This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
spk01: Good morning, everyone. I am Joy Bessinger, Head of Investor Relations and Corporate Strategy for IMV. And I'm pleased to welcome you all to our first quarter 2022 clinical and operational update conference call. I am joined today by Andrew Fowler, CEO, Dr. Jeremy Graf, our CSO, and Brittany Davidson, our head of... During this call, we will discuss our business outlook and make forward-looking statements. And today are pursuant to and within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of applicable securities laws. These comments are based on current expectations and management regarding future events and operating performance and should not be seen as guarantees of future performance or results. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. These risks are discussed in our continuous disclosure documents filed in compliance with applicable securities laws in Canada and the United States. The press release, the annual information form, the MD&A, and the financial statements have all been posted on our website at imv-inc.com. If you wish to receive a copy of these documents, please do not hesitate to contact us. Please note that they will be taking questions from sell-side analysts only today. I will now turn the call over to Andrew to provide an overview of our recent highlights and progress. Andrew?
spk04: Thank you, Joy, and good morning, everyone, and welcome to IMV's Quarter 1 Operational Update. I'll begin today's call with an overview of our recent accomplishments, highlighted by the exciting data in metastatic bladder cancer we recently presented at AACR. Jeremy will dig a little deeper into both the clinical and translational data we have recently presented, and Brittany will then provide an overview of our financial results for the first quarter ended March 31st, 2022. Our priorities for 2022 are clear and definite. We're in an environment of difficult external challenges and we remain laser focused on our strategic goals. They are to accelerate Maverick FMS towards registration, both in the DLBCL and ovarian cancer through meaningful clinical development and to enhance our platform through business development to validate the versatility and functionality of our DPX platform. In the last quarter, we expanded our clinical confirmation of benefit for maverick peppermint S in metastatic bladder cancer. This, on top of encouraging data in DLBCL and ovarian cancer, confirms the broad therapeutic opportunity for MVPS. What's more, the balance we have continuously demonstrated between efficacy and tolerability in heavily pretreated patient populations in the first quarter. We dosed our first patients in the DLBCL Vitalize trial. To recap, this is an open-label, global, multi-centered Phase IIb trial designed to confirm the significant benefits shown in the Spiral trial. We also dosed our first patients in the Phase I breast cancer study, as well as the Phase I non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer study, using maverick, epimenes, and DPX cement. clinical trials. We are activating sites for the Phase 2b Avalon trial in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and expect to dose our first patient by mid-year. The goal of this trial is to replicate the strong results we noted in the DECI trial. In parallel to these clinical efforts, we are also actively advancing our business development activities in order to leverage our DPX plug-and-play model to build a deep pipeline of immune educating therapies. On April 22nd, we announced that Michael Bailey has been appointed chairman of the board of directors, chairman of the board. Michael has over 30 years of pharmaceutical industry experience, which includes a number of successful oncology launches and is currently the CEO of Aveo Oncology. His deep expertise in the commercial strategy and business development positioned him well to add further value to our organization. Michael has been serving on IMV's board of directors since 2020, and we are pleased that he's accepted this new leadership role. I'll now pass the mic over to Jeremy, who will walk through our clinical summary in more detail and the exciting information that supports the IMV pipeline. Jeremy. Thank you, Andrew.
spk03: Let's go ahead to the next slide, please. We were able to highlight the new research and the new information on the advancement of aesthetic bladder cancer setting at this year's annual meeting for the American Association for Cancer Research. The first presentation was a poster presentation detailing the involvement of natural killer cells in our therapeutic mechanism of action. The second presentation was a podium presentation wherein we were able to detail the clinical experience from our basket trial Next slide, please. So knowing that natural killer cells are involved in our therapeutic mechanism of action helps to deepen and broaden our understanding from abracadabra therapeutic modality. Ultimately, what we're able to show is that. in the absence of B and T cells in preclinical models, we were still able to trigger anti-tumor efficacy, and that was related to natural killer cell function. From translational research, we were also able to show that natural killer cells are incited by MADROPEP-MUTAS in clinical tissues. Collectively, this allows us to appreciate a much richer mechanism of action. Natural killer cells, as you may know, kill tumor cells in a very different way than T cells, and so we're now able to bring to bear multiple modalities of killing Next slide, please. We were also able to show the data from the bladder cancer trial. You'll recall that this was a basket trial. While we saw efficacy across many indications in the basket trial, the efficacy and the clinical benefit that was evident in the bladder cancer setting was the most striking. As we have seen routinely, when we combine Mabropepamute S with low-dose intermittent cyclophosphamide and Pembrolizumab, the treatment was very well tolerated. As has been typical for our clinical experience, the most common adverse reactions were grade one and two injection site reactions. In this trial, there were no severe adverse events attributed to Mavropepamideps. We ultimately enrolled 17 patients on this trial. Originally, the trial was designed to seek two or more responders of the first 17 patients and then to graduate to a second stage of the trial. We actually saw five responses, two complete responses Importantly, lesions that were responsive in this study were not only lymph node metastases, but liver metastases as well. As we broke down the data, we were ultimately able to realize a very important aspect of this entire study. Our complete responders and one of our partial responders actually had already progressed through immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, a very important aspect. And as we've seen multiple times across our clinical experience, clinical benefit was most evident in patients who showed survival in specific T-cells. This helps affirm that the benefit derived from epinephrine-based therapy is, in fact, related to our mechanism of action. On the right-hand side of this slide, you see a waterfall plot. In this plot, we're showing the patients who reached at least one scan, so the evaluable had an N of 13. What you can see is the baseline tumor size at start, zero. You can see in the dotted line that when we reduce tumor size by more than 30%, that's when we call response by resistance criteria. And you can see here very clearly that we had five responders in addition, three additional stable disease patients. Let's go to the next slide. I want to take you through a few vignettes for individual patient experience. In this first example, the patient came to us with extensive metastatic disease. The patient had not received prior therapy. Please go back one slide. Go forward one slide, please. Thank you. The patient had not received prior therapy for metastatic disease. The patient came to us with four target lesions designated, two lymph node leak. Please go back one slide. Okay, the patient had two liver lesions and two lymph node lesions. At first scan, the patient showed us responsiveness with a target reduction of more than 60% from baseline. We must have some sort of automatic timing on this slide. Effectively, that first patient showed us that we can shrink liver lesions and that we can have a durable response. The patient survived out beyond day 910. Let's go ahead to the next slide. The second example, We were able to see lymph node-based disease, and at first scan, this patient showed us a very profound response, a complete response, in fact. Ultimately, the patient was able to stay on therapy for about 400 days, Okay, and the last example here is a very profound example. This patient was a complete responder. We saw that this patient showed response immediately at first scan. This patient continues to show response out now well beyond 600 days. Let's go to the next slide, please. Importantly, the patient, this case study five patient, showed us profound disease reduction This patient continues on therapy. The example of this patient is particularly important because the patient received only one single dose of pembrolizumab and only two courses of CPA. So effectively, for the bulk of the 600 days this patient has been on trial, we have complete response driven by Mabropep MUDAS itself. So a very interesting case for us. Let's go ahead and forward to the final slide of this particular section. The clinical translational summary. It's been a very important quarter for us. And as you might recall, we are pushing neurocapamute forward in four different cancer indications. Our lead indication is the relapsed refractory DLBCL indication, the trial that we've called Vitalize. We've enrolled our first patients in this study. We continue to enroll more patients. To accelerate enrollment further, we are opening new countries and activating additional sites. We expect to be able to talk about first results from this study in Q3 of this year. Our second phase two B study is in the advanced metastatic ovarian cancer space in the platinum resistant patient population. This study is called Avalon. You might recall that we had FDA approval for this protocol in January. We are in the midst of activating sites right now. We are on track to activate the first sites in Q3 and to enroll the first patient in Q3. In bladder cancer, we have two different opportunities. I showed you the data from wherein we had complete and partial responses in patients who had previously failed checkpoint inhibitor therapy. The responses were durable, and as I showed you in the very last example, the responses include patients who have only received a single dose of the placement. We also have an earlier stage bladder cancer study wherein we are comparing our first product, Mabropepamute S, to our second clinical product, DPX Cermage. So Mabropepamute S is now Enrolling this particular cohort is enrolling in this non-muscle invasive bladder cancer setting. Once that cohort is enrolled, we begin to enroll the cohort with the second product. The second product, as you may recall, involves a new product that targets both the surviving tumor antigen as well as the MAJ9 tumor antigen. And so in this context, and with the preclinical data we have at hand, we expect to be able to incite an immune response to two different cancer antigens simultaneously. The beauty of this study, because it is in a non-muscle invasive bladder cancer setting, is that we will get tissue prior to treatment and we will get tissue at surgical resection. This allows us to compare these tumor biopsies and really dig deeply into what it is that Magropep and MUDAS is doing at the level of the pathology of the slide. The last study is similar. This is a breast cancer neoadjuvant study. This is in hormone receptor positive HER2 negative patients where we are combining Mabropepamute with the aromatase inhibitor Letrozole. It has been noted by our collaborators at Providence that resistance to aromatase inhibitors often involves upregulation of survival. And so it only stands to reason then that if we can attack the survival-expressing tumor cells at the same time that we're adding Letrozole, we might have a profound therapeutic benefit. This study, much like the non-muscle invasive bladder cancer study, will allow us to get tissue prior to treatment and tissue at surgical resection so that we have paired tumor biopsies to evaluate and dig more deeply into our mechanism of action. We are targeting presentation of the first results from this study at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium this coming December. And lastly, we continue to deepen our understanding of Medropepamudas and DPX platform products To show that, in fact, we're enlisting not only the killing function of T cells, but also the killing functions of natural killer cells. Very important because these two immune cell subtypes kill tumor cells in very different ways. And we think this is a very important and powerful aspect of this novel immunotherapy. Now I'll hand it back to Brittany.
spk00: Thank you, Jeremy, and good morning, everyone. As reported, during the first three months of 2022, we incurred a net loss and comprehensive loss of 10.5 million or 13 cents per share, which compares to a net loss of 7 million or 10 cents per share for the same quarter ended March 31st, 2021. The loss increase is mainly driven by an increase in R&D costs as we advance MVPS towards registration trials. The increase in R&D expenses of $1.9 million can be further explained by startup costs for the Vitalize Phase 2B trial in DLBCL as we continue to activate clinical sites across North America and abroad, as well as related manufacturing activities for MAP-Repeptimate S and DPX-DermAge. This increase was partly offset by a decrease in cost for the ongoing basket trial following completion of enrollment in 2021. The rise in G&A expenses in 2021 is mainly driven by an increase in headcount and executive leadership changes, as well as loan interest associated with our non-dilutive debt facility with Horizon Technology Finance Corporation. As of March 31st, 2022, the company had cash and cash equivalents of $28.7 million, and cash earned for the quarter was in line with our internal forecasts. Based on our current projections, which includes the remaining $10 million available under the debt facility, we continue to expect that our cash position will be sufficient to plan operations through our near-term milestones and into the second quarter of 2023. We also have $47.5 million remaining under our aftermarket facility and $10.7 million warrants expiring in 2026 that could generate another $22.5 million. We also continue to evaluate additional sources of funding to thoughtfully extend our running. Thank you for your attention. And I'll now turn the call back over to Andrew for his closing comments.
spk04: Thank you, Brittany. We have a number of catalysts in 2022 and early 2023, which will further solidify our path for MVPS registration, as well as create pathways for future growth and partnerships. We plan to provide an early clinical update from our first group of patients in the open-label vitalized trial of MVPS in relapsed refractory DLBCL in the third quarter. We are actively working to open additional sites and expedite patient recruitment. Our early data look is on track. We are planning additional meetings with our KOLs to discuss the next steps the bladder cancer patients, and planning the design of a potential trial. We'll provide updates on our progress as we go. Mid-year, we are planning to initiate our Phase 2b Avalon trial of Mavripep-Maness MVPS in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. We expect to have some incremental data from the investigator-initiated non-metastatic, HR-positive HER2-negative breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. We also anticipate preliminary data from our non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer study using our dual-targeted immunotherapy, DPX-SumAge, and our lead asset, Mavripepma-S. We are focused on executing the value-creating inflection points in the next year as we continue to meet our catalysts, both clinical and strategic, around our lead compound and DPX platform. We believe that IMV is in the best position it has ever been from a clinical, foundational science and biotech-specific experience perspective. Thank you for joining us today. Operator Gigi will now take questions.
spk09: As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to press star one on your telephone. To withdraw your question, press the pound key. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes in the line of Joe Pangenis from HC Wainwright. Your line is now open.
spk05: Hi, everybody. Good morning, and thanks for taking the question. So a couple things, please. First, with regard to the path forward for bladder, You're going to have obviously an advisory board regarding trial designs. Is it your wish to go down both pathways for the post-CKI and the early stage? At the same time, I should say.
spk04: Thanks, Joe, for the question. So the short answer is that it's open for discussion. One of the reasons we're actually excited about the multiple sets of data we collect in bladder cancer is we will, through the non-muscle invasive space, have some clarity as to how our product works in the early setting, as well as the late setting through the data we presented at AACR. With respect to the strategy, it is still being discussed with full leadership, but I might have Jeremy talk a little bit more detail as to the way in which we plan to evolve our bladder cancer strategy.
spk03: I think that's right, Andrew. I think what we're hoping to do through multiple discussions with our KOLs is crystallize whether or not we want to focus on the checkpoint inhibitor for breast population or whether we want to be more broad. There are really multiple opportunities, as you know, across the treatment landscape for bladder cancer patients, both opportunities in early disease as well as opportunities in the advanced metastatic setting, where we can combine with checkpoint inhibitors, either as naive patients or we can combine after after checkpoint inhibitor treatment. So both are still on the table. It's a great question. It's what we hope to resolve here within the next month or so as we continue to have these KOL meetings. And Joe, you had multiple questions. Was there another question?
spk05: Please. So with the current environment, it's unfortunate that I still have to ask this question, but I guess, you know, you have such a broad program and upcoming studies and, you know, your current manufacturing initiatives to be able to address those studies, I guess, How are you taking into consideration the overall supply chain constraints?
spk04: With regards to supply chain constraints, Joe, are you talking with respect to availability of product or are you talking about something else with supply chain?
spk05: Manufacturing at your facilities and essentially manufacturing to start.
spk04: Appreciate the question. So we have in this last 12 months significantly evolved our manufacturing capability because of the nature of Maverick Peppermint, the product. We actually have very good supply on hand with terrific longevity with respect to the amount of product we would need for clinic. I will say that Product supply and manufacturing supply is not actually a challenge for this organization based on the amount of product we have on hand and the amount of shelf life that that product has. Now, that is not to say that we aren't continuing to evolve our processes with respect to the way in which we make and the way in which we optimize our product for commercial supply. But we're in a very fortunate position because of the work we've done on developing our formulation expertise that we do not believe this is a critical issue for our business at this time.
spk05: Just a logistical question regarding the upcoming breast cancer data in December. So is that going to be just early safety and efficacy data, or we'll be able to see any of the early translational data as well? Because it's an exciting argument that you put forth there, just knowing that aromatase inhibitor resistance increases survival and expression, as you mentioned.
spk03: Thanks for that question, Jeremy. That one I'll pass right to Jeremy. Yeah, our expectation is that we'll be showing real data, not just safety. And what I mean by real data is we'll be able to understand the pathologic response of the tumor. It's a pathologic response rate in obviously a small patient population, but also to interrogate what type of immune cells and what type of activation status they have on treatment versus prior to treatment. That'll be very helpful for us. That's our intent as we submit That's what we're gunning for.
spk09: Thank you. Our next question comes in the line of Nick Abbott from Wells Fargo. Your line is now open.
spk08: Oh, good morning. Thanks for taking our questions. Jeremy, just maybe going back to the discussions on bladder cancer with KOLs. When do you expect to be in a position to be able to discuss the data with FDA and No, this is now a question from my ignorance. I apologize. Can you suggest a trial that has a PD-1 inhibitor without actually naming what that is, or do you need to specify a PD-1 inhibitor in order to engage FDA meaningfully? And then I have a follow-up.
spk03: I think what we really want to do is have already locked up what checkpoint inhibitor we would like to use in a follow-on trial. That's the best. the FDA so that they can react to something concrete. There are many different opportunities, as you know, in bladder cancer, and there are many different checkpoint inhibitors already used. Atezolizumab, Opdivo, Pembrolizumab, all of these are used in different facets of the bladder cancer treatment landscape. So we're looking at and evaluating what our best opportunities would be now, but we definitely want to crystallize which checkpoint inhibitor we're using as we finalize the protocol and push it to the FDA.
spk08: Thanks, Jeremy. That kind of serves up my next question, you know, which is there is no kind of milestone, as far as I can tell, at least for an MVPS partnership, whether it's broad for the product or more indication-specific. So maybe, you know, given the highly encouraging bladder data, has this changed the tenor of discussions? Do you think you need an additional data point, such as early data from Vitalize? to secure a deal, and are you proposing what your ideal deal structure is to strategics, or are you kind of open to suggestions?
spk04: Thanks, Nick, and I'll take it, Sandra. The short answer for the question is yes. Where we see the value of Maverick Peppermint, the lead product, is with sort of broad utility and using, as you say, the encouraging bladder cancer data, it gives us a window to do more of a sequenced collaboration. I would expect that the way we will develop bladder cancer if we move forward with a checkpoint combination would be very intently with a strategic partner. in such a way that we would start to develop a relationship, beyond the relationship we obviously already have with Merck, that gives us some flexibility to stay open-minded with that question. I think the way we've sequenced our data this year, and we're really fortunate, and I'd love to say that it was by good planning rather than providence, but in a year gives us multiple opportunities to elicit these types of strategic conversations. We also need to be mindful that as we stand right now, the IMV valuation does not really give us flexibility to do a licensing for the lead product. And so that's why the business development focused on the platform is so instrumental to how we need to build our organization through the next six to 12 months. build out as a strategic collaboration, but we need to see sort of the fulminants of the data to motivate the conversations rather than doing any of that prematurely and perhaps leaving value on the table.
spk08: I understand. Last question is really just on financing. I just want to make sure that I really understand what is included and what is assumed. So, you know, there's $10 million for a 2Q clinical milestone and which are very confident of getting. So we're spending around $10 million a quarter, so including that milestone that's less than $40 million, but that gets us somehow into 2Q23. So I'm just trying to understand, you know, the runway and, you know, presumably this does not include starting that bladder trial, which would require the strategic...
spk00: Sure. So we do expect cash burn levels to remain consistent with Q1, but there's a potential for a decrease in the back half of the year due to the timing of manufacturing activities and reduction in costs related to our basket trial. And currently, the latter trial is not included in the forecasted runway.
spk04: is we're very motivated to move forward with a program in bladder cancer alongside the DLBCL and the ovarian studies. The reality is... runway we need to preserve in the current environment. And so our enthusiasm for a bladder program is probably equally motivated by strategic collaborations that involve financing rather than doing it all on our own. And so one of the challenges, and it's an enormously frustrating challenge that I'm sure you can appreciate, is we've got really encouraging data that we're getting great advice from our thought leaders on moving forward quickly. but we're in a position where we have to be a bit thoughtful with our runway, and so we're being careful and prudent in how we invest in our clinical strategy.
spk08: I just want to make sure I really understand this. So you get $27 million working capital now, extra $10 million, that gives you $37 million. That's going to last through over four quarters.
spk04: The assumption on cash burn is that we have cash by normal operations into the second quarter of next year, and then with some thoughtfulness about how we present that cash through working capital, we probably hope to stretch that deeper into that quarter, but that is the advice we're giving, and that's consistent with the way we've been burning cash through this year and even through the back end of last year.
spk08: Okay, great. Thanks a lot.
spk10: Thank you. And our next question comes from Brandon Folks from Cantor Fitzgerald. Your line is now open.
spk07: Hi, thanks. Thank you for taking my questions and congratulations on all the data today during the quarter. Maybe just, you know, following on from the line of questioning, can you just give us or elaborate on the feedback from the experts post your data presentation at AACR? Just kind of, are they in line with your thinking of the way to move forward? And then secondly, you know, how do you balance maybe, you know, doing a partnership now, you know, maybe not the most ideal partnership, given you did mention your value inflection points coming forward, but that just brings you a bit more financial flexibility. And any color on how you view the environment currently, the partnering environment currently, you know, are partners willing to put up a meaningful upfront on a partnership? Thank you.
spk04: And thanks, Brendan, for the question. I'll have Jeremy talk to the advice we've received from the experts in bladder cancer, and then I'll come back and talk through sort of the pulse of the partnership environment we have right now.
spk03: So, Brendan, I would say that the response to the data that we showed at AACR, the response to the data we showed within our KOL meetings was very enthusiastic and, in fact, anticipate trying to do multiple opportunities in the bladder cancer space beyond where we already are right now so the non-muscle invasive will continue and we'll probably pick one and maybe two additional opportunities to advance maybe the advanced metastatic setting maybe the attachment setting there are different plays that we can we can trigger not sure yet exactly which is the right play that's really what's what we're seeking from our thought leader conversations yeah and into the business development all
spk04: I would say that there is, I mean, we have to always remind ourselves and in the conversations we have with collaborators that we are first and foremost a platform company. Our lead asset was generated from the DPX platform with products we licensed in from the KGAA to create what we now know as Maverick Peppermint. What the platform did, and we've talked about this over time, is the platform enhanced the therapeutic viability of the survivor and target. The conversations we're having around business development are very much centered in that same point of trying to re-engage our platform to enhance the therapeutic appeal of compounds that have either existed with strategic partners or they have interest in but have not yet had the satisfactory enhancement to make real. I would say that the environment, well, at least that we've had experience, the environment's very fertile for these types of collaborations. Now, you mentioned in your question large upfronts. I'm not talking about deals here that are going to redefine the IMV P&L, but they're deals that will certainly stretch our cash runway deeper into next year. And with the way in which this market sits today, that's a really important quality for a company that has material data both at the end of this year and then the start of next year. The other element of business development, which is then what's hematological malignancy, we believe because of the way survival is expressed across tumor biology that there are multiple other opportunities for this in multiple other solid and potentially other hematological malignancies. We don't have the cash availability to do all of those trials. I think the natural evolution for us is to now look at partnering the asset, not necessarily to license it away from is seen as valuable as we appreciate it by strategic partners, but then start to evolve towards an environment where we will look to partner the asset as we get closer to commercialisation. The challenge with this type of deal is that, as you know and as I know, licensing products come with more material bioeconomics than I think the IMV market cap really... product for terms that are not favorable for IMV. And we're really mindful to protect the value of this asset and protect the value that the asset has to IMV as we have those discussions.
spk07: Great. Thanks so much. That was very helpful.
spk10: Thank you. And as a reminder, to ask a question at this time, please press star then one on your touchtone telephone. And our next question comes from Paul Stewartson from IA Capital Markets. Your line is now open.
spk06: Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just wondering, in terms of the enrollment sequence prioritizing MVPS ahead of DPX CIRMAGE for the non-muscle invasive bladder cancer study, does that mean that in Q4 when we get the first look at these data, we won't have any data yet on DPX CIRMAGE responses? Is that correct? And if so, when... would we, you know, get to see the first look at the DPX CIRMAGE data?
spk04: I might have Jeremy talk to that.
spk03: Oh, thanks. Certainly, Paul. I think the first data that will come out will be with Mabropepamide S, and that gives us a great benchmark since we have such extensive clinical experience with that particular molecule. We may, by Q4, have, you know, some smattering of data for the CIRMAGE That's the evidence we seek in this trial. And then as we carry that forward and enroll more completely into that cohort, we expect to see pathologic response, et cetera. We expect to be able to interrogate the tissue at surgical resection for the types of immune cell reactivity that we have seen in the past, the activation of T cells, infiltration of T cells, infiltration of NK cells, B cells, et cetera. So we'll see, I hope, a little bit of the data from CIRMAGE this year, but surely we'll see the data from member PEPMUDAS as a benchmark this year.
spk06: Okay, that's helpful. And just in terms, the only other follow-up for me is just in terms of, I guess, both Vitalize and the breast cancer trial. When you're looking at sort of enrollment pacing, is that something that has been able to pick up a little bit now that, you know, there's several patients in these trials and all the sites or at least a lot more sites have been activated. Is that something that's accelerating a little bit and we could see increase in sort of the back half of this year or how is enrollment progressing?
spk04: So if I can just start on that and then I'll have Jeremy talk a little bit to the details. So what we have seen particularly And that is obviously enhancing our ability to bring in additional sites, but also encourage those sites to recruit patients. Obviously, the world is complicated and particularly with COVID still being a challenge and not so much a challenge for patients presenting at hospital, but the hospitals having that we would hope for. So we are working on a timeline that we feel very comfortable about, but I'll pass to Jeremy to talk with a little bit more intimacy about this because it's something that I think we'd love to dig in with you.
spk03: Paul, I think it's a very good question. I think what we're trying to do to accelerate employment even further, we're on pace with what we expected in North America. North America has its unique challenges for DLBCL given the treatment options available to patients. In other locales around the world, those treatment options It's very important.
spk06: Great. Thank you so much for the color. Thanks for taking my question.
spk10: Thank you. And that concludes our question and answer session. I'd like to turn the conference back over to Arnold Hall for closing remarks.
spk04: Thanks, Gigi. Thank you, everyone, for dialing in. I appreciate the opportunity to connect with you, as always, and look forward to continuing those conversations as we at IMV continue to progress forward to really exciting clinical data, both at the back end of this year and the early side of next year. Appreciate your attention and have a lovely Friday.
Disclaimer