tumor markers alone cannot be used to assess objective tumor responses. If markers are 
initiallyabove the upper normal limit, however, they must normalize in order for a patient to be 
considered as having attained a complete response. 
 
 
4 EVALUATION OF BEST OVERALL RESPONSE 
4.1 Time point response 
A response assessment should occur at each time point specified in the protocol. 
For patients who have measurable disease at baseline Appendix Table 6 provides a summary of 
the overall response status calculation at each time point. 
 
Table 6: Summary of the Overall Response Status 
Calculation [Time point response - patients with target ± non-target disease] 
Target lesions 
Non-target lesions 
New lesions 
Overall response 
CR 
CR 
No 
CR 
CR 
Non-CR/non-PD 
No 
PR 
CR 
Not evaluated 
No 
PR 
PR 
Non-PD or not all 
evaluated 
No 
PR 
SD 
Non-PD or not all 
evaluated 
No 
SD 
Not all evaluated 
Non-PD 
No 
NE 
PD 
Any 
Yes or No 
PD 
Any 
PD 
Yes or No 
PD 
Any 
Any 
Yes  
PD 
 
4.2 Missing assessments and inevaluable designation 
When no imaging/measurement is done at all at a particular time point, the patient is not 
evaluable (NE) at that time point. If only a subset of lesion measurements are made at an 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 95 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
assessment, usually the case is also considered NE at that time point, unless a convincing 
argument can be made that the contribution of the individual missing lesion(s) would not change 
the assigned time point response. This would be most likely to happen in the case of PD. 
 
4.3 Best overall response: all timepoints 
Best response determination in trials where confirmation of complete or partial response IS 
required: Complete or partial responses may be claimed only if the criteria for each are met at a 
subsequent time point as specified in the protocol. In this circumstance, the best overall response 
can be interpreted as in Appendix Table 7. 
 
Table 7: Best overall response when confirmation of CR and PR required 
Overall Response 
First Timepoint 
Overall Response 
Subsequent Timepoint 
Best Overall response 
CR 
CR 
CR 
CR 
PR 
SD, PD or PRa 
CR 
SD 
SD provided minimum criteria for SD 
duration met, otherwise, PD 
CR 
PD 
SD provided minimum criteria for SD 
duration met, otherwise, PD 
CR 
NE 
SD provided minimum criteria for SD 
duration met, otherwise NE 
PR 
CR 
PR 
PR 
PR 
PR 
PR 
SD 
SD 
PR 
PD 
SD provided minimum criteria for SD 
duration met, otherwise, PD 
PR 
NE 
SD provided minimum criteria for SD 
duration met, otherwise NE 
NE 
NE 
NE 
 
CR = complete response, PR = partial response, SD = stable disease, PD = progressive disease, and NE = 
inevaluable. 
a If a CR is truly met at first time point, then any disease seen at a subsequent time point, even disease meeting PR 
criteria relative to baseline, makes the disease PD at that point (since disease must have reappeared after CR).  
Best response would depend on whether minimum duration for SD was met. However, sometimes ‘CR’ may be 
claimed when subsequent scans suggest small lesions were likely still present and in fact the patient had PR, not CR 
at the first time point. Under these circumstances, the original CR should be changed to PR and the best response is 
PR. 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 96 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
 
4.4 Special notes on response assessment 
When nodal disease is included in the sum of target lesions and the nodes decrease to 
‘normal’size (< 10 mm), they may still have a measurement reported on scans. This 
measurement should be recorded even though the nodes are normal in order not to overstate 
progression should it be based on increase in size of the nodes. As noted earlier, this means that 
patients with CR may not have a total sum of ‘zero’ on the case report form (CRF). 
Patients with a global deterioration of health status requiring discontinuation of treatment 
without objective evidence of disease progression at that time should be reported as‘symptomatic 
deterioration’. Every effort should be made to document objective progression even after 
discontinuation of treatment. Symptomatic deterioration is not a descriptor of an objective 
response: it is a reason for stopping study therapy. The objective response status of such patients 
is to be determined by evaluation of target and non-target disease as shown in Appendix Table 6 
and Table 7. 
For equivocal findings of progression (eg, very small and uncertain new lesions; cystic changes 
or necrosis in existing lesions), treatment may continue until the next scheduled assessment. If at 
the next scheduled assessment, progression is confirmed, the date of progression should be the 
earlier date when progression was suspected. 
 
 
5 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 
5.1 Duration of response 
Duration of overall response: The duration of overall response is measured from the time 
measurement criteria are first met for CR/PR (whichever is first recorded) until the first date that 
recurrent or progressive disease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progressive 
disease the smallest measurements recorded on study). 
The duration of overall complete response is measured from the time measurement criteria are 
first met for CR until the first date that recurrent disease is objectively documented. 
 
Duration of stable disease: Stable disease is measured from the start of the treatment (in 
randomized trials, from date of randomization) until the criteria for progression are met, taking 
as reference the smallest sum on study (if the baseline sum is the smallest, this is the 
reference for calculation of PD). 
 
5.2 Lesions that disappear and reappear 
If a lesion disappears and reappears at a subsequent time point it should continue to be measured. 
However, the patient’s response at the point in time when the lesion reappears will depend upon 
the status of his/her other lesions. For example, if the patient’s tumour had reached a CR status 
and the lesion reappeared, then the patient would be considered PD at the time of reappearance. 
In contrast, if the tumour status was a PR or SD and one lesion which had disappeared then 
reappears, its maximal diameter should be added to the sum of the remaining lesions for a 
calculated response: in other words, the reappearance of an apparently ‘disappeared’ single 
lesion amongst many which remain is not in itself enough to qualify for PD: that requires the 
sum of all lesions to meet the PD criteria. The rationale for such a categorization is based upon 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 97 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
the realization that most lesions do not actually ‘disappear’ but are not visualized because they 
are beyond the resolving power of the imaging modality employed. 
 
5.3 Use of FDG-PET 
While FDG-PET response assessments need additional study, it is sometimes reasonable to 
incorporate the use of FDG-PET scanning to complement CT scanning in assessment of 
progression (particularly possible ‘new’ disease). New lesions on the basis of FDG-PET imaging 
can be identified according to the following algorithm: 
 
a. Negative FDG-PET at baseline, with a positive FDG-PET at follow-up is a sign of PD based 
on a new lesion. Confirmatory CT is recommended. 
b. No FDG-PET at baseline and a positive FDG-PET at follow-up: 
➢ If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up corresponds to a new site of disease confirmed by 
CT, this is PD. 
➢ If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up is not confirmed as a new site of disease on CT, 
additional follow-up CT scans are needed to determine if there is progression occurring at 
that site (if so, the date of PD will be the date of the initial abnormal FDG-PET scan).  
➢ If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up corresponds to a pre-existing site of disease on CT 
that is not progressing on the basis of the anatomic images, this is not PD.  
 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 98 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
APPENDIX 2: EORTC QOL QUESTIONNAIRES 
 
As consulted on July 16th, 2015 at  
 
http://groups.eortc.be/qol/sites/default/files/img/specimen_lc13_english.pdf 
and 
http://groups.eortc.be/qol/sites/default/files/img/slider/specimen qlq-c30 english.pdf 
 
 
 
 
 
specimen_lc13_englis
h.pdf
specimen_qlq-c30_e
nglish.pdf

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 99 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
APPENDIX 3: ECOG 
 
ECOG Performance Status 
 
Developed by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Robert L. Comis, MD, Group Chair 
(57) 
Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET, Carbone PP. 
Toxicity 
and 
response 
criteria 
of 
the 
Eastern 
Cooperative 
Oncology 
Group. 
Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5(6):649-55.  
 
GRADE 
ECOG PERFORMANCE STATUS 
0 
Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction 
1 
Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work 
of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light house work, office work 
2 
Ambulatory and capable of all selfcare but unable to carry out any work activities; 
up and about more than 50% of waking hours 
3 
Capable of only limited selfcare; confined to bed or chair more than 50% of waking 
hours 
4 
Completely disabled; cannot carry on any selfcare; totally confined to bed or chair 
5 
Dead 
 
 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 100 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
APPENDIX 4: GUIDANCE ON CONTRACEPTION  
 
ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR PROTOCOLS WITH A TERATOGENIC DRUG OR 
WHEN THERE IS INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO DETERMINE 
TERATOGENICITY 
(CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING 3 OPTIONS)a 
 
OPTION 1: Any TWO of the following methods 
➢ Hormonal methods of contraception b, c, d 
➢ IUD c, d, e 
➢ Vasectomy d, f 
➢ Tubal Ligationd 
➢ A Barrier method (Female or Male Condom with spermicide, Cervical Cap with 
spermicide,Diaphragm with spermicide) 
 
OPTION 2: Male condom (with spermicide) and diaphragmg 
 
OPTION 3: Male condom (with spermicide) and cervical capg 
 
a The theoretical failure rate for any of the options listed is considerably less than 1% per year 
b Excludes progestin-only pills 
d A highly effective method of birth control with a failure rate less than 1% per year 
e IUDS used should have a failure rate less than 1% (highly effective method), such as Mirena 
and ParaGard 
f Must be at least 90 days from date of surgery with a semen analysis documenting azoospermia 
g These 2 barrier methods together are acceptable for a teratogenic drug 
 
UNACCEPTABLE METHODS OF CONTRACEPTION 
Abstinence (including periodic abstinence) 
No method 
Withdrawal 
Rhythm 
Vaginal Sponge 
Any barrier method without spermicide 
Spermicide 
Progestin only pills 
Concomitant use of female and male condom 
In countries where spermicide is not available or its use is not considered compatible with male 
condoms, use of a male condom without spermicide in conjunction with a hormonal method, 
IUD, or tubal ligation will be acceptable to fulfill this recommendation. Any barrier method 
when used alone (without spermicide) or the concomitant use of a female and male condom, is 
not considered a sufficient method of contraception, as each carries a failure rate of > 1%. 
Women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) receiving OSE2101 will be instructed to adhere to 
contraception for a period of 90 days after the last dose of investigational product. Men receiving 

OSE2101 
Protocol OSE2101C301 
Confidential 
Version n°6.0 
Page 101 of 101 
02 February 2022 
 
OSE2101 and who are sexually active with WOCBP will be instructed to adhere to contraception 
for a period of 90 days after the last dose of investigational product.  
 
For women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) randomized to receive docetaxel, they will be 
instructed to adhere to contraception for a period of 33 days after the last dose of investigational 
product. 
Men randomized to receive docetaxel must follow instructions for birth control as per the SmPC 
(6 months after discontinuation of treatment), or package insert. 
 
Women of childbearing potential should be advised to use effective contraceptive measures to 
prevent pregnancy during the treatment with pemetrexed