Innate Pharma SA

PAR:IPH

Earnings Call Transcript 2022-Q3

[Operator]

Hello, and thank you for standing by. My name is Regina, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Innate Pharma Publication of Revenue for Third Quarter 2022 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Henry Wheeler, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

[Henry Wheeler, executive]

Thank you. Good morning, good afternoon, and welcome, everyone. This morning, Innate issued a press release providing a business update for our Q3 '22 results. We look forward to highlighting the progress made during the quarter as well as addressing future goals and milestones. The press release and today's presentation are both available on the IR section of the website. On Slide 2, before we start, I'd like to remind you that we will make forward-looking statements regarding the financial outlook in addition to regulatory and product plan developments. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those forecasted.

On Slide 3, on today's call, you'll see we will be joined by Mondher Mahjoubi, our Chief Executive Officer, who will then hand over to Joyson Karakunnel, EVP and Chief Medical Officer; and then Yannis Morel, EVP of Business Development and Product Portfolio Strategy. We will also have our CFO, Frederic Lombard on the line for Q&A. Mondher, I'll now hand the call over to you.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Thank you, Henry. Good morning and good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining our call today. Please move to Slide 4, and let me start by reminding you our strategy. Our strategy centers around 3 key priorities where we look to drive value from our early R&D efforts to later-stage partnership where it makes sense to do so. Firstly, we look to create near-term value driven by our lead proprietary product candidate, lacutamab, which is in development for T-cell lymphoma, we readout in CTCL happening in the second half of this year and 2 trials in the larger indication of peripheral t-cell lymphoma underway.

Second, we continue to fuel our pipeline and create longer-term value by leveraging our antibody engineering capabilities to develop innovative molecules with a primary focus on our multi-specific NK cell engager proprietary platform called NK. Sanofi has the most advanced NK in the clinic and have selected another candidate, and we are nearing the clinic with the others, notably with our CD20-targeting tetra-specific ANKET and called APH6501. Last but not least, we are building a strong and sustainable foundation for our business, leveraging various partnerships across industry and academia. Here, our AstraZeneca partnership with monalizumab, which is continuing in lung cancer. And our focus remains to leverage the value of our products as much as possible.

We want to ensure that if we can gain valuable competencies via a partner agreement, we will consider that in our development plans for the product. This will further validate our science and offer capital that we can reinvest to advance our early portfolio. Before I hand over to Joyson, please move to Slide 5.

On Slide 5 is an overview of our pipeline, which shows how we continue to translate our size into a robust portfolio of proprietary and partnered assets. It also illustrates how we are executing against our strategy with our lead proprietary asset like lacutamab, supported by partnered and earlier stage product in particular, from our NK cell engager platform. We anticipate a number of potential clinical readouts and catalysts in the upcoming couple of years as our R&D engine looks to leverage our scientific know-how to create a sustainable business. I would like now to pass the call over to Joyson, who will review the progress made with our portfolio, starting with lacutamab, our most advanced proprietary asset. Joyson, over to you.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

Thank you, Mondher. On Slide 6, let me start with our first-in-class humanized monoclonal antibody that targets the immune receptor KIR3DL2. As you remember, KIR3DL2 is an inhibitory receptor found in approximately 65% of patients across all cutaneous T-cell lymphomas. In the TELLOMAK trial cohort Sézary syndrome patients could potentially be a pivotal cohort. We announced that we will present preliminary data from this cohort at the ASH Annual Congress in December. For mycosis fungoides, we have Cohorts 2 and 3, where we are testing the hypothesis of non-expressors and expressors of KIR3DL2 using the frozen companion diagnostic assay.

In September, we presented preliminary data from the mycosis fungoides cohort 2 at the EORTC Congress in Madrid. Slide 7. summarizes the preliminary Cohort 2 and 3 data in mycosis fungoides presented at EORTC in September. As a reminder, from the data presented last year as expected, our scientific hypothesis confirmed in cohort 2 high global response rates in comparison to the benchmark and the non-expressing cohort and low global response rate in the non-expressing cohort. At the EORTC Congress this year at the presentation in the KIR3DL2 expressing cohort, 2, we were encouraged to see that in these late-line patients with a median of 4 prior treatments, lacutamab demonstrated a 28.6% ORR and 6 responses.

We are particularly encouraged by the response in the skin, where we saw a 57.1% ORR and 12 responses. On Slide 8, we have the abstract published on the ASH Annual Congress 2022 website ahead of the Congress and publication of the data in December. The abstract detailed that in this heavily pre-treated post-mogamulizumab patient pool with a median prior line of therapy of 6 and 10.9 months of median follow-up. The ORR in the ITT population was 21.6%, with an ORR of 35.1% in the skin and 37.8% in the blood. A favorable safety profile as mentioned. We look forward to discussing the data in more detail after the presentation at the ASH Annual Congress.

On Slide 9, let me summarize the progress we are making with lacutamab. We are pursuing a fast-to-market strategy for lacutamab in the study of Sézary syndrome where lacutamab granted U.S fast Track designation and EU PRIME designation in 2020. We have expanded past Sézary syndrome to mycosis fungoides where we have seen encouraging preliminary data from our Phase II trial in both cohorts. For the Sézary mycosis fungoides, enrollment is on track with final data due in 2023. Finally, we are continuing to enroll into peripheral T-cell lymphoma in the monetary fee and combination trials in the relapsed setting.

On Slide 10, I would like to update you on monalizumab to remind you, monalizumab is an Anti-NKG2A, which acts upon the checkpoint pathway to potentiate NK cell activation that we have licensed to AstraZeneca for oncology. On this slide, you could see an overview of the late-stage development plan for monalizumab in lung cancer. Based on the AstraZeneca sponsor Phase II COS data, AstraZeneca commenced to PACIFIC 9, a Phase III trial evaluating the combination of either monalizumab or Ipilimumab plus durvalumab in the unresectable Stage III non-small cell lung cancer setting who have not progressed after concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

For the Phase II COAST study, the 3Rs evaluated the combination of durvalumab plus [indiscernible] estrogenic CD73. As published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology by AstraZeneca after a median follow-up of 11.5 months, the results of an interim analysis showed a hazard ratio of 0.42 for durvalumab plus monalizumab versus durvalumab alone. These results also showed an increase in the primary endpoint of confirmed ORR for durvalumab plus monalizumab, over devalue Revlon of 36% versus 18%, respectively. We look forward to further updates from this study from AstraZeneca. I will now hand over to Yannis to cover our NCAP platform.

[Yannis Morel, executive]

Thank you, Joyson. On Slide 11, I wanted to highlight our proprietary multi-specific NK engager platform that we call ANKET. ANKET standing for antibody-based NK cell engager therapeutics. ANKET is a versatile fee for purpose technology made of various building blocks that is creating an entirely new class of try and tetra-specific to induce synthetic immunity against cancer. This technology platform, which is leveraging our scientific expertise in the NK space will be an engine for our pipeline, creating value via multiple [indiscernible] addressing multiple tumor targets. The backbone of the ANKET platform is based on the unique engagement of the activating NK cell receptor, NKp46 and CD16 on the NK cells, which allows for optimal harnessing of the NK cell effector function, which can be further increased by addition of IF2 variant that induce their proliferation.

On Slide 12, I wanted to share with you why we are so excited for this platform and why there is a growing interest from the industry in the NK space. As you can see on the left part of the slide, on the [indiscernible] image published by the group of [indiscernible] pioneer work using adoptive transfer of NK cells has provided proof of concept that NK cells can induce a strong antitumor response. That's exactly what we are aiming to replicate with our ANKET molecules, which are designed to engage efficiently the NK cells of the patient within the tumor.

In the middle panel, you can see the detailed mechanism of action of the tetra-specific ANKET molecule. On one hand, the engagement of the activating NK cell receptor, NKp46 and 16 NK cells trigger and antigen-dependent killing of the tumor as well as production of key cytokines for the antitumor immune response. On the other hand, the addition of IL-2 variants, which targets the IL2 receptor [indiscernible] complex on NK-cells in use NK cell proliferation within the tumor microenvironment, increasing therefore, the number of antitumor effector sales. Overall, this platform demonstrates compelling preclinical antitumor efficacy as evidenced by the strong efficacy that you can see on the game graph.

Lastly, on the right, you can see our growing pipeline of once molecule with Sanofi having licensed 2 molecules, which I will cover in the next slide. Our most advanced proprietary inked the tetra-specific molecule targeting CD20 and called IPH-6501, for which we plan to find an IND next year. We also have other clinical targets for which we hope to provide some updates on due course. On Slide 13, you can see our most advanced ANKET program is a CD123 targeted tri-specific molecule called IPI-6101 or SAR579 that we have generated in collaboration with Sanofi. It is now licensed to them and currently in Phase I trial.

We also announced over the summer that Sanofi has selected for further development, a second drug candidate. It is IPH5401 or SAR-514, which is a BCMA-targeted tetra-specific ANKET molecule, which is using Sanofi's CROSSODILE molecular format, which shows the versatility of our platform. We have announced EUR 30 million in milestone to date from this partnership. On Slide 14, we are pleased to have a few presentations at ASH highlighting the development for lacutamab as well as several updates for the ANKET platform. This includes the 2 programs with our partner, Sanofi, and an oral presentation from our CFO, Professor Eric Vivier, who will present the ANKET platform, including our latest update published last month in [indiscernible] medicine. We will have also update at the ESMO-IO conference in December for our anti-CD39 program called IPH5201. I will now turn to Mondher for a summary of the catalyst and flows.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Thank you, Yannis. Please move to Slide 15. As you can see, we are working diligently to execute across all our strategic pillars, and we believe that we are laying the foundation to drive near and long-term value. Looking at our clinical program, we expect to achieve a number of milestones over the next 2 years. First, as you heard from Joyson, our Phase II TELLOMAK study for lacutamab continues to progress. We have reported preliminary data this year with final data due next year. In addition, our [indiscernible] T-cell lymphoma program, initial data are expected next year. For monalizumab, the lung cancer trials are underway, and we continue to advance the adulting pathway agents in the clinic, where we look forward to sharing our Phase II plant in due course.

In parallel, we continue to develop our ANKET technology platform, including with our partner, Sanofi, and we are very encouraged by the preclinical results from our next-generation NK cell engagers. We believe that this represents a natural evolution of our platform with data presented at conferences at the end of the year. Finally, we look forward to further date on our proprietary anti EPA-6501, as you've heard, with the IND on track to be filed next year. Let's now move to the conclusion slide. Lastly, on Slide 16, as you can tell, we continue our exciting journey actually. We look to build our business to create value for patients and stakeholders. And in summary, we have positioned Innate Pharma for the future with our strategy and made meaningful progress throughout the year-to-date across all 3 strategic pillars.

We have carefully managed our resources so we can continue to invest in progress in our pipeline. And I am very pleased that we continue to have a strong cash position with a runway into the second half of 2024 with $151 million as of September 30, 2022. Collectively, we are driving value across our business and ultimately advancing our goal to deliver innovative medicines to patients. We look forward to keeping you updated on our progress. That concludes our prepared remarks. We will now open the call to questions.

[Operator]

[Operator Instructions] Our first question will come from the line of Yigal Nochomovitz with Citigroup.

[Yigal Nochomovitz, analyst]

One, just had 2. One on TELLOMAK and then one on the tetra-specific ANKET. So on TELLOMAK, I was just interested in the Cohort 3, which I know is the one with the non-expressers, you still had some good responses albeit not all of them characterized as TR. I was just curious, is that because those patients are still expressing some low level of the target KIR3DL2 or is there another reason? And then on the tetra-specific ANKET obviously, CD20 is a very well-known target. So I'm assuming the idea there is to pick something that's very well validated so that you can show what tetra-specific platform can do above and beyond the known target as opposed to introducing a totally new variable in addition to the tetra-specific can't get. So if you could just elaborate on your thinking there.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Actually, we'll start with the second one, and I'm going to hand over to Yannis to set the context actually of the identification and selection of this target. And then Joyson will address your question about the level of activity we have seen with cohort 3. You're absolutely correct. It's not new, it's not 0. We have some activity and we have some hypothesis to explain actually that level of activity. But let's start with the ANKET platform and the CD20 first.

[Yannis Morel, executive]

I think you're right. We selected CD20 in order to meet the number of variables. With this new tetra-specific molecule, we are really progressing to the clinic a brand-new mechanism of action relying on the activation [indiscernible] as well as the cytokine in the same molecule. So as we are ringing this for the first time into the clinic, we decided to go after a very well validated target and CD20 is obviously one of these, and which is also the advantage when you look at the expression as opposed to other potential validated targets to be quite stable across the different line of treatment, meaning that if you have like rituximab relapsed patients, a lot of them are still expressing the target, which makes really from our perspective, the ideal candidate for this first proprietary program in the clinic, knowing that we have also others at the preclinical stage with other targets.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

And without of course, add in too much, as you have seen in data we have already presented. We believe that we have really differentiated asset based at least on the safety profile generated so far, but also on the preclinical antitumor activity that we have published in various tumor model. May I ask, Joyson, maybe to address your question on why we still have responses in cohort 3 despite the fact that the KIR3DL2 level of expression is below the 1% short.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

So just as a reminder, the Cohort 3 is [indiscernible] in Cohort 2 is the expressing mycosis fungoides as you mentioned. Now there different factors. One is, of course, the heterogeneity of tumors. Number 2 is the assay sort of assay conditions. So because of those 2, we do see some low levels of activity even in the nonexpressers. Now we're further exploring this also to both make our assay more precise by looking at an all-commerce cohort. So keep in mind that TELLOMAK study does have an all-commerce cohort also which we'll be looking at an FFPE assay, we're keeping in mind that Cohort 2 and Cohort 3 were a frozen-based assay. So these are sort of the reasons why we believe that you're seeing some low level activity.

[Operator]

Your next question will come from the line of Daina Graybosch with SVB Securities.

[Daina Graybosch, analyst]

2 for me on TELLOMAK and lacutamab. I wonder if you can talk about what you think are regulatory expectations for accelerated approval. Whether in these diseases, they focus on the global response rate or whether the skin or blood response rates are used in their regulatory review? And then the second question is, as we've all been hearing a lot more about Project Optimus. I wonder if you could remind us if you've done any randomized dose optimization between 2 doses of lacutamab and if not, how you plan to do that to meet the loose Project Optimus. I don't want say guidelines, but almost guidelines from FDA.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Thank you, Daina 2 very important questions. I think Joyson is probably the right person to address. First of all, our thinking about the accelerated approval of lacutamab in Sézary on demand, of course, the evolution of the regulatory environment in the U.S. Joyson.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

So in regards to the regulatory sort of benchmark or what the regulators may be looking for, we're in ongoing discussions with them. So at least at this point in time, I want to say what they're considering for accelerated approval. Of course, as we know this benchmark is this for accelerated approval has become a bit tougher in the last few months or so just because of the scrutiny that's been put on the accelerated approval program at the FDA. I think number 2 is in regards to Project Optimus. Interestingly, Project Optimus is just dose justification. And for us, dose justification, we have looked at justification and continue to ensure that going forward, are the dose is correctly justified. So I think we've been doing this for drug development for years on end. And I think for lacutamab, it has been done accordingly. I don't believe that the FDA has guided that you must do a randomized trial, but instead, they do say to explore several different doses at different levels. And it's not necessarily based on randomization with the statistical significance.

[Daina Graybosch, analyst]

Can you just remind us because it happened longer ago, how many doses you explored and sort of how many patients at various doses.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

So we did explore several different doses. We've explored both into - Hello. So we did explore several different doses, both intrapatient dosing as well as patients who received a single dose throughout. So we do have several different doses with adequate number of patients and doses, at least that we were able to look at some of the PK and PD.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Daina, if you want to follow up and maybe send you the Phase I data that was published, as you know, in New England a couple of years ago where we have the details on the escalation.

[Operator]

Your next question will come from the line of Swayampakula Ramakanth with HCW.

[Swayampakula Ramakanth, analyst]

A couple of quick questions. On the TELLOMAK trial, you know that you're on to present some initial data on the syndrome at ASH. But what's the expectation for the final results of the TELLOMAK trial itself? And also, for the same drug, can you highlight a little bit about your work [indiscernible]? That would be helpful.

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

Good afternoon, thank you for the question. Let me repeat them just to make sure we got them right. So first one is about the data to be presented at ASH and in particular, what expectation we have with regard to the level of activity for lacutamab in Sézary syndrome, in other words, sort of targeted product profile? And the second question is an update on the PTCL and once again, actually Joyson is the right person to address both questions. Joyson, back to you.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

I didn't hear the PTC question, but let me go ahead and address the Sézary syndrome question first. So in Sézary syndrome, just from the abstract that was published for us, we did have a -- just as a reminder, this was a very heavily pre-treated population who are personal lacutamab with a median number of 6 lines of therapy. And with that, we had seen a global confirmed overall response rate of 21.6%. So we were very encouraged by that. And we do expect that we would continue to see encouraging data even in the final data set itself.

[Yannis Morel, executive]

So just to maybe make sure I got to try it. RK you were asking for an update on the PTCL. And as you know, we have 2 trials in peripheral T-cell lymphoma, a company around Phase Ib trial, assessing the level of activity and the safety of lacutamab in monotherapy. And we have a [indiscernible] European cooperative group well known in him that is testing the combination of lacutamab with chemotherapy, in particular with the combination of [indiscernible]. And we said that at the previous call that an interim or preliminary data will be presented in 2022, so next year.

[Operator]

No further phone questions at this time.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

So we have a question here from Olga Smolentseva with Bryan Garnier. 3 parts to the question. Firstly, could you give us any flavor on what we should expect from the Phase I data for IPH5201 at ESMO IO? And do you see any read across for IPH5201 from the recent pause of an anti-CD39 program by Surface Oncology.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

I think it's fair to say that we will wait for the presentation at ESMO for further details. As you know, we are starting a Phase II trial in non-small cell lung cancer and hope to be able to provide further details on this program very soon. We are unable to comment on other companies and the resource allocation and reprioritization. So we'll stick to our program and the data that will be presented at the end of the year.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

Second question from Olga. How do you see IK6501 fits into the highly competitive landscape of CD20 targeting bispecifics?

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

Another important question. I think Yigal, I believe, asked a question along the same line. We are fully aware of course, competitive landscape here. But as Yannis said , we will further evaluate this landscape as we enter IND filing next year, and we'll provide an update on the exact indication that we are pursuing. But from what we have seen in the clinical data so far, there is really an opportunity here to differentiate APS-65, both on safety, but on improved efficacy. And I must also say that this is, again, the first proprietary tetra-specific ANKET molecule entered into the clinic, and the selection of a validated target was a way to mitigate the risk of going after a completely novel platform, which is the tetra-specific. So that was our approach to really mitigate the risk of the novel platform by choosing a well-established and validated target.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

And last question from Olga. Should we expect the final data for lacutamab in Sézary syndrome to include a similar highly pre-treated patient population as per the interim update at ASH.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

Yes. Again, I think I may be stating the obvious, but you know that patients in this trial needed to have at least 2 lines of prior therapy and must be mogamulizumab. As you may remember, mogamulizumab was still in the launching phase and some of the region when we started the trial, patients ended up being very late line and no reason to think that the rest of the trial would be any different. So we continue to enroll according to our inclusion/exclusion criteria, i.e. Stage 4 and Stage 4b relapsed/refractory more -- 2 or more pain of systemic therapy, including mogamulizumab. Those are the main selection criteria. And despite having a median of 6 lines of prior systemic therapy, we are encouraged by the top line up efficacy, and we look forward to discussing these data further at ASH presentation. Final data, as I said earlier, are due in 2023 for both our microdetail and Sézary syndrome cohort.

[Operator]

[Operator Instructions]

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

We have a couple of more questions submitted online. So Jingming Chen at Evercore. A similar question to before. Do you plan to file for approval in SSFs? Or wait to do a trial studying MF and SS combined? What are the main matrix considerations for the decision?

[Mondher Mahjoubi, executive]

I'm going to hand over back to Joyson to recap our strategy in terms of development and registration for lacutamab in Sézary MF. Joyson?

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

So I think to answer your question, do we plan to file for approval in SS first or wait to do trial studying MFSS combined. I think number one is that this is going to depend a lot on the data. So we are keeping all our options open. That includes the potential to file for SSFs, that also includes the potential to file for both. All during that time, of course, considering even partners in the mix. So just kind of making sure all our options are open. And what are the main metrics and considerations for this decision. Number one is the data itself will drive the decision. So the strength of the data will drive the decision. Number 2 is sort of the regulatory landscape as it starts to evolve, we'll have a major influence on how we look at this. And then third is just our ability to have a look for a partner.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

Thank you, Joyson. I have some further questions submitted online. I'm Eric Liberia at Stifel. Question one, lacutamab has delivered consecutively 2 highly confirming sets of data in MF and SF. Now many times in the past to explain the ability of lacutamab to find a good partner would be heavily dependent on the interim data in PTCL. This is, however, quite speculative at this stage. Therefore, how should we think of both the value and the future of the compound of PTCL does not deliver on promises. In other words, how much dependent upon PTCL is the future of lacutamab overall?

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

I would say, first of all, we follow the science, and of course, we will define what is the right thing to do based on the data plans. You are well aware of course the business case in Sézary and also the potential in MF and clearly, having a PTCL indication, we completely changed the perspective of this drug moving from maybe just a few hundred million to blockbuster PTCL is there. I think at this point in time, we need to validate the signal through the TELLOMAK and the preliminary data we have so far in the abstract that is submitted to ASH is going into the right direction.

I think we will wait for the PTCL data to emerge at least the preliminary data next year to assess the various scenario. But keep in mind that we have 2 shots, if I may say, at the call. We have a monotherapy trial, which is maybe a high risk, but nevertheless, I think an opportunity to identify single-agent activity in a heavily pre-treated and difficult-to-treat patient population. And we have also the combination trial with the Liza Group, which, of course, another way to explore the potential of lacutamab in this disease. And of course, these are the only options that we are thinking of. There are many other opportunities in second line, but also in frontline that are being explored by the team. But I think it's important that we generate the first set of data to better understand actually how to position them to deliver value for this asset.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

Second question from Eric. In TELLOMAK, patients are required to be pre-treated with Moga. You collected very advanced patients on average with 6 previous lines of treatment. As time progresses, is it fair to say that Moga is now used earlier and therefore, that you would treat less advanced patients, if approved.

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

Again, I think it's a number question. And similar to what I said earlier, it's difficult to speculate on the, I'd say, how heavily pre-treated are the patients that will be recruited in the next couple of months. But as I said, Moga was still in the launching phase. And even after launch, you know that Moga did not get reimbursed everywhere. So we had clearly, in some region, wait when the drug was available. And we ended up, of course, recruiting with a very late line of therapy. And we didn't see a major change in the, I would say, the access to Mogamulizumab in some part of the world, at least in Europe.

So there is no reason to think that the rest of the trial would be any different. And we may end up with, yes, heavily pre-treated and a median of 6 lines of therapy. I think what is important is, A, validate that we have an activity and a meaningful activity in patients who have been exposed to Mogamulizumab, that's, I think, number one. And number 2, of course, this is an area of unmet medical need because by design in the post mogas setting, there is no established on the can of course, the data we generate with TELLOMAK would be of importance. And of course, we'll be discussing with the health authority when we have them.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

Last question from Eric. Considering your previous comments on stability of the CD20 targets. Would it be fair to expect your drug to go first in a very advanced line of treatment once existing CD20 antibodies have failed?

[Joyson Karakunnel, executive]

Indeed, like I mentioned, the CD20 target antigen is pretty stable across the different lines of treatment, including the monoclonal antibodies, but also other now T-cell engagers. You know that they are also in this type of NHL, some CAR-T but they are rather targeting CD19. So I think that what you're saying is a pretty good fair assumption that we can first start with the advanced line of treatment because we are mobilizing a very different mechanism of action as the current approved treatment like monoclonal antibodies or CAR-T but also the one that are in the Phase III and late-stage development ideas.

[Frederic Lombard, executive]

I think we have no more questions online. So like maybe as a concluding remarks. I remind you that you have seen we continue to execute against our strategic priority. We have a strong financial position. We are well funded into the second half of 2024. As we reported also readouts from our proprietary and partnered portfolio program. These readouts set the stage for delivering both near and long-term value while also highlighting the strength and depth of our core R&D efforts. And finally, looking ahead, we will continue to [indiscernible] program, move our early-stage R&D activity in the clinic with our next generation NCD platform. While for Mogamulizumab, we look forward to further clinical development in early lung cancer with our static underway, which further reinforced, of course, our strategy of building a sustainable business with a robust R&D engine. With that said, I thank you very much. Wish you a wonderful day. Thank you.

[Operator]

Ladies and gentlemen, that will conclude today's meeting. We thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.