Nykode Therapeutics As

Greetings and welcome to the NICODE Q4 2024 Financial Results Webcast. At this time, all participants are in listen-only mode. If anyone should require operator assistance, you may do so by pressing star zero on your telephone keypad. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. You may ask a question at any time by typing it into the Ask a Question feature on your screen. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It's now my pleasure to turn the call over to your CEO, Michael Ensig. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much, Kevin. And also from my side, a warm welcome to all the participants for this NICODE's fourth quarter webcast. Just a quick reminder of our forward statement. We assume you're all familiar with those. On that note, we'll move forward. I am very pleased to, as usual, have Agnes Frederiksen, Chief Scientific Officer, Head of Business Development and Co-Founder with me together with Harald Gurvin, Chief Financial Officer together. We'll take you through the key highlights of the fourth quarter, as well as, of course, the financial numbers. So it's been an eventful fourth quarter for us, although obviously there are parts of this we are not looking forward to. to see any time through. It has been a tough period with a number of layoffs and people leaving the organization. Because we have announced the strategic refocus to align our activities and our organization and our cash branch with our cash runway. And we are good through these processes right now. The intent is, of course, to align the activities with the cash runway and to extend the cash runway into 2030. We'll achieve that by reaching an annual cost base of approximately $20 million going forward. We are reporting today a strong cash position of more than $150 million, which is, I think, in these days in this industry, a uniquely strong position to be in. Also, on the very positive side, we did publish the final dataset from our phase 2 trial, the CO2 trial, in the peer-reviewed JITSI journal, once again confirming what we saw in the interim data, a prolonged benefit, a definitive vaccination effect in the patients with advanced cervical cancer. We regained ownership. including the IP rights to our VB10eo program from our partner Genentech and are now looking into the optimal path for that program going forward. We did announce a small set of data from the NO2 trial that does confirm what we've seen earlier in the N01 trial, a competitive immune response. I will take you a little bit through these data again later in this call here. But just to say that we remain very confident in the VB10neo program compared to the industry or other programs in the same field. Then we presented new data on both our cancer vaccine, the mRNA modality, and we'll spend a little bit of time for that later in this call here. And of course, on our very exciting APC target immune tolerance program, we'll also be spending some time on this later in this call here. We've been through this before but just want to recap for everybody the purpose of our refocused strategy is to create a company which is obviously lean and research focused. Focused on discovering novel assets which we in turn think will create very exciting investment opportunities through targeted development activities including also clinical trials. And everything we do will be geared and aimed towards generating early partnerships. We do believe that is the best way to create value for a company like Nyko with a very strong technology platform, but also with our strongest competences in the product discovery and early development area. So expect to see us continue to generate exciting new assets from our research engine. and in a very cost-conscious way also take decisions on targeted cost-efficient development activities to create shareholder value and pave the way for early partnerships. Our lead program, BB1016, is still in progress and also here reminding you that we are addressing a patient population with a huge unmet need And perhaps surprising to some, still remain with high and growing incidences. It's been a notion that some of the prophylactic vaccines would change the market opportunity for this patient population going forward. That does not seem to be the case. First of all, because of a lack of uptake of prophylactic vaccines around the world, which means there will be a continued use or need for therapeutic vaccines in the HPV16-driven cancer fields in the future. We have now reported very strong data for BV1016 combined with atezolizumab. in the CO2 trial together with also a favorable safety profile. We see an even stronger effect in the PD-L1 positive patients and again even stronger effect in the PD-L1 positive patients with only one prior line of systemic treatment. Again reminding you that we have also in our very first trial with VB1016 in a H-cell patient seen very encouraging effects with BB1016 as a monotherapy in an area that is also gaining increasing attentions from industry players around the world. We have an ongoing trial, CO3, where we are looking for the immune responses and safety in first-line patients with head and neck in combination with pembrolizumab. We did announce or publish the data from the CO2 trial, and we're not going to take you through all the data. The publication is available also through a link on the homepage. We just want to remind you what gives us a very high level of confidence and conviction in VB1016. What you show here is the key data from the patient population with high PD-L1 expression. And we shown you here the overall response rate, the PFS, and the median overall survival compared to three different historical trials that were assessing checkpoint inhibitor. Monotherapy in a very similar patient population, also PL1 positive. And you see that the CO2 trial basically observed an ORR of 29 compared to from 16 to 18% seen with checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy. We saw PFS of 6.3 months compared to 1.9 to 3 months for the checkpoint inhibitor monotherapies. And very impressively, we saw the medium role survival land at 24.7 months. compared to overall survivals ranging from approximately 10.6 to 13.9 months observed with checkpoint-inhibited immunotherapy. These data obviously gives us, as I said before, a very high level of conviction and confidence in the effect of VB1016 and give us every reason to continue developing VB1016 and look for partners. Next slide just shows you what we've seen in the patient population that are PD-L1 positive and have only received one prior line of systemic therapy. If you go to the far right of this graph or table here, you see the OR climbing from 29% up to 40%, the PFS from 6.3% to 15.8%. month and for this patient population we did not reach the medium overall survival. So this also gives us conviction that the earlier stage we go into the higher the efficacy we will observe for VB1016. With those words, I'm going to hand over to Auneide, our Chief Scientific Officer, Head of Business Development, to take us through the updates on VB10neo and our immune tolerance program. So please, Auneide.

Thank you, Michael. So moving into VB10neo, that's our fully individualized new antigen-based cancer vaccine. This has really the potential to address a broad set of indications as we do make one vaccine per patient that could be applicable for basically all tumor types. We do see a strategic focus on large investments these days in individualized cancer vaccines in late-stage trials by our peers, focusing then importantly on the adjuvant setting. and expecting data readout from these trials from our peers in N25 and in 26, 27. So as you may all be aware of, there has been limited transactions in the field of cancer vaccines since Michael was very active in this space in 2020 and 2021. We now see that that is changing in the landscape, being very aware of what's happening in the field of cancer vaccines in early stage. So that's positive for NICODE and also regaining the rights from VB10E. We do have, as you all should be aware of, proven to generate broad and long-lasting T cell responses. across two clinical trials. And importantly, this has not been in adjuvant setting. This has been in heavily pretreated patients with recurrent metastatic solid tumors. We have successfully established in-house proprietary neoantigen selection algorithm that we call NeoSelect. And we work with plasmid DNAs that for individualized cancer vaccines do have a very competitive turnaround time and cost of goods reaching the market. Strong patent protection. You do remember we got a patent approved earlier this year for VB10-Neo. And as we reported in Q3, preliminary immunogenicity data from the NO2 trial aligns and confirms the final positive data from the NO1 trial, even though these patients are with even a broader set of indications and later stage patients. A final analysis is currently ongoing as we are regaining also all the rights from Genentech for this program. Looking forward to finalize all the analysis. As we also showed in Q3, preclinical data supports the opportunity for strong and durable responses using our technology across modalities, importantly here with mRNA. I'll show you the next slide. So just to remind you, we have done some preliminary analysis from VBNO2 that we reported in Q3, where we see comparing to what was presented in NO1 that we generate the same amount or even slightly higher percentage of immunogenic neoantigen patients with at least one immunogenic or de novo induced vaccine response. and those that do have a response to any new epitope. Additionally, where we haven't shown you really the data yet, we are looking forward to do that in the future. We do see a persistent expansion of T cell clones in the majority of valuable patients measured also by the alternative method TCR sequencing. We see persistently expanded clones emerging already as early as after two to four vaccinations and also durable in frequencies. And the adduction of this persistent de novo T cell response has been confirmed by IBS Alicebot, which means we can identify that some of these clones are truly generated by the vaccine. So we continue to be very confident in Vibitinib's potential and happy to see that there is an increased interest in cancer vaccines by the environment. Go to the next slide. These are data that we've generated to also investigate our technology across modalities. So this is generated by mRNA LNP and we looked into durability. As Michael mentioned, we have very strong convincing durability of VB1016 in the CO2 trial leading to prolonged medium overall survival. We wanted to see if that holds through when we also use the mRNA format. Here we have vaccinated in preclinical models two times early and looked that we can actually still identify neoantigen-specific T cell responses at day 133 after two initial vaccinations. But also importantly, when we boost this with a third vaccination at day 132, we are able to really boost the T cell response to see up to 35,000 spots there in this particular experiment, which can mimic either that you do see the antigen coming naturally by the disease or with a third vaccination. So very promising data. We also see very strong increase in the number of new epitopes that are boosted after this long-term, in this long-term assay. If you go to the next, we also looked whether these T cell responses were able to come for tumor protection at this later time point. So here, vaccinating either at day zero or two times, day zero and day 21, and doing a tumor trial in as late as day 90, we see that with one vaccination, we generate 75% tumor protection, but with two vaccinations, we've been able to fully protect the mice at this time. late to time point of tumor challenge. So able to prove that the T cell responses that's generated are efficacious also long term. And then, as Michael mentioned, the immune tolerance field is a very interesting field these days in the industry. We see a lot of activities in immune tolerance. We also see a lot of activities and interest into this field that we are working with, which is truly antigen-specific immune tolerance. The field as such has huge opportunities, both within a range of autoimmune diseases, but also allergies and organ transplant rejection. So basically those indications where we see an unwanted antigen-specific immune response that we can then modulate with the treatment. The antigen-specific immune tolerance field is unique and still new with a few players, but a lot of activities. Also, we see transactions in the field. There's a lot of unmet medical need, and we know that up to 1 in 10 people are actually affected by autoimmune disorders, and then you can add allergies, organ transplant rejection. This has a huge focus for NICO these days. That is obviously supported by the preclinical proof of concept data that we've generated in the most common autoimmune disease models that is being used by the field. We show potent therapeutic advantage of our APC targeting technology that is significantly better than other technologies operating in the space that do not have our APC targeting technology. platform patents obviously submitted and we are moving very rapidly forward now establishing several tolerance relevant methods and assay that will be extremely important in order to both identify the most optimal version of the NICODE tolerance vaccine but also to really understand our opportunity to specifically modulate the immune system in different directions also within autoimmune diseases. These are data shown in Q4 with the comparison of two different versions of our technology where we have kept everything identical except the two targeting units. So we have a range of different targeting units that we can use that we believe can turn the immune response into tolerance. You see they are both very effective in preventing disease in this EIE model, which is the model that most of the players in our field are using really to understand the efficacy and the mode of action of antigen-specific tolerance. If you go to the next, when we look into that in particular with different dose levels as well as comparing with constructs that do not have any relevant targeting units of the non-targeted vaccine, which is then shown in black in the figures, you really see that adding a functional targeting unit provides a very strong increase in the ability to alleviate disease in this model. And this was done with the first targeting unit that we did show earlier this year. And then if you go to the next, we mimic this with the second targeting unit and confirm that this also works and potentially works as good or even slightly better with this targeting unit here. And then if you go to the next version, we have also now successfully set up a very interesting alternative model, which is a relapsing-remitting EAE model, which means that We have generated data with another construct that holds the different relevant antigen PLP compared to MOG antigen that we used before. We also see that this provides efficacy in a relapsing-remitting model. And all of these data now allows us to move more rapidly forward from where we stand today to really dig into the variety of our different constructs, which ones provides the optimal activity and modulates which arms of the immune system. Should we go to the next? We are currently in Boston and looking forward to present new data from our antigen-specific immune tolerance efforts at this highly relevant conference, Antigen-Specific Immune Tolerance Summit. going on this week. We will present a lot of interesting data tomorrow. Then, by those words, I will transfer to you, Harald, for going through the financial results.

Thank you, Agnesa.

Looking at the income statement, we reported total revenue of 6.9 million in the fourth quarter, up from 2.3 million for the same period in 2023. 6.8 million of the revenues relate to R&D activities delivered under agreements with Genentech and Regeneron, and the remaining relates to government grants. The increase in the quarter is mainly due to the cancellation of the contract with Genentech. Part of the 245 million in upfront and milestone payments received under the contract were taken to income over time, as the R&D services under contract were delivered. Following the cancellation of the contract in the fourth quarter, the outstanding balance of 6.8 million was taken to income in full. Employee benefit expenses were 8.3 million in the fourth quarter, down from 8.9 million for the same period in 2023, reflecting the first part of the organizational changes executed during the second half of 2024. The main part of the reorganization was executed in January and is expected to be finalized in the first half of 2025. which will significantly reduce the employee benefit expenses going forward. Other operating expenses were 4.1 million, down from 10 million in the same period for 2023, mainly reflecting reduced R&D services to Genentech and reduced clinical activities. Finance income and costs were a net 1.1 million negative in the fourth quarter, which mainly relates to interest income and unrealized currency movements on the William Crown exposure. So overall, we reported a net loss of 6.8 million for the fourth quarter, compared to a net loss of 5.3 million for the same period in 2023.

Next slide, please.

Then moving on to the balance sheet, we had a strong cash position of 150.4 million at year end, which, based on the realisation, will give us a runway into 2030. As previously communicated, We received a decision from the Norwegian tax authorities in October 2023 relating to the tax treatment of the upfront payment received under a license agreement entered into in 2020, which generated a payable of approximately US $1.3 million to the tax authorities in the fourth quarter of 2023. NIACO is confident that the upfront payment has been treated correctly, a view which has also been conferred by third-party experts. NIACO appealed the decision in the first quarter of 2024, and the payment has been booked as a receivable by a wage outcome of two. The receivable is the Norwegian crowners, and the dollar amount in our accounts will fluctuate with movements in the exchange rate, which also explains the large unrealized movements in finance income and costs in the income statement between the quarters. In February this year, we received a letter from the tax authorities that we can expect a draft of the recommendation from the Secretariat in the first quarter of 2026.

Next, please.

Moving on to equity and liabilities, we have total equity of 106.2 million at the year end, which represents a strong equity ratio of 89%. And with that, I will give the word back to Michael.

Thank you very much, Ar, and we'll finish off with an outlook on our priorities for 2025 before we open up for a few questions. So we are actually having a high focus right now from the management side on continuing the implementation of our refocused strategy and organizational adaptations, aligning our financial resources and cash runway with the new organizational priorities. As we said, we are aiming for a cost base of approximately 20 million US dollars per year, which will enter and extend the cash runway into 2030. We also continue to be convinced and progress our pipeline. We are currently executing the CO3 trial in the VP1016 program in first-line head and neck patients where we are assessing VP1016 in combination with pembrolizumab. This trial is expected to read out later this year here, and we'll mainly be looking for the ability of VB1016 to generate immune responses in these patient populations and, of course, assess the safety in this particular patient population. We'll also be assessing or discussing the optimal path forward for VB10 Neo, aiming at positioning VB10 Neo for future partnerships. And for the immune tolerance program, we are working hard to retain our leadership in this field here. and really position NICO's immune tolerance platform as the best in-class antigen-specific tolerance treatment. And we'll, of course, also be on the outlook for partnerships in that field. And with those words, I think we've come to the end of the formal presentation and are ready to take some questions. Kevin?

Thank you. And now we're conducting a question-and-answer session. As a reminder, to ask a question, please type it into the Ask a Question feature on your screen. Our first question is coming from Geyer Holm from DNB Markets. It's in two parts. Part one, what are the most important events for value creation in the coming years as you see them? And part two is, you aim to reach a cost base of approximately 20 million U.S. dollars per annum. How fast can you get down to that level and what cost level could we expect?

Thank you very much, Gaia, for your questions. I think I will address question number one and then I'll hand over to you for addressing question number two. So the most important event for us in the coming years, not just 2025, is obviously to see progress on our most important assets and our assets. I would say I would divide into the three probably obvious ones for everybody, VP1016, VP10 Neo and our immune tolerance platform. So for VP1016, we did just report very exciting final data from the CO2 trial in patients with advanced cervical cancer. And we will be seeing the results of the CO3 trial this year. As I said before, the CO3 trial is mainly designed to give us a feeling for the immune response levels and the safety in this patient population, which is the first time we test U1016 in first line head and neck. So that will also be important and I think together all these data will inform us on the next best step for VP1016. So we will of course on the back of that trial be coming out and giving some guidance on where we see the next step for VP1016 as a sense of priority. For the VP10 Neo program we remain, as I've said a couple of times during this call here, convinced about the uniqueness of the program and the ability to generate a broad and deep immune response, we see the levels that Alneida went through earlier on a very competitive level compared to what we see with peer-reported data. So our conviction in VB10neo is, despite the development from the partnership front, actually unchanged. We also sense that the excitement around individualized immunotherapies these years here are higher than ever. There are being put more money into clinical development of individualized immunotherapies across the industry than we've seen any earlier year with COVID. several pivotal programs going on and and also a range of randomized phase two programs going on from from peers and as always in this field here we do expect to see a lot of spillover effect should those programs come out positive which we of course hope they they will And we sense that also from discussions with the pharma industry. We do see an increasing pickup on the number of pharma companies that wants to get an update in this field here. So I think our job for the VBT NEO is to really figure out how we position ourselves best as the most attractive, unencumbered, individualized immune therapy, aiming, obviously, at entering a future partnership. And how we do that exactly, we've indicated earlier, we will need a little bit more time. I think we've indicated we'll be coming back in the first half of 2025 with further guidance on how we see the best path for VB10neo going forward. And then, of course, the whole field of immune tolerance, which is an extremely exciting field these days, generating a lot of interest from potential pharma partners. Here, we will continue to strengthen the underlying base for the APC targeted technology platform and continue to demonstrate that our approach is really unique and best in class We will be on the lookout for various constructions of collaborations with partners that could potentially accelerate both the programs and of course contribute critical know-how and muscles to the programs. So that's basically how we approach that. And as Onedi indicated in her slide, we will be presenting what we actually consider to be exciting preclinical data at the conference in Boston tomorrow, which we think further establishes the APC targeted technology platform that we have as one of the best in class, if not the best in class. I think I'm going to leave it to you, Harald, to talk about the second question.

Yeah, thank you. We are, of course, constantly working to prioritize costs where they bring the most value. If you look at 2025, there will, of course, be both restructuring costs. The main part of the reorganization was executed in January. And there will also be ongoing costs related to the CO3 trial and finalization of the NO2 trial. So the cost level for 2025 will be higher than the 20 million long-term cost base we are aiming at. Exactly how we will come back to once we have more clarity. But if you look at when we aim to reach the new long-term cost base, you know, based on the current plans, we should already next year be able to reach that 20 million cost level.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Sean Hama from Jefferies. In your discussions with potential partners, has anyone said whether they await further data from VB 10.16 before signing an agreement? such as immunogenicity data from VBC03. When can we expect this data?

Yes, thank you very much. And, of course, I fully do appreciate the question, but it does, to some extent, suddenly become a gross simplification of, I think, partnership dialogue in general when you try to boil it down to So singular questions. So when we talk to partners about any programs, it's an ongoing dialogue that stretches over long periods where you try to keep people engaged in the program and tell them about the progress and the data coming out. And the responses comes in in a broad range along a spectrum. from there will be people who are not even focused on these strategic areas and there will be people who are on the lookout and trying to stay updated and there will be people who are interested but will be looking for something more. So it is a correct implication that some companies need to see more data. Some companies even say they want to see randomized data before going into new modalities and therefore there will be companies who have said we'll be looking for more data in the areas where the CO3 is bringing those data. We will have to see whether that'll be enough. It depends both on the outcome of the data and And the way I think some of the parameters that we are not emphasizing here pans out when you dig down into patient cases. So we'll have to see, but we are definitely not ruling it out.

Thank you. Next question is a follow-up from Sean Hama from Jefferies. What have you gathered from FDA regarding the feasibility of running later stage trials for personalized cancer vaccines and the scope for commerciality?

Yeah, thank you. Also a good question. And I think this whole field is in a flux these years. And I say that in a positive sense, although I realize it can be perceived as something that is risky. I always felt that, or we always felt that in particular, the FDA has had a very open mind to these new technologies and the prospect of using AI-driven algorithms to design individualized therapies. So I think FDA is one of the more forward-looking agencies you'll find together with perhaps the German authorities, PIPE. We don't sense that there's any hesitancy from FDA towards a particular patient population, but we do agree with the majority of parties in the industry right now that the sweet spot for the current individualized immunotherapy platforms including probably our own lies towards the more early stage cancer tumor type so in the adjuvant setting the locally advanced or resectable settings where we've seen actually quite encouraging data coming out. We never ruled out late stage cancer but I think Just to repeat myself here, we do agree that it is probably in the early stage we will see the first breakthroughs for individualized immune therapies like ours and our peers. And also expect that is where we will be focusing our own thoughts as we map out our plans.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Carol Montaroni from Van Lanschot Camping.

What kind of partnership are you looking for or are you open for?

Thank you. As you know, partnerships come in all shapes and forms, and we are in general very open for exploring multiple partnerships, particularly at this stage of the company. I think if you look at our three main priorities programs at the moment, VB 1016 is an asset that we find to be very mature as it is generated very promising data across cervical cancer. And we're now waiting for the first data in head and neck cancer. So that is more likely to be a traditional partnership with pharma that we will prioritize. Although there are also other innovative therapies moving forward towards approval that can be interesting to explore in combination with also VB1016. When it comes to VB10 Neo, we have a very broad opportunity space for partnerships. We have currently generated promising data from everything from feasibility, turnaround time, cost of goods, and immunogenicity as a size of clinical efficacy in very late stage cancer patients across multiple different indications with the plasmid DNA format in combination with checkpoint inhibitors. We do see that the field is moving forward, really focusing on very similar setups, but in adjuvant settings. So still here, really open for standard collaborations, moving the asset forward into adjuvant setting. But we also importantly here, as you see the results, have the opportunity to explore partnerships on the back of other modalities like RNA. We also have the opportunity to explore partnerships in combination with other therapies that are moving forward. We've seen approvals recently with cell therapies in the space, and there are multiple cancer immunotherapies that we now see are reaching a stage where they are looking for combinations that can further increase the potency of their therapies and cancer vaccines, both off-the-shelf and individualized cancer vaccines. falls in that space. So I would say there is a broad opportunity space for potential partnership structures that we can explore, particularly for where we have VB10E at the moment. Then for immune tolerance, that field is currently very different from cancer immunotherapy. There has been multiple years now. where you need late stage clinical trials in order to see transactions in cancer immunotherapy or there's basically not been very much activity on the transaction size in cancer immunotherapy. While in the field of immune tolerance and also specifically in the field of antigen specific immune tolerance, we see a very active space with multiple pharma companies saying that's really false within their strategy and we see also transactions on a pre-clinical stage and if you look at our data and we'll also see multiple data tomorrow what we have here with our platform is really differentiating from the other technologies being explored in the field and we are getting closer and closer to be in a position to continue to support the differentiation and the ability we have when we are changing our APC targeting units and modulating response in different directions. So we are focusing really here on the preclinical path to be able to support those partnership discussions that we are currently seeing. So what really differentiates our platform compared to others? And there are certainly opportunities that we will explore to also pursue early stage partnerships, even at the preclinical stage, which is obviously of importance for us because they could be more new terms and clinical partnerships based on clinical data. I think that answers the question.

Thank you. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question, please type it into the Ask a Question feature on your screen. Our next question comes from Arvid Nassander from Carnegie. It's in two parts. I'll ask part one first. What is the current development stage of your most advanced immune tolerance project, and when do you anticipate entering the clinic?

Thank you, Arvid. I think I've Touched upon that also in answer for the previous question. And the antigen-specific immune tolerance phase is newer. There are fewer players. There are fewer players that have moved into the clinic. There are few players now that also are not in dialogue or already in a partnership with pharma companies. What we are focusing on the moment, which is based on tight interactions with the range of potential future partners, is to really show and understand the differentiation of broader our technology compared to technologies that are not using APC targeting, but also the opportunity to investigate different APC targeting units and whether we can see a differentiated modulation of the immune response, which can be applicable for different sets of indications within autoimmunity, allergy, organ transplant rejections. Currently, we don't see any other companies out there that do have a technology that has the same potential as we have. which is where we really, truly differentiate, and that's where we focus on before we choose the optimal path forward to move into the clinic, either alone or in collaboration with a partner per indication.

Thank you. Follow-up, Margaret, from Margaret and Sandra from Carnegie is, with your strategy now more focused on asset generation and early stage development, Do you approach pipeline expansion in terms of therapeutic focus and breadth?

Yeah, so I will continue with the tolerance part here. I think the breadth of the pipeline and tolerance can obviously be further expanded by first focusing on the platform and the uniqueness of the platform and the potential across different APC targeting units, different antigens and models. and allow us to broaden the pipeline also in collaboration with partners which are indication specific. So that obviously has a strong potential to broaden the pipeline within tolerance in the future years to come. We do focus our cancer immunotherapy pipeline on further advancing the assets that is already has already provided clinical benefit, which is including BB1016 and BB10 Neo and making sure that we move those forward in the most cost-effective manner and that can lead to partnership discussion and further support the platform so we can continue to expand the pipeline in the future also here.

Thank you. We've reached the end of our question and answer session. I'd like to turn the floor back over for any further or closing comments.

Thank you very much, Kevin. Thank you very much to all the participants joining in for the questions that we covered today. Stay tuned. We are looking forward to keep you updated on progress both on our immune tolerance platform, but also as we'll be giving further guidance on the next step for VB10 Neo and, of course, for VB1016 once we've seen the readout from the CO3. So with those words, we wish you all a continued good day and look forward to keep you updated. Bye.

Thank you. That does conclude today's webcast. You may disconnect your line at this time and have a wonderful day. We thank you for your participation today.