MediWound Ltd.

Good day and welcome to the MediWOM third quarter 2024 earnings call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal conference specialists by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star then one on your touchtone phone. And to withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Dan Ferry of Life Advisors. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Operator, and welcome, everyone. Today, before the market opened, MediWound issued a press release announcing financial results for the third quarter ended September 30, 2024. You may access that release on the company's website under the Investors tab. With us today are Ofer Gonen, Chief Executive Officer of MediWound, Honey Luxenberg, Chief Financial Officer, and Barry Wolfensohn, Executive Vice President of Strategy and Corporate Development. Following our prepared remarks, we will open the call for Q&A. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that statements made during this call, including the Q&A session relating to MediWOON's expected future performance, future business prospects, or future events or plans are forward-looking statements, as defined under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Although the company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions, actual outcomes and results are subject to risks and uncertainties and could differ materially from those forecast due to the impact of many factors beyond the control of MediWound. The company assumes no obligation to update or supplement any forward-looking statements, whether a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Participants are directed to cautionary notes set forth in today's press release, as well as the risk factors set forth in MediWound's annual report filed with the FCC for factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements. The conference call is the property of MediWound, and any recording or rebroadcast is expressly prohibited without the written consent of MediWound. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Ofer Gonin, Chief Executive Officer of MediWound. Ofer?

Thank you, Dan, and good morning, everyone. I appreciate you joining us today to discuss MediWound's performance and progress during the third quarter of 2024. This has been a strong quarter for MediWound, marked by meaningful achievements that contribute to our long-term growth and advances us closer to realizing our vision. Let me start with an update on Nexobrid, our innovative enzymatic therapy for severe burns. This quarter, we reached a significant milestone with FDA approval on Nexobrid for pediatric use in the United States, expanding its label to cover patients from newborn to 18 years old with deep partial thickness and full thickness thermal burns. This approval solidifies Nexobrid status as a treatment option for all age groups in the United States, bringing its indications in line with those in the European Union and Japan. Commercial revenue of NexoBridge has met expectations limited only by our existing capacity constraints. In the United States, NexoBridge continues to make substantial progress thanks to various self-dedicated commercialization efforts. More than 70 burn centers have already made P&T committee submissions, of which approximately 50 are already securing approval and placing initial orders. Additionally, NexoBridge recently received a Category 3 CPT code, which is scheduled to be posted on the AMA website January 1st and go into effect July 1st next year. VeriCell has also reported an impressive 43% quarter-over-quarter increase in revenue of NexoBridge, reflecting its expanding impact in the United States burn care market. We are also excited to share that the World Health Organization, WHO, has recently designated enzymatic debridement as an essential treatment for burn injuries in its standard recommendation for burn care in mass casualty incidence guidelines. This reinforces NexoBreathe's crucial role in emergency response and global preparedness and strengthen ongoing initiatives to develop strategic stockpiling of NexoBREED in the European Union, building on the successful precedent set by BARDA in the United States. As we shared before, we have also completed construction of our state-of-the-art GMP compliant manufacturing facility with commissioning currently underway. The facility is expected to reach full operational capacity by the end of 2025 and to increase our manufacturing output six-fold. Commercial availability will be contingent upon obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals. The company anticipates $20 million in revenue for 2024, compared to prior guidance of $24 million. NexoBrit product revenue remains in line with expectations, driven by strong demand that well exceeds current manufacturing capacity. However, the FDA approved NexoBridge pediatric indication without requiring any additional post-approval activities. This eliminates the need for BARDA funding for such activities and reduces the associated revenue. Additionally, following a Type C meeting with the FDA, clinical activities for the temperature-stable formulation of Nexobrid for the U.S. Army have been scheduled for 2026, which postponed the associated contribution from the U.S. Department of Defense. To conclude, demand for Nexobrid continues to grow, driven by U.S. expansion via VeriCell, FDA pediatric approval, and inclusion in the WHO BMCI Guidelines. Our new GMP facility, set to increase capacity six-fold, will support this rising global demand and revenue growth. I will now turn to Escarex, our advanced enzymatic debridement therapy for chronic wounds. We have completed all preparations for the upcoming Phase III study of Escarex in venous leg ulcers, marking a major step forward in addressing an unmet need in the two billion chronic wound debridement market. The study is set to commence with IND submission planned by year end. This pivotal trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCRx and aims to establish it as a transformative treatment for VLUs. All setup activities for the trial have been finalized, including successfully passing the required EMA inspection ensuring compliance with regulatory standards and readiness to initiate the study. To provide insight into this upcoming Phase III study and to the broader commercial potential of SCRx, MediWood will host a virtual Key Opinion Leader event on January 8, 2025. During the event, experts will discuss the trial design, objectives, and highlight SCRx's anticipated impact on patient outcomes. In parallel, we are working with a third-party research firm on a comprehensive market analysis to refine our understanding of the potential market share, target segments across various scale settings, pricing strategies, and projected peak sales. We look forward to sharing the findings of this analysis alongside expert perspectives during these KOL events. In addition, we are preparing to launch a randomized head-to-head, face-to-face study of SCRx versus collagenase in 2025. This trial is designed to support our BLA submission and further establish SCRx's competitive advantages. This study will enroll 45 VLU patients across multiple sites in the United States and Europe. Participants will be randomized into a one-to-one-to-one ratio to receive escarex, placebo, or collagenase, which is marketed in the United States as Santil and in Europe as Iruxol. Over a 14-week period, the escarex and placebo groups will receive up to eight daily applications during the first two weeks, while the collagenase group will follow the product-specific instructions for use. The trial will evaluate key safety endpoints, including the incidence of severe advanced events and time to complete wound closure, as well as other efficacy endpoints, such as time to complete debridement and wound bed preparation. To ensure consistency and optimize patient outcomes, the study standardizes wound care and compression management, made possible through strategic research collaborations with Solventum and Molnicki. We have also obtained 16.25 million euros in funding from the European Innovation Council to advance the development of Escarex for diabetic foot ulcers, accelerating our program timelines by four years. With over 1.6 million DFU patients in the United States requiring debridement each year, this funding will afford us the opportunity to bring a potential new treatment to these currently underserved patients facing the risk of amputations, infections, and death from DFU's complications. The preparation for the Phase 2-3 study in those patients are progressing well, and we're excited about the potential to impact, that S-Corex have impact on these improving outcomes for substantial patient population. So as for S-Corex, we are finalizing the IND submission for the VLU patients, setting the stage for the initiation of the Phase III trial. Furthermore, the upcoming head-to-head study comparing SKRx to collagenase alongside advancements in the recently funded DFU program will solidify SKRx's position as the leading solution to address critical unmet needs in the chronic wound market. Having summarized our significant progress with both Nexobrid and SKRx, I'd now like to highlight the key strategic and financial milestone. This quarter, we secured $25 million through a private investment led by Molniki Healthcare, which is a global leader in the wound care field. This strategic partnership provides not only critical funding, but also access to Molniki's extensive commercial expertise and regulatory insights, enabling us to advance our strategic plans with greater focus and momentum. Now, I'll hand it over to Hani to briefly review our financials.

Thank you, Ofer. Let me now take you through our financial results for the third quarter and the year-to-date period of 2024. Revenue for the third quarter of 2024 totaled $4.4 million compared to $4.8 million in the same period of 2023. This decrease was primarily driven by lower revenue from BARDA development services. Gross profit for the quarter was $0.7 million, representing 16% of total revenue, compared to $0.9 million, or 90% of total revenue, in Q3 2023. This decline reflects change in the revenue mix. Turning to operating expenses. RMD expenses were $2.5 million in Q3 2024, up from $1.5 million in the same period last year. As we ramp up activity for our pivotal SCRX Phase 3 clinical trial. SG&A expenses total $3.2 million.

Pardon me, it seems that our speaker line has disconnected. Please hold while we reconnect. Pardon me, we have our management team to reconnect. You may proceed.

Okay. Moving on to our ill-to-date financial highlights. For the first nine months of 2024, total revenue reached $14.4 million, up from $13.3 million in the same period of 2023. primarily driven by revenue contribution from Verizon. Gross profit for the first nine months was $1.7 million, or 12% of total revenue, compared to $2.9 million, or 21% of total revenue, in the first nine months of 2023. This reflects the same changes in revenue mix mentioned earlier. In terms of expenses, R&D expenses of $5.9 million, slightly higher than $5.7 million in the same period of 2023. SG&A expenses of $9.1 million, up from $8.8 million in 2023, driven by increased share-based compensation costs. Operating loss for the first nine months of 2024 was 13.3 million compared to 11.4 million in the same period of 2023. Net loss for the first nine months came in 26.3 million or $2.72 per share compared to a net loss of 5 million or 56 cents per share in the same period of 2023. This increase was largely driven by financial expenses from revaluation of florants, which were influenced by a remarkable 78% increase in MediMoon's share price year-to-date. On a non-get basis, adjusted EBITDA for the first nine months of 2024 was a loss of $9.9 million, compared to a loss of $9 million in the same period last year. Balance sheet highlights. As of September 30, 2024, MediWood maintained a strong financial position with cash equivalent and deposit, totaling $46 million, up from $42.1 million at year-end 2023. During the first nine months of 2024, we successfully raised $25 million through a pipe offering, received $1.2 million from the exercise of Series A warrants, and fully settled our liability with DEVA. We used $19.7 million to fund our operating during the period, including $6 million allocated to capital expenditure for the scale-up of our manufacturing facility. This concludes my financial review. Ofer, back to you.

Thank you, Kami. This has been a very strong quarter for MediWand, marked by significant progress and key achievements. We secured FDA approval for the pediatric indication of NexoBridge and raised $25 million in strategic funding. On the S-Corex front, We finalized the operation for the phase three study in venous leg ulcers and accelerated plans for the diabetic foot ulcers, addressing a market with a significant unmet need. We are also gearing up for a head-to-head trial of escorex versus collagenase to further validate escorex's competitive advantage. Additionally, the completion of our new Lexabraid manufacturing facility and the initiation of the commissioning process represent major milestones in scaling our global capacity. With this accomplishment, we look forward to a strong finish of the year and believe that MediWood is well-equipped with the resources, partnerships, and momentum to execute our strategic plans and deliver meaningful value to patients and stakeholders. With that, I'll now turn the call back to the operator for any questions. Operator?

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star then 1 on your touchtone phone. If you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star then 2. And at this time, we'll pause momentarily to assemble our roster. And the first question will come from Josh Jennings with Cowan. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks for taking the questions. Appreciate the thorough download. Ofra, I was hoping to just ask about the Phase III escorex and the IMD submission. Anything you can share, any color on your interactions with the FDA? And it seems like with the KOL event timing early in January that you don't expect much pushback in terms of from that submission and that you could see an approval of the IND submission pretty soon after. But when should we expect a trial moment to kick off, I guess, is ultimately the goal of my question. Just any interaction with the FDA, your confidence that the design is in play, we'll roll through. And then when should we expect enrollment to begin.

Okay, so hi Josh, and thank you for the question. So as you all know, this trial is the most significant and comprehensive trial in venous leg ulcer patients in over two decades. This is why all the wound care companies are collaborating with us and interested in this specific endeavor. We spent some time with the FDA to discuss the potential protocol with them and with Emma, and we were able to have it cleared both by FDA and Emma. We are in the process. We also were expected by Emma, before you start the phase three trial, this is something that is required before you ship clinical batches overseas here from Israel. So we had this inspection and we passed it successfully. The IND submission is expected imminently by the end of this year. And 30 days after that, we expect to start enrolling patients.

Excellent. Thanks for that. And I wanted to ask about the head-to-head phase two study, Escrex versus collagenase or Santel in VLU patients. I mean, our assumption is this is originated internally, but just wanted to check the box that this is not a requirement. by any of the regulatory bodies in the U.S. or Europe. And this is just a study that will bolster the evidence of escorex's role in chronic wound care and potentially support reimbursement decisions.

So the main motivation for executing this trial is that we are four years away from a launch, and we want to be ready with data that will support as high revenue as possible. So the main reason for doing it is, first of all, to have a real predetermined a priori analysis as opposed to a post-hoc analysis that we had in the previous headway study that we did, that we released the data of Santee. Second, we want to expand the data set that we have and we want to show all of our advantages for us versus Santec. Third, we want to include our Escarex brand also versus Iroxol in Europe because we are going through the process to having it approved globally, and not just in the United States. So we don't have data yet versus Yeruxal, and this is another reason that we are doing a study in Europe and in the United States. All this strengthens our position and gives us a head start for the commercial launch. As for the requirements from the FDA, we are now completing a full package, as I said earlier, doing the phase three study that we need to conduct, But we have all kinds of small studies, such as a PK study and a human factor study, and all kinds of data that we are collecting in order to make sure that once the phase three study is successful, we have all the relevant data in order to have this drug approved.

Got it, and lastly, one more question is on ExaBridge. Just wanted to make sure we were digesting the update on the manufacturing capacity. increase initiative. Has there been any changes since the last training psychologist in terms of timing of having the capacity increase of benefit medi-wound and maybe just review that and if there has been any changes, maybe just help us understand them. Thanks so much for all the questions.

So this is a very important question. So as for... As for the new manufacturing facility of NexoBridge, you know that it took us some time to build it. It took us more than two years since we started the process. We guided that we will finish the construction by mid-year and we did it. And now we are in a process that was pre-planned in the process which is called the commissioning. We are getting closer to the point in time when we need to call for inspections for both FDA and EMA. The reason that we gave a little bit more color is basically to make sure that now we have some dependency on getting closer on inspection. This is why we mentioned it in this call.

Great. Thanks so much. Thank you.

The next question will come from Francis Briesbaugh with Oppenheimer.

Please go ahead. Hi, this is Dan. I'm for Frank. Thanks for taking our questions. Thanks for all the color around the trials just as a follow-up to the phase two head-to-head versus collagenase. What should we, how should we be thinking in terms of success expectations? You know, the post-hoc showed potential superiority over Santal. This is designed in a similar way. Is it non-inferiority? Any color there. Thanks.

Yeah, it's an interesting question. So, hi, and this head-to-head study is pretty much designed similarly to the previous phase two that was a success. The only thing that is different is that we don't give an option for the centers to treat with ortholytic debridement or all kinds of conservative debridement options. They have only two options. They can treat with X-Corex or they can treat with Suntil and, of course, placebo. What we should expect, and this is what we expect, is to see similar effects because we know that Suntil or Ruxol basically do not do much effect in the first two weeks when we debride it with SKRX. The only thing we want us to do is to see the same impact. This is a predefined study, so the data that will be generated here can be used more credibly when we start discussing pricing with relevant entities.

Thank you. That's very helpful. And just one more follow-up. Could you talk about how you expect what the impact of this recent addition of the WHO inclusion is with respect to stockpiling, or does it accelerate any of the timelines that you had in mind? Thank you.

So now we're thinking about concluding an event that we were working, I think, for the last two years. in order to have it achieved. To include enzymatic debridement as an essential treatment for burn injuries in burn mass casualty incidents is a big achievement for us. When you discuss stockpiling with HERA, which is the European border, it was an event or check the box that you needed to pass We are currently under a shortage. We don't have enough exobrid to ship, to stockpile to all kinds of European countries. But now we are getting closer to that. We believe that in 2026, when the limitation of manufacturing will be beyond us, we believe that then we will be able to sign significant agreements with European countries and with HERA in order to have next-of-breed stockpiles in Europe for all kinds of emergencies.

Thank you. Thanks for taking my questions, and congrats on the course.

Thank you.

The next question will come from RK with AT Wainwright. Please go ahead.

Thank you, good afternoon Ofer and Hani. So in your opening comments, you were talking about category three CPT code. So how do you anticipate getting benefit from this and what needs to be done so that we can move up the category?

Again, I think in the short term, I don't think it will have any direct impact to the penetration of Nexobrid to the U.S. market. I think hospitals, burn centers, have the motivation to acquire Nexobrid regardless of specific codes because it's a better treatment and it saves money to the burn center itself. So I don't think it will have a real impact. But, you know, this is the process. It's a breakthrough new technology. Data should be gathered. And let's see the impact that will happen in the next 12 to 24 months. Very good.

And then regarding the DFU study that you're anticipating to start, with the money that you received from the European authorities. What needs to be done there before we can start thinking about the phase two study anticipation in DFU?

So, although we have quite significant data about the effectiveness of S-colex on debridings diabetic foot ulcers, the amount of data that we have is less robust than we have on venous leg ulcers. We see the same results between 60 and 65% success after two weeks. We didn't see any advantage to this indication to the other, but we have less data that supports an immediate phase three for this indication. So what we should do is to write a protocol, make sure that all the key opinion leaders, both in Europe and in the United States, are aligned with the program and the necessity and the treatment scheme of S-Correct to this indication. We need to get clearance from FDA and EMA, and we believe that this process will not take less than a year. This is how we estimated it.

Okay, and then the last question from me is regarding the type C meeting that you had with the FDA about the temperature-stable formulation of Nexabut. What did you learn from that, and what needs to be done? Because you're saying you're going to start the study in 2026, so I'm just trying to understand what needs to be done between now and then.

So mainly, we have three main activities in this program. The first one, we are building a specific facility that will enable us to manufacture clinical materials to this phase three trial. We are building this facility to deconstruct it next year and operational in 2026. This is the first thing. The second thing, FDA asked us for all kinds of non-clinical development data and working on the CMC in order to make sure that the Mexobred temperature-stable formulation is very close to Mexobred In order for us to need a minimum of a clinical trial, we don't want to develop a drug from zero. So we need to prove to the agency that those products are very similar, and we estimate that this process will enable us to start the clinical trials in 2026. Okay.

Thank you. Thanks for taking all my questions.

Thank you.

The next question will come from Michael Akunowich with Maxson Group. Please go ahead.

Hey there. Thank you guys for taking my question today. I guess just to follow up on RK's question there, do you have a sense of what kind of clinical work is going to be needed to get the temperature stable form evaluation approved? Do you expect that'll just be a single relatively small trial?

This is our expectations. We shared the program with the agency, with the FDA, and we didn't get negative responses. So yes, this is what we expect, assuming we are able to finish the non-clinical and the CMC request that they have. And as I said, we estimate that it will take us at least a year.

All right, thank you. And then looking over to the opportunity in Europe for stockpiling, could you talk a little bit about the size of that potential opportunity? And then just given where the timeline lies, is this something that could make sense to do with the temperature-stable formulation given the advantages that has for stockpiling?

So this is an interesting question since we are discussing this internally quite a lot. So as for the potential of stockpiling, we didn't disclose the amount, the size of the market, but it should be in the low tens of the millions of dollars. Stockpiling, and of course, we need to divide it by three because the shelf life of the product is three years. Currently, the next hybrid room temperature stable formulation is only being developed to the U.S. market. After we have clarity, after we get clarity from the FDA that we are, this is what we need, this is a small study in order to have it approved, we will go to the European authority and we will ask for similar regulatory pathway. But we are not there yet. The discussions that we are having with the European barter, which is called HERA, is We are now analyzing the quantities. We are defining exactly the needs. And I believe this will be matured only towards the end of 2025. And then in 2026, when we will not have any capacity constraint, we will be able to start shipping products to Europe.

All right. Thank you. And then just one more quick clarification question for me. Looking at the head-to-head study, right, what role is Silventum playing? Is that the same as it is in the phase three for VLUs?

So, maybe Barry, do you want to jump into this question?

Sure. Our primary goals in securing all of these collaboration agreements were to ensure that in the phase three and in the head-to-head studies, as much as possible, the variability between study arms is minimized to provide best-in-class products for the patients in our study. Compression therapy is the gold standard for the management of venous leg ulcers, and it's an essential component in all the validated clinical practice guidelines for this indication. Regarding Solventum specifically, the superior benefits of Coban 2 and Coban 2 Lite were confirmed in a recent real-world evidence retrospective study presented at both the Symposium on Advances in Wound Care and at the European Wound Management Association Conference this past year. Given the prominent position of this product in the market, we're quite pleased that Solventum will be supplying them for the patients in this study, as they're doing in the Phase 3 as well, along with providing investigators and their teams with the training required to use them appropriately.

All right, thank you for that. Thank you guys for taking my questions today. Thank you, Michael.

This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Ofer for any closing remarks. Please go ahead.

Thank you, everyone, for joining us today. We look forward to continuing our dialogue and updating you on our progress during the next quarterly call.

The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.