Hello, and welcome to the Genmab Q2 twenty twenty one Conference Call. Throughout the call, all participants will be in a listen only mode and afterwards, there will be a question and answer session. And just to remind you, this conference call is being recorded. During this telephone conference, you may be presented with forward looking statements that include words such as believes, anticipates, plans or expects actual results may differ materially, for example, as a result of delayed or unsuccessful development projects. Genmab is not under any obligation to update statements regarding the future nor to confirm such statements in relation to actual results, unless this is required by law.
Please also note that Genmab may hold your personal data as indicated by you as part of our Investor Relations outreach activities in order to update you on Genmab going forward. And please refer to our website for more information on Genmab and our privacy policy. Today, I'm pleased to present Jan Bandivilenko. Please go ahead with your meeting.
Hello, and welcome to the Janmab conference call to discuss the company's financial results for the first half of twenty twenty one. With me today to present these results is our CFO, Anthony Pagano. For the Q and A, we will be joined by our Chief Development Officer, Judith Klimovsky our Chief Operating Officer, Anthony Monsigny and our Chief Medical Officer, Tahir Amari. Let's move to Slide 2. As already said, we will be making forward looking statements, so please keep that in mind as we go through this call.
Let's move to Slide 3. GenMark has a science focused and innovation based culture, and collaborations and partnerships have have always been part of our DNA. During today's presentation, we will reference some of the products being developed under the strategic collaborations, And this slide acknowledges those relationships. Let's move to Slide 4. Reference on this slide are some of the many successes that propelled our growth throughout our 22 year history.
One key factor in our future growth is the breadth and depth of our proprietary pipeline, which we anticipate will expand to 9 programs in the clinic by the end of this year. So now let's move to Slide 5 and look at some of the recent achievements in our pipeline and beyond. We moved a major step closer to our goal of bringing our own medicines to patients with the FDA's acceptance of the tisotumab pedotin BLA for priority review. Data from the clinical trial on which the BLA was based, the Innovative 204 Phase 2 study, Was also recently published in The Lancet Oncology. As we shared with you last quarter, The PDFA target date for our potential U.
S. FDA approval is October of this year. Along with our partner, CGM, We look forward to updating you on the progress of tisotumab vedotin in metastatic cervical cancer in due course. Data from 2 of our other pipeline products was also featured at recent medical conferences, including multiple presentations of updated dose escalation data for abcaritumab and a presentation of preclinical data for GEN-ten forty two, one of our DuoBody products in co development with BioNTech. Excitingly, we are anticipating an additional DuoBody product in the clinic by the end of the year, Following a recent CTA submission for dual body CD3 B7 H4 or GEN1047, which may have potential in solid tumors.
We look forward to additional pipeline expansion in the future, including potentially from our oncology research and development collaboration with BOLT Biotherapeutics. In addition to progress in our own pipeline, the power of Genmab's innovation was reflected in important updates for products being developed by other companies. Enclacumab, formerly in development with Roche, is now in Phase 3 development with Global Blood Therapeutics. The pivotal studies are assessing the safety and efficacy of enclacamab in reducing the frequency of vaso occlusive crisis or VOC related hospital readmissions in patients with sickle cell disease. There were also exciting updates for clinical stage products that incorporate our DuoBody technology.
Novo Nordisk published preclinical data on the DuoBody based MAM8s in the journal Bloods and multiple abstracts evaluating Janssen's bispecific program leveraging GenMark's dual body technology platform were presented at this year's ASCO. In June, Janssen also announced that the FDA granted Brain Tube Therapy designation for teclistamab in the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. So now let's move to Slide 6 and look at the most significant milestones to date for Genmab's in Duobody Technology. In May this year, Janssen received FDA approval for ribofans for patients with metastatic non small cell lung cancer with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Exon 20 insertion mutations. This is the first regulatory approval for a therapy created using our proprietary dual body technology.
And we hope this is the first validation of many Of the major potential of this innovative technology to create truly differentiated bispecific antibody therapeutics. With the approval of hyperphones, there are now 4 therapies on the market that incorporate Genmox innovation. DARZALEX, which has now been part of the treatment regimen for over 200,000 patients, continues to evolve with additional approvals in both Europe and the U. S. The approved indications for multiple myeloma expanded in both territories based on the Phase 3 APOLLO study and subcutaneous daratumumab is now the only approved therapy for AL amyloidosis in both the U.
S. And in Europe. DARZALEX was also granted an approval in China are based on the Phase 3 LAPUS study, which examines daratumumab in combination with Zolcade and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory Multiple myeloma. Sales in the first half of the year were also strong, and we reported $2,798,000,000 in net sales by J and J, an increase of 52% over the first half of twenty twenty, Resulting in DKK2,360 million in royalties to Genmab. We are enthusiastic about the future of all 4 of these medicines as they exemplify our commitment to applying our world class antibody expertise to create differentiated antibody therapeutics with the potential to fundamentally improve patients' lives.
The collaborations for these medicines provide us with recurring revenue from royalties, which we can then use to invest further in our business to deliver on our inspirational vision. I'm now pleased to turn the call over to Anthony, who will discuss our revenue in more detail. Anthony?
Great. Thanks, Jan. Let's move to slide 7. As I've done in the past, I'd like to start with an overview of our financial framework and the related key drivers. First off, let's think about our revenue profile.
On the left, you can see our current and future recurring revenue streams. There are now 4 approved products created using our innovation. That's DARZALEX, KASIMTA, TEPEZZA and most recently, RIBERVAN. Each of these have exceptional growth profiles. Taken together, we expect them to generate significant cash flows for us in the years to come.
Then we have an additional potential revenue stream that could come online later this year as we submitted the BLA for tazotamab vedotin in Q1. If T cell is approved, that will bring the total number of approved products to 5, will continue to invest in our business and capabilities to position us for sustained success, and will accelerate and expand the potential winners in our pipeline and will also ensure we are ready to launch should Tiso and in the future epridumab be approved. As well as investing, will, of course, remain focused on the bottom line. Now with this context set, let's take a closer look at an important component of our recurring revenue growth DARZALEX sales on Slide 8. We saw continued strong performance for DARZALEX in the first half of twenty twenty one.
You can see that in the chart on the left. Overall, DARZALEX sales grew by 52%. That's net sales of approximately $2,800,000,000 which translates reached DKK 2,360,000,000 in royalty revenue. This exceptional growth was driven by continued strong market shares across all lines and by the strong uptake of the subcu formulation. So DARZALEX remains a key driver of our revenue, as you can see on Slide 9.
Looking at the graph on the left, you can see our recurring revenues grew by 49% in the first half of the year, primarily due to higher DARZALEX royalties. We've already spoken about DARZALEX and the very strong performance there. Moving to COSIMTA, we're encouraged by the nice quarter over quarter growth seen in the first half of the year. For Tepesa, Due to the supply chain disruption, we didn't record any royalties for the Q1. However, Horizon started to supply the market again in April with have strong sales reported in Q2.
We're also enthusiastic about the recent approval of Ribrevant and look forward to seeing how sales progress. So our revenue profile continues to get stronger with increases both in recurring and non recurring revenue after excluding, of course, The one time upfront payment from AbbVie in 2020. And we're taking our strong recurring revenues are investing in a highly focused way, as you can see on the next slide. Total operating expenses grew 26% in the first half of the year. And here you can see where we invested.
We continue to accelerate our investment in our product portfolio, especially the advancement of both ECCO and dual body PD L1-four-1BB. We've also continued to strategically spend on expanding our team, hiring key team members to support our growing product pipeline. And we've continued to build our commercialization and broader organizational capabilities to support our expansion. Finally, Now let's look at our financials as a whole on Slide 11. Here you can see our summary P and L.
For H1, revenue came in at approximately DKK3.6 billion. That's up 83% on last year if we exclude the one off payment from AbbVie in 2020. Total expenses were about $2,200,000,000 with 79% being R and D and 21% G and A. Operating income was $1,300,000,000 compared to $4,600,000,000 last year. This was also impacted by the upfront payment from AbbVie.
Our net financial items amounts to a gain of $527,000,000 which was primarily driven by the strengthening of the U. S. Dollar against the Danish kroner on our U. S. Dollar denominated cash and investments.
Then we have tax expense of $444,000,000 So as you can see, extremely strong financial performance for the first half of twenty twenty one. Now, let's look at our guidance are on slide 12. Following our strong first half numbers, we are improving certain aspects of our 2021 guidance. We now expect our revenue to be in the range of DKK7,300,000,000 to DKK7,900,000,000 driven primarily by the continued strong growth of DARZALEX. Our OpEx guidance will stay in the range of $5,500,000,000 to $5,800,000,000 as we continue to step up our investments in the second half of the year, are in line with our overall strategy and our 2021 key priorities.
Putting this together, we're planning for Now for my final slide, let me provide a few closing remarks. In summary, we've had a very solid first half. We've created growing recurring revenue streams based on products with exceptional growth profiles, And that gives us a strong backbone of significant underlying profitability. And we're investing those revenues in a highly focused way realize our vision and capitalize on the significant growth opportunities in front of us. And on that note, I'll hand you back to Jan to discuss our key priorities.
Thank you, Anthony. Let's move to Slide 14. Our world class team continues to work tirelessly to meet the many ambitious goals we set for ourselves for this year. We are especially excited to share updates on our clinical programs, including data from both our Tour in the U. S.
And our HexaBody based proprietary programs. As we continue to build our pipeline and evolve into a leading fully integrated biotech innovation are in the process of our business. We are looking forward to a busy second half. So let's now move to our final slides. This is Slide 15.
That ends our presentation of GenMark's First Half twenty twenty one Financial Results. Operator, please open the call for questions.
Our first question comes from the line of Wimal Kapadia from Bernstein. Please go ahead.
So Can I just ask on EFCO? Just curious how you think about the Polaris data from earlier this week are from Roche suggesting we have a new standard of care in first line DLBCL. Just wanted to hear your thoughts on a potential trial for EPCO with Bolivia, how quickly you could begin a pivotal trial in this setting. I'm curious if you actually believe first line DLBCL is the largest opportunity for EPCO, at least based on what we know about the molecule today. Thank you.
Thanks, Wimal, for the question. And I'm going to pass the question on the POLYFE trial to Judith Klimovsky. And then Anthony, once you can potentially detail the first line, the fuselage B cell and form a market opportunity. I can tell you, Wimal, we are going for that for sure. And Judith can explain how the Polarex data may potentially impact the route for the FUSLABS T cell lymphoma.
Judith?
Yes. Thank you, Yan. So we are aware of the result, the same as you. Thank you for the question. So far, we have a high level will be in the discussion of the data.
As soon as the granularity of the data becomes available, will assess it thoroughly and determine what is the impact or what other steps we need to take to ensure our clinical development plan is aligned with a most current potential standard of care. Are very premature to say because we don't know their results in detail.
And Wimal, just to follow on that in terms of the market opportunity, we certainly see The frontline DLBCL opportunity as a significant one for epridumab, but we also see A broader lymphoma opportunity as well. So, I think, again, as Judith commented, it's early it's too early to comment At this point, we'll certainly ensure that you're informed as we evolve the strategy.
Thank you, both. Wimal, I think I give it back to you now. Okay, great.
Thanks very much.
Thank you.
And the next question comes from the line of Matthew Weston from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.
Hello. Good afternoon. This is Elizabeth Walton on for Matthew Weston. I'm wondering if you can help us a little bit on costs. We've seen you raise your sales guidance, but not your guidance for your operating expenses.
Perhaps you can help us think about the cadence of your commercial spending given the tesotinab Japanese submission is delayed? And then perhaps on the R and D spending use underspent versus consensus expectations for this quarter, can you also help us there in thinking about your cadence of R and D spending going forward?
Thanks, Elizabeth, for both questions. And I will hand them over to Anthony Parcano. Anthony?
Sure. Thanks, Elizabeth. You're right. I think overall H1 costs were a bit on the low side relative to our full year Guidance, maybe starting on the R and D. Expenses were impacted by phasing of costs related to the various pipeline programs, particularly EPCO and dual body PD L-one hundred and forty one BB.
Here, from our perspective, it's a matter of timing, and we expect cost related to these programs and other programs, sort of R and D activities more broadly to ramp up in the coming quarters. And we also have some chunky CMC investments to come later in the year. As a reminder on EFCO together with AbbVie, we are still planning some additional late stage trials, so more to come on that. So overall from the R and D perspective is primarily timing and phasing, and we expect to make up a lot of it in the second half of the year. On the SG and A side, Our focus here really is on the near term potential launch of tazotumab vedotin.
Team is really geared up to make sure we're ready if that ultimately the PDUFA date is hit in October. Team is working hard on that, maybe in a minute, Anthony Mancini will provide a bit of color on that one. And at the same time, we're also super excited about EFCO. In this regard, the team is preparing for echo and potential launch and overall making some important investments in building the overall commercialization infrastructure and a lot of exciting prelaunch activities. So in summary, Elizabeth, we believe our 2021 guidance on OpEx to be at the right level for now.
Anthony, anything you want to add as it relates to SG and A and Some of the prep going on for T
cell? Yes. No, I just Anthony would add just a couple of comments as it relates to tislelomab vedotin. And one of the important things is that we are now, as Jan alluded to earlier, working towards launch readiness for the target PDUFA date of October 10th for tisotumab vedotin in collaboration with our partner, Seagen, We actually are now launch ready in the U. S.
With fully trained field teams in place in anticipation of that PDUFA date, And we're really looking forward to a robust launch. We have robust launch plans in place, and we're confident that we can ensure broad awareness and adoption of see the upon approval. So that's kind of where I'll leave it.
Thanks, Anthony and Anthony. Thank you, Elizabeth, for the question.
And the next question comes from the line of Emily Field from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Have a question. I hope I'm not getting too sleuthy here, but it looked like in your internal development chart that the color bar for GEN-ten forty two advanced this quarter from last quarter. So I was just wondering if you could give us an update on when we may see that dose escalation data in the back half of this year and any guidance into what tumor type we may potentially see that in?
Thanks, Emily. I think what I can say is that we have submitted multiple abstracts to different conferences And also an abstract for 1042 for 1 of the conferences in the coming months. We haven't yet received feedback on whether it's accepted, but what I can tell you is that we are super, super excited about the data, the 1042, and I hope that you will share that sentiment with us once you see the data. It's a bit too early to comment on the exact tumors, but What I can tell you is that we have seen signals in multiple tumors. So we have to further explore probably which ones to pursue, but we are very, very excited about 1042.
Thank you.
Thank you, Amelie.
And the next question comes from the line of James Gordon from JPMorgan. Please go ahead.
Hello. James Gordon, JPMorgan. Thanks for taking the question. A question on J-one hundred and forty six, please. The question was that T-ten forty six is an MESC silence for 1b PDL-one bispecific in the clinic.
So just beyond maybe plant market, Where you're seeing differentiation versus some other companies that are also following the same approach? And also just in terms of how we might think about what data we're Is it logical to think that we're going to see the data all in one big lump, so potentially it's something like SITC in mid November? Or are we going to get the data at various different conferences over the year
So this is a question related to 1046, I think, James. I didn't catch that in the beginning. Why don't we pass over that yes, why don't I pass over to Thij, Marie, and Thij can give you some further color on the type of data you can expect in the coming time, James. Tahir?
Yes. So if I understood thank you. If I understood the question correctly, there were 2 components. 1 was On the construct in and of itself, and I think we've spoken many times about the complicated biology of engaging for 1 VB in this condition of activation that we try to achieve with our model and as it relates to the advantages come from the dual body platform to try to interrogate that complicated biology. So we feel very comfortable And confident in our asset because we knew how difficult it was to get actually a construct that would elicit the biology that we were looking for.
As it relates to the data, I mean, it's probably fair to say that there will be some data readouts as data becomes available. We're continuously enrolling and obviously generating data. We will probably provide some updated data at SITC. Again, Similar to the comment that was made at TENHANZE42, obviously, we have submitted some data, but we have not yet confirmation that this will be presented. And for the other tumor types, as we generate the data, we'll present them at an opportune time when the data is mature Any updating conferences, probably more in the first half of next year.
Thanks, Tayl. Thanks, James, for the question. Operator, next one.
The next question comes from the line of Michael Novol from Nordea. Please go ahead.
Yes. Thanks a lot. So just a question to EPCO in CLL. Maybe you can just provide whether some of the data you've submitted conferences also include some of the initial data. I know it's early, but data in CLL.
And then secondly, Maybe you can just remind us about the inclacomab royalties and economics with now GPT. And then lastly, in terms of your Dara sales guidance, I know it's, of course, also based on what sort of feedback you get from J and J, but The midpoint indicates no growth between first half and or the low point no growth between first half and second half. Is that even realistic? And if it is realistic, then what should drive no growth in sales in the second half?
Thanks for the questions, Michael. I will handle the first two and then pass the third question over to Anthony Pagano. So definitely, APCO, multiple data sets submitted, Michael, and I'm willing to say here, also including the early data for CLL from the first patients, and let's hope that we can present them near the end of the year. Then economics for inclacromab, This is another program which we started off at Roche in the early year, I think it was around 2,003 in 2004 time frame, economics are very similar, I can tell you, to the pesa economics, Michael. I don't know the exact milestones here, but they're very, very similar.
The contract the molecule was made in the same era have taken clotumumab. So I probably want to leave it with that and then hand the other question over to Anthony Pagano.
Yes. Thanks, Michael. And I guess after a strong start to the year, I can see why you asked the question. For me at this stage, our guidance sort of feels at the right level. And let me spend a couple of moments and explain to you why.
I mean to start and start thinking about the growth rates that we saw in the first half of the year, I think it's useful to remember that the year over year growth rates that we saw were positively impacted by some of the favorable comps, right, due to the softness we experienced in the early parts of 2020 due to COVID. And turning to our guidance, when we think about our revised guidance for Dara, we really focused on 2 main scenarios to kind of bookend it for you, Michael. First, the 5% sequential growth rate we saw in Q2. And this is really the most recent data point we have and reflects the continued very strong fundamentals for Dara, where we've seen very nice market shares across the board, Particularly in frontline where we've seen some meaningful gains in the U. S.
And this of course is coupled with ongoing strong uptake of the subcu formulation. So this level of continued growth gets us towards the top end of our guidance range of $5,900,000,000 So The second scenario and the second sort of point I'd like to make, Michael, is that unfortunately, as you know, we also find ourselves in the midst of a global pandemic. As we've heard from a number of the other companies, COVID continues to represent a challenge in diagnosing new cancer patients, and in some cases, getting the needed treatment to existing cancer patients. For sure, so far, this doesn't seem to have been a significant barrier for Dara, but it's something I think we do need to be mindful of and take into consideration when formulating our guidance. So here to reflect what I just explained and the fact that we could see some unexpected choppiness in the second half of the year, We assume the H2 sales level that approximates at H1, and that gets us to the bottom end of our guidance range of $5,600,000,000 So when you take this all together, we believe that the $5,600,000,000 to $5,900,000,000 is the right level for us overall.
And maybe just to step back for a second, though, Overall, we continue to be super pleased with the very, very strong fundamentals of Dara, the continued investment that's being made in terms of continued development of Dara as well as the overall growth profile for DARZALEXIS sort of generally.
Thanks, Anthony. Next question, operator?
The next question comes from the line of Michael Schwed from Guggenheim Securities, please go ahead.
Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. I have another one on eptoritumab. I noticed that your broad Phase III study, the 480 patient study is are enrolling patients. Just curious if you could update us how you're tracking towards completion of enrollment of some of those Cohorts and how you're thinking about potential timelines for accelerated regulatory
Thanks for the question, Michael. I will hand it over to Tari Amari, who is on top of the recruitment. Tahir?
Yes. I'm on top of the recruitment, but I'm not entirely sure if I will communicate them in detail. But The study has multiple arms with different B cell malignancies that are obviously occurring at different speeds because of the different incidence prevalence as it relates to the specific inclusion and exclusion for TAEUS for relapsedrefractory c such B cell, relapsedrefractory follicular lymphoma and Renapse refractory MendocImmforma. So it's a little too early to speculate on the timelines, but we are are quite happy with where we are in the Kuglans, particularly with the COVID challenges that certainly have had implications Broadly across the entire landscape, we've been enrolling basically on our projections.
Thanks, Sai. And Michael, please go ahead.
I was just curious, sorry, Jan, about the data
will update on EPCO later this year. Will this be another follow-up on the Phase 1 data? Or will this include some of those Phase 2 go over there
as well. What I can say here, Michael, is that we have submitted multiple abstracts, and that will include data. I already said that in my answer. Will first answer on CLL, but it will also be potentially some combination data, combination therapy data, This is new, which you haven't seen anything from and potentially updates, of course, on the already the Phase III data, Which you have seen already before. So it will be a combination of data, and I think We are very excited about, I think, the potential of APCO.
We believe it will be an absolute transformative therapy in the lymphoma space. And we can't wait to hear back from the conferences, Michael, whether the assets are accepted, and then we will have an open discussion on that.
And maybe to add to the question, I think, that's general, like registration enabling or potential registration enabling data sets I usually first submitted to authorities before they are presented in the public.
And the next question comes from the line of Craig Svanovich from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hey, thank you very much. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for the update as well. Just two questions.
1, in your interim report, you quantified the potential impact of the outstanding DARZALEXA litigation at DKK146 1,000,000. I was just wondering If you could provide any color on the math on how you got to that. And then assuming continued growth in DARZALEX sub Q, would you expect that for the second half, it would be somewhere in that neighborhood or slightly greater? So that's just my first question. And then second just on DARZALEX subcu.
Halozyme reported earlier this week and they shared that they had data to suggest that Conversion from IV to subcu is about 66% in the U. S. So I was just wondering if that data matches kind of what you're seeing in the U. S? And can you comment on what you think that conversion looks like outside the U.
S? Thanks so much.
Thanks, Craig, for the The first one can probably best be handled by Anthony Pagano. And the second question on the conversion rate and then how it looks in the U. S. Versus rest of the world can probably be addressed by Anthony Moccini. Maybe Anthony Pagani, you can start.
Yes, it's Greg. So we'll do some have some fun, do some math together here. We've provided our original guidance for 2021. I talked about kind of call it a headwind As it relates to what Gantan is doing in terms of withholding some royalty from us, we have to distribute it. And the appropriate thing is, most accounting rules Not recognize that revenue, that's exactly what we've done.
I highlighted at the beginning of the year that we thought the impact was about DKK 150,000,000 Now with the improved guidance, DKK 500,000,000 on a full year basis, how do you get to that number? So effectively, it's a that you referenced here for H1, about DKK140 1,000,000 or so. I think on a go forward basis, as we've kind of already seen, expect the total level of sales of Q to be higher and continue to grow as we move. So we do expect that number to increase in the second half of twenty twenty one as total sales But also as the total amount of subcu sales relative to IV sales also continues To grow up. Hopefully, that helps you get to the math.
I can't give you royalty rates, etcetera, specific amounts, Janssen was holding, that's just something we're not part of the contract with telecom.
Thanks, Anthony. Maybe Anthony wants to send you some color on the conversion from
On IV and subcu usage, it's really dataset, so what Halozyme will depend on the dataset, but it's largely in line with what we're seeing based on IQVIA and Simba data. And at the end of Q2, what we saw about 64% of U. S. Gross sales expressed in terms of fast Your question about outside the and obviously, Greg, that number continuing to evolve in a positive way with a
fly to the U.
S. Now that the formulation is launched in the EU and actually achieved public reimbursement In a good majority of countries, in fact, 4 of the top 5 EU countries, we can say that it's about 54% already SubQ, and that's really highly dependent on the system in each of the countries, which as you know Are very different. So hopefully that gives you a little bit color on subcu inside the U. S. And out.
Thanks, Joanna. That's Great. If I could just get a quick follow-up. What do you think that max conversion could look like? I think there's a Good reason to think that some patients would prefer to stay on IV for a variety of different, whether it's social factors.
But can you help us think about Where you think ultimately this conversion could go to?
Anthony, do you want to comment on that?
Yes. I can sort of give you my sense of this. Look, normally when you have a subcutaneous version and an IV version, practice economics play a factor in sort of determining where it could go, because in the case of FastPro, that's really not a factor, Because they continue to both be in Part B, we really don't see any huge barriers to continued subcu adoption in the U. And so, I think because of the in fact, it's quite the opposite. It's 3 to 5 minute injection versus Multi hour infusion, so we actually see more advantages than any disadvantages.
And you mentioned kind of the social aspect of the infusion. It's hard to tell exactly where that would sit, but there's no other real reasons to not use subcu. Hopefully, that gives you a little bit of color, Greg.
And the next question comes from the line of Jonathan Chang from SVB Leerink, please go ahead.
Thanks for taking my questions. On the BOLT collaboration, can you discuss the rationale behind partnering with BOLT to evaluate bispecific immune stimulating antibody conjugate therapeutics? And how does this platform compare to others you may have evaluated in the process? I'd also be curious to know how you're thinking about target selection for this approach. Thank you.
Thanks, Jonathan, for the questions. I will happily hand it over to Tahi. But I can tell you that we have had intense discussions with multiple candidates for these type of conjugates and are super excited about the Bold Biotherapeutics Technology and platform, and we have we are already working with them now on the very large number of target programs. But let me ask Kai to first give a perspective on why we have selected the BOL technology and then maybe I can add to that at the end. Kai?
Well, so I mean, let's start first. Thank you for the question. As Jan would say, we're very enthusiastic about The potential of engaging in the innate immune system and see that as very complementary Some of our mechanisms that we are currently having in clinical development for that are going to come clinical development in the very near future. So it's very a complementary strategy to the things that we have already been working on, either the Stemap alone or in our collaboration with BioNTech. We have looked, of course, at a number of companies that are working on this.
We felt at the time that All of these deals that there was a good collaborative spirit and a joint scientific idea and belief The colleagues at Volt, so this was one important part and we also felt that they were very much leading or At least on top of the field as it is emerging. And I think it's all there is to say at this point. As Jan alluded to, As these discussions went on, we had a lot of work that was already done in terms of proof of concept. And so we are quite happy with What we saw, which led to the deal, and I don't think we would at this call give any indications on targets, Except that this is a very important cornerstone of our future IO strategy.
Thanks, Taiv. What we should also say is that the approach is, of course, already clinically validate in the HER2 space, which is very different from some other technology platforms. So we are very, very excited. We have already, I think, more than several hands full of potential targets we are pursuing, both at monospecifics and at bispecifics. So I I think there's definitely more to come here, Jonathan, and we're very, very excited about this new partnership, and we will progress it maximally from here.
We have one more question from the line of Asthika Gornavani from Truist Securities. Please go ahead.
Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. I hate to dwell on this, but it's just important for us to understand. So For SITC, for Gen 1042, Jan, you mentioned That was a single abstract submitted. I'm curious if you can tell me how many abstracts with clinical data was submitted for Gentium-forty six?
And then if I can tag on just another catalyst related question here. Previously, you've alluded that you might have epriritimab initial expansion data this year. I just want to know is, have any abstracts for that for the NHL expansion being submitted? Thank you.
Thanks, Astika. I think I can answer you that for 10.46, we have submitted one abstract. And For ecuritumab, we are not commenting on that because we have multiple abstracts there from different studies. So we are not going to comment on that until we have heard back from the conference us together on whether it's accepted or not.
And we have one final question from Kennen MacKay from RBC. Please go ahead.
Jan, you mentioned EPCO potentially being a blockbuster therapy. I think another one from your pipeline that could fit that bill is Jamie, the ABC in development in collaboration with ABC Therapeutics. Just wanted to get your perspective on that asset and Whether or not that GBS signal that's being seen there is something that could improve as that moves forward in standard of care in Hodgkin's or in solid tumors or If there's really any understanding of sort of where that's coming from. Thanks and congrats again.
Thanks, Kennen, for the kind remarks and for the question. I'm going to hand over the ABC Therapeutics question on to Tahi, I think who's on top of that data. And Tahi can maybe give you a bit of on how we look at that on the IL-two receptor ADC concept time?
Sure. Yes. So, the challenge with this concept of course is The toxicity related to the payload, which is Difficult to manage, and I think the team at ADCT is continuously working through optimizing the management of These toxicities and so I think there is still some work to be done in order to fully assess The opportunity for Kami
in
both solid as well as Hodgkin, because As the data right now, there are some concerns around the tolerability, particularly if you want to go into combination
and as there are no further questions, I'll hand it back for closing remarks.
So thank you for calling in today to discuss GenMark's financial results for the first half of