Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our third quarter business update and financial results. I'm Namir Hassan, CEO of Zelluna, and I'm delighted to be joined by Geir Christian, our CFO. I can have the next slide, please. And the next. Today, we will be covering our key events for our third quarter. We'll revisit the TCR-NK technology briefly . We'll go into more detail on our lead ZIMA-101 first-in-human clinical study, and then we will cover a financial update and finally finish with a summary and outlook. I can have the next slide, please. And the next one. Thank you. It's really been another defining quarter for Zelluna, with tremendous progress across all areas of development. I'll focus here on our lead clinical program, and perhaps most importantly, we have really seen a tremendous progress in the recruitment and dosing of patients, which are on track.
This is, and can tend to be, a challenge for early-phase clinical studies, and I'm delighted to say that we have treated two of three patients at level 1, and we expect to complete the cohort and treat the third patient in Q4. The clinical and biological assessments, which include tumor imaging assessments and patient sample analysis, remain ongoing for the patients. This has been really underpinned by the strong progress and the strong engagement that we have seen from our clinical sites and our clinicians. In fact, the sites overall have pre-screened over 30 patients across different indications for the two biomarkers that are necessary, MAGE-A4 and HLA-A2. Because of this high volume of engagement, we're able to guide today that we expect to treat and fill cohort two, the second dose level, by early Q2 2027.
This really has been a tremendous start for the clinical study. Second to that, we have also seen encouraging initial clinical observations, no dose-limiting toxicities. The safety profile has been favorable. This is a very important point when it comes to cell therapies, where we can see and have seen toxicities in patients with other types of cell therapy modalities. We're also looking at samples from patients, as you know. These samples include blood samples, they also include biopsy samples, and what we have seen so far are the distribution of cells in the system, systemically in the bloodstream, is as expected, and we have also picked up some immune marker changes.
What we're looking for here are biological traces for the effects of TCR-NK, for the effects of our therapy, and we're picking up some changes that suggest we are seeing some immunological changes as a consequence of treating with TCR-NK. These changes have also been seen with other types of immunotherapies, and so we continue to assess what these changes mean and how they may potentially be linked with the effect of the treatment. Parallel to that, it's also a delight to mention that our manufacturing transition is on track. We have a new CDMO that we have been working with, and the first run has been completed with product characterization ongoing. This is a very important element of any cell therapy, where manufacturing needs to be adaptable and versatile, and potentially transferable between manufacturing sites.
What this run has demonstrated and highlighted is the potential adaptability of the manufacturing platform that the team have been developing over the last years. We announced last night that we were delighted to receive an award from the Research Council of Norway of around NOK 16 million to advance our manufacturing program. Lastly, and also very importantly, we are seeing growing clinical evidence in the field for the TCR-NK concept. This is some data that has emerged from MD Anderson, where they have a TCR-NK therapy. It targets a different target, NY-ESO. It is in a different setting, in this case, multiple myeloma. What they have shown is a complete response that is durable with this type of therapy in a multiple myeloma patient that has been heavily pretreated with multiple lines of therapy, including highly innovative prior cell therapies.
This is a very important point and goes to reinforce the concept and the approach that we have, which is that TCR-NKs, in concept, are able to deliver. Move on to the next slide and just revisit briefly why our platform technology is exciting and differentiated. We have a differentiated platform whereby we have TCR-NK cells, and we also have a clinical stage program which we are very excited about, and we have been updating on. We now have seen external clinical evidence demonstrating that the concept can work and really drive durable external clinical evidence, demonstrating that the concept can work and really drive durable responses. We also have a scalable manufacturing platform with layers of IP, including a concept patent. This is a patent protecting TCR-NK. If I can have the next slide, please. Just a couple of slides to briefly revisit the context. Context is important.
We are operating in a cell therapy space, and these two slides demonstrate two axes of what it means to operate in a cell therapy space. The first is to demonstrate that small patient data sets within this space can really command high value when it comes to approvals. Here shown are multiple approvals with the number of patients that have driven these approvals, showing that approvals for cell therapies can. For that is that, in general, cell therapies, when they work, they work of what happens when you then increase the number of patients. In fact, just a week ago, another company with a cell therapy, Iovance, that have an approval, have treated another indication, separate to the approved indication.
They treated eight patients with synovial sarcoma and had seen four responses in those patients and have immediately moved to a registration study on the back of the 50% response rate on relatively few patients. Small patient data sets can be predictive of what one can expect later on. If I can have the next slide, please. Another axis to consider when it comes to cell therapies is the potential value of small patient data sets where we have seen multiple transactions over the last couple of years that have involved small patient data that have driven acquisitions and partnerships. Important to remember with these types of transactions is that it is symbolic also of the shift we have seen in cell therapies and the appetite for off-the-shelf scalable cell therapies, and that is exactly the arena that we are in.
We are offering an off-the-shelf scalable cell therapy platform, in our case, to treat solid tumors, which is where the largest cancer burden is and the greatest commercial possibility. If I can have the next slide, please. What have we done over the last quarter, and what can we look to the horizon towards? We have really transitioned to become a clinical-stage company over Q3. We have had a great start when it comes to site engagement and patient identification. This can be a big challenge for early -phase clinical studies, and I think a testament to the excitement around the program and the platform, we're seeing huge engagement from sites and the clinicians. Now we're building that momentum where we're able to guide on when we expect to complete the next dose level, dose level 2.
Incidentally, level 2 is three times higher dose than level 1. so it's a significant uplift from where we are today. Also continue to build on the platform and the pipeline with manufacturing and working with our new CDMO, and also our pipeline, where the lead pipeline program is another target, KK-LC-1, that is expressed across complementary cancers to MAGE-A4. So we're moving and building our clinical data with a focus on clinical execution in order to really develop the understanding and build the data on the potential of the TCR-NK platform. That, we believe, will really open strategic options for the organization moving forward. If I can have the next slide, please. Just to revisit the TCR technology and pipeline, we have typically done this in our updates. We can keep this relatively brief.
Four pillars, if you like, of the company and the platform technology. We believe it's a game-changing platform with a de-risked concept and path. We'll come back to that a little later. We have a protection on the concept, the TCR-NK concept, which we think really holds tremendous value if we come to show that the platform is able to deliver responses in patients. We believe near-term value inflections. We're moving and advancing with momentum through our dose escalation study.
We expect to fill cohort one in Q4, and we're able to guide on filling cohort two by early Q2, which will all be very exciting to build that clinical data, tumor imaging, sample analysis, and really build a comprehensive picture of how the treatment is working in patients, and all of this operating within the arena of cell therapies, where we have seen the value, high value of small clinical datasets. If I can have the next slide, please. So, we talk about the de-risked concept. We now have updated on the external data that has demonstrated for the first time a TCR-NK delivering deep responses in a late-stage multiple myeloma patient. We also believe the components of TCR-NK are de-risked. The T-cell receptor itself is a validated scaffold, targeting scaffold. We have two approvals that are driven by T-cell receptors in solid tumors.
NK cells themselves are, we believe, a validated cell type with decades of clinical data demonstrating the safe use of the cells and also potency in liquid cancers. We bring those two things together in one cell to really drive responses in solid tumors. That way, we believe we are addressing the main challenges that are marking the difficulty for current cell therapies to really drive scalable treatment for solid tumors. Moving on to the next slide. These are the challenges that I had touched on, three main challenges. The first is the effectiveness of cell therapies in solid tumors, where most therapies go after a single target, and what that means is that the cancers can avoid that target, whilst perhaps showing a response initially. Patients tend to relapse with those types of therapies.
With our TCR-NK approach, we have multiple ways of recognizing cancer. We have demonstrated that in our science that the talented team have been able to produce and publish. With recognizing cancer in multiple ways, we aim to reduce the prospect of cancer escape. The second challenge has been scale and cost. All the therapies that have been approved for cell therapy are ones that are specific to each patient, so every patient will get their own manufacturing batch. That comes with cost, that comes with complexity, failed manufacturing runs, and ultimately difficult and challenging to scale. Whereas we produce an upfront batch, frozen, hundreds of vials in the freezer, accessible and immediately able to use those for patients. So it is a scalable, lower-cost solution.
Finally, the safety challenges that many cell therapies face, including some of the latest innovative therapies that we have seen, such as in vivo CAR-T, where we have seen toxicities emerge in those novel platforms too. So far, we have seen a favorable safety profile with our TCR-NK platform. We know NK cells generally are safe. They have lower risk of toxicities that are typically seen with other cell therapies. So we believe collectively the TCR-NK approach can provide effective solutions to all three challenges. Moving on to the next slide. Our manufacturing platform that we are now working with a new CDMO on is one where we are able to upfront generate hundreds of vials that are destined to treat many patients, and those are frozen down and can be used immediately when needed.
This scalability prospect for our platform really addresses a huge challenge in trying to meet the massive unmet need, which is the solid cancer space. Moving on to the next slide. I will spend a little time on our first-in-human study. As you know, we have two sites that have been activated, that are up and running, and that are recruiting patients. Highly engaged sites where we have built strong momentum. Professor Fiona Thistlethwaite from The Christie is our Chief Investigator. This is a quote that she has in her reflections on the start of the trial, again, encouraging progress to see the recruitment, identifying high volume of patients, taking them through the pre-screening. So that is the first eligibility test looking for MAGE-A4 and HLA-A2.
We also have Andrew Furness from The Royal Marsden in London also identifying patients and channeling those patients into the study. This is crucial and fundamental to any early phase clinical study, is to really build momentum in patient recruitment, particularly for those early doses, so one can get through the first dose levels and move to the higher dose levels. Very pleased by this engagement and progress. Moving on to the next slide, please. An illustration and a reminder of the format of the study. It is a phase I dose escalation, three patients per cohort, three dose levels defined, and we have a fourth dose level that is flexible, not predefined. We have four indications, lung, ovarian, sarcoma, head and neck cancer, and patients have been identified and have been screened for the biomarkers MAGE-A4 and HLA-A2 across all four indications.
We are treating patients that are heavily pre-treated. These are very sick patients, heavily pre-treated, sometimes with high disease burden, with no other options, unfortunately, for them. That is the state of patients that we are treating. We are really trying to develop and induce responses in quite a poorly patient population. We have oversight by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee, and we had announced in August that they had reviewed the first patient data, the sentinel patient, and had assessed and recommended the continuation of the study on account of the favorable safety profile. You can see there in the illustration the process that a patient will go through, lymphodepletion to prepare the patient for the cells, three infusions of the cells, safety observation period, and for the first patient, at least in the cohort, a review of that patient's data to allow the next two patients.
For each cohort, by the end of the cohort, we also have a safety review by the independent committee for the entire cohort. We really comprehensively analyze the patients across various axes. We look at tumor responses by imaging, tumor biology, cell kinetics, immune biology, and I had commented earlier on some of the findings we have seen for those in this early phase analysis. Moving on to the next slide, safety is a really important feature when it comes to cell therapies and is really growing to become a differentiating feature for cell therapies. Safety can limit the potential scale and use of cell therapies, where safety can be a challenge and problematic. Those therapies would need to be used in specialist centers, and so limits the scale to use the therapies in more community hospitals.
We have seen toxicities with CAR-Ts and also with the emerging in vivo CAR-T platforms with neurotoxicity. We have seen cytokine release syndrome and also some graft-versus-host disease. There are a range of toxicities that we may see with some cell therapies that so far for TCR-NKs, we have not seen so far a favorable safety profile. This really is growing to be a differentiating feature potentially for the platform. Moving on to the next slide, this is to demonstrate what areas we are looking at and what are we looking for essentially in the first patients treated. Principally is to demonstrate safety. This is a phase I study, and that is always the principal driver. It is a first-in-class MAGE-A4 targeting T-cell receptor NK, so even more important to demonstrate safety.
In the patients that we have treated, we have had a favorable safety profile with no dose-limiting toxicities. That is very important. Next, the next layer is to demonstrate proof of mechanism to also inform the potential of the platform. For that, we are looking at sample analysis, tumors, blood samples. This is ongoing, and we have seen some encouraging changes in patients with peripheral immune marker changes. As mentioned, we are looking for essentially traces and biological effects of TCR-NK in the blood. With some changes that are seen, we are really assessing what those changes potentially might mean with respect to TCR-NK effect. Ultimately, of course, we would be wanting to understand the effects on the tumor and really want to observe tumor shrinkages through imaging.
Those assessments continue, and we expect a greater opportunity to observe those effects as we move through the dose levels, where level 2, for example, gives three times the exposure of cells compared to level 1. with our guidance on when we expect to treat patients in level 2, we are really excited to look forward to getting there and continue to assess the effects on the tumor now and as we continue to move through the dose levels. Moving on to the next slide, just to take you through the sequence of events that we have had over the last quarter or so. We have had two patients treated. The first patient was dosed in July.
We then had a one-month safety period, and after that, we had the Independent Data Monitoring Committee review the entirety of the data for the patient and recommend the recruitment of the next two patients, and that was in August. The second patient was dosed in October, and throughout that period, we have been building momentum with identifying patients across the indications and smoothening the infrastructure to the testing needed for the two biomarkers, HLA-A2 and MAGE-A4. Now we are in full swing with that momentum built, over 30 patients that have been tested for the two biomarkers, and we expect to complete level 1 in Q4, and we can guide now on when we expect to complete level 2 by early Q2 2027. All of that is a credit to the team at Zelluna and a credit to the teams at the two clinical sites.
They have really shown a very strong engagement with the study. Moving on to the next slide. Just to take a moment, because this is very important. The external growing evidence on the potential of TCR-NK, perhaps now underpinned by the first clinical data with a TCR-NK program from the MD Anderson, where they had announced a complete durable response in a multiple myeloma patient. What was reported, it is a response in a heavily pre-treated patient, a patient that has been treated in prior lines of therapy with a cell therapy, including BCMA CAR-Ts, which can be very effective, but they relapsed with that, and they went on to get the TCR-NK and had a response with TCR-NK that was complete.
You can see there in the stains in the picture on the right, staining for the cancer cells and the target NY-ESO, where there is complete clearance in the bone marrow of those cancer cells. This is important because it demonstrates that the concept, the approach, the TCR-NK engine, if you like, is able to really drive durable, deep responses, in this case, in a myeloma patient. What we are aiming to do in our study is to demonstrate responses in solid cancer patients. So the TCR-NK can target, kill, and drive responses in late-stage cancer patients. I can have the next slide, please. Looking to our pipeline, we have a pipeline beyond MAGE-A4, that is made up of KK-LC-1, which is the next in line, and then behind that, PRAME.
It is a pipeline which has broad tumor potential, multiple cancer indications, as you can see, really large cancer types with high unmet medical need. As we have been building our platform, truly a platform, we also leverage on the platform knowledge and infrastructure. So pipeline programs can plug into the manufacturing platform. For example, they can plug into the part, the regulatory. Pipeline programs can plug into the manufacturing platform. For example, they can plug into the part, the regulatory. So pipeline programs can plug into the manufacturing platform. For example, they can plug into the part, the regulatory.
A loan or a commitment and running licensing agreement. We also raised funds in June, gross proceeds of 58.2 million. We are very pleased, Trond, that we could announce earlier this year that we received NOK 16 million in grants from the Research Council of Norway to support our clinical study. As you might have seen yesterday, we announced that we have received another grant from the Research Council. It is almost 16 million as well, in support to further advance our TCR-NK manufacturing. I would like to move on to the profit and loss and the cash position on this slide, where you can see the quarter this year compared to the quarter last year and the year-to-date figures.
I will not go into any details, but just mention that our payroll and payroll-related expenses is substantially lower than last year, as we have reduced our headcount substantially. The R&D costs are about 14 million, or less than 14 million this quarter, and the key contributor to the cost here is the startup of the clinical trial. It is quite a heavy cost to get that trial up and running, and we have, as indicated, enrolled the first patients this quarter. Other operating expenses. Sorry, if you go about one slide back. Our operating expenses were influenced this quarter by a few events in terms of the private placement and share issue and general meeting. Compared to the third quarter last year, we have substantially lower costs year to date this year, because we do not have any business combination-related cost anymore.
Then I am happy to take you to the next slide, where you see the quarters from first quarter last year to this quarter, and you can see how the figures compare over time. I will not go into the details here, other than say you can see the number of employees demonstrating the substantial reduction in the headcount that we have gone through post the business combination. Next slide, please. Here you see the quarterly operating cash flow, which were substantially higher last year, and now is more stable around NOK 20 million plus per quarter. When we look at Q3 especially, the operating cash flow is in line with the operating profit adjusted for depreciation and other non-cash items. The cash position was reduced from NOK 86 million at the end of the second quarter to NOK 60 million this quarter.
Importantly, though, is to mention that we have not received our tax refunds, SkatteFUNN, tax credit for 2025 yet at the end of the Q3, which we can expect to receive this quarter, Q4. We also not received any payments yet under the NOK 16 million grant for the clinical trial. We expect that to happen shortly, and most of that will then come in Q4 and in 2027. I think that completes my review. On the next slide, I would like to hand it over to you, Namir, for a summary and outlook.
Thank you, Geir. If I can have the next slide, please. I would like to finish by bringing together why we believe this is a really exciting phase for Zelluna. Starting on the left, what we have achieved and what we have de-risked is that we have really gone through our preclinical work and demonstrated the potential preclinically. We have generated a GMP batch of material that is frozen and now being used to treat patients. We have world-class clinical sites active and dosing patients and really strongly engaged in the program, which is exactly where a development program would want to be at this early stage. All of that with a protected TCR-NK platform. Looking below, the external evidence that continues to grow on the potential and the confidence in TCR-NK.
We have the TCR data that we know demonstrates the validity of the T-cell receptor as a targeting platform, the natural killer cells and the data on natural killer cells demonstrating their safety and potential activity, and now with growing evidence for an independent TCR-NK demonstrating that the concept can drive responses in late-stage cancer patients. If we move our focus to the central bucket, patient data, which is our highest priority now, moving through dose escalation, treating patients, the initial data is emerging and encouraging, and we are now able to look towards when we may be able to complete higher doses with guidance on when we would fill cohort two by early Q2 2027. Why does it matter? That is shown on the right-hand bucket. It matters because small patient datasets where we are able to demonstrate the biological translation into patients can really drive high value.
High value in terms of transactions and high value in terms of the patients needed to then drive approvals. The predictability of those small patient datasets is very clear when it comes to cell therapies. We're very excited. We're very excited by the progress. We're very excited by the potential to continue to build on the clinical data and hopefully demonstrate the potential of the platform to drive value and create value for patients that are really in dire need of new therapies, and then, of course, in parallel, value for shareholders. Thank you very much for your time this morning, and I'll be delighted to take any questions as they come in.
Thank you, Namir. This time, we have received quite a few questions, so see if we can deal with all of those. They are related to the clinical trial and our clinical program. The two first questions are related to if you could explain why no tumor response or imaging data have been disclosed from level 1 so far, and what criteria will determine when you're ready to report clinical efficacy data? A related question is the decision not to disclose clinical efficacy data driven primarily by the small patient number, short follow-up, the low initial dose level, or absence of sufficiently mature data?
Very good questions, and thank you for those questions. Of course, this is an attention point for us, of course, as well. The phase that we're in is early. We've treated a couple of patients, and so the primary drive for this phase is to establish safety. We are clearly assessing patients for the potential for any responses in tumor as we are assessing patient samples. But at this early stage, with only two patients treated, it's premature to speculate or comment on any of that data. Where we would establish and communicate the data, we would need to be confident in any communication that we make.
But of course, we're very mindful of that, and we'll be very diligent to our obligations, and we would communicate when the time is right, when we believe we have sufficient data to make a communication and a meaningful comment on imaging in particular. To the second question, and I think the layers of explanation in that second question, in terms of us being early phase, in terms of us having short follow-up so far, I think all of those are true, and I would resonate with those explanations. I would say as we move forward, we'll continue to build on the data. We've treated two patients. We're waiting on imaging data. We have a third patient that is scheduled to be treated, and of course, we'll need to receive the imaging data from that patient.
As we collect all of that data, we are, of course, mindful about potentially communicating to the market when we believe there is meaningful data to communicate.
Thanks. Then we have a couple of questions related to what we have seen so far. You have touched upon this, and you have elaborated somewhat on this, Namir, but maybe it is good to repeat, and maybe you can say something more along the lines of, around cell kinetics are in line with expectations. Could you explain in simple terms what this means and what you have seen so far in patients? The other question is, you also mentioned change in pro-inflammatory immune markers after treatment. Is this an early indication that the ZI-MA4-1 cells are doing what you hoped they would do in the body?
Very good questions. With the cell kinetics, in simple terms, what we have seen is when we look for the cells in the bloodstream, we can see that they pretty rapidly disappear from the bloodstream, and we assume they are moving into the tissues. This is a phenomena that has been seen with other NK therapies where you infuse the therapy, and within a day or so, they disappear into the tissues. We have seen similar kinetics with our TCR-NKs. Our assumption is that they are moving towards the tumor, and we are looking at that, of course, and that assessment is ongoing when it comes to biopsies, for example. Then when it comes to the immune marker changes that we have seen, of course, what we are looking for are biological traces of the effect of TCR-NK.
We are looking for those traces in the bloodstream. Of course, the actual effect of our therapy will be on tumors, but you can sometimes pick up traces in the bloodstream that would indicate the cells are acting in the tumor. This is quite a broad analysis where we are looking at the whole field of immune markers, and we have picked up some changes that occur once we infuse the cells. These changes are what are called pro-inflammatory changes. In essence, the immune system seems to be kicking off, and we have seen similar changes with other immunotherapies, whether that is cell therapies or bispecifics. We do not know exactly what it means yet, whether it means that we are seeing the TCR-NKs active in the tumors and we are picking up these traces in the bloodstream. We do not know that yet.
But it's interesting, and I think encouraging, that we're seeing these immune effects that have been seen with other immunotherapies at the time that we're infusing with the cells. And remember, this is the first dose level, and so to see these effects at this dose level, we take that as encouraging.
Thanks. We have a couple of questions related to the dose and the dose levels. So one question is, how many dose levels do you have in total? And another one is, level 2 will use three times as many cells as level 1. based on what you have seen so far, what would you hope to see differently at the higher dose?
Okay, so we have three defined dose levels in the protocol. There's also a fourth dose level that's not defined. That's a typical practice in protocols to give the flexibility in case you want to go in between dose levels or do something else. But three defined, predefined dose levels. Dose level 2 is three times the exposure of dose level 1, and dose level 3 is two times the exposure of dose level 2, so six times the exposure of dose level 1. In terms of what we hope to see for dose level 2, I think very standardly with cell therapies and most other cell therapies, the higher the exposure, the more opportunity to see the effect. And so in broad terms, we would expect to see heightened effects of what we're beginning to see now in dose level 1. That's in broad terms.
When we may expect to see very compelling clinical efficacy data is impossible to say at this stage, and it would be remiss for me to give a prediction of that. But what I will say is, what we're seeing now is encouraging safety, and tolerability, and some immunological effects, and we continue to assess patients. We haven't completed the cohort. We continue to assess patients. But what we expect is to see heightened effects as we move up the dose levels.
Thanks. Then one question related to recruitment. No patients were recruited in September, yet the company highlights ongoing recruitment efforts. What gives investors confidence that recruitment will accelerate going forward?
It's a very good question. With any clinical study and setup, the infrastructure needs to be established initially, and that happens at the time of activation and post-activation, actually. What we have now is we have built strong momentum in identifying patients across those four indications. As I say, over 30 patients that have been put through the initial screening cascade, so looking for HLA-A2. It can take some time to build that momentum, and I think that has been, actually, when compared to other studies, early phase studies, we have thankfully, and thanks to the sites, we've actually swiftly moved to build that momentum.
Now we can It wouldn't have been appropriate initially to estimate and guide on the rate of recruitment, but now we're in a position, as you have seen in the presentation, to be able to guide on when we expect to fill the next cohort, and that's on the basis of the momentum that has grown over the last weeks since activation, weeks and short months, and the strong engagement of the sites to really consistently, continuously identify potential patients on the study. I would say the confidence that the investors can have is in recognizing that we have over 30 patients. I think that's already a testament to how many patients have actually gone through the initial eligibility test, and that momentum continues, and strong engagement continues. Hence, we expect to fill cohort two, of course, at a faster pace than cohort one.
Thanks.
We're up and running, I'll say.
Very good. Thanks. Just one practical question. Would you publish the full ZIMA poster presented at ESMO on our website?
Both posters, ESMO and SITC, will be also presented tomorrow, and that's a translational-leaning poster. ESMO was purely clinical. Both are on the design of the study and the plans for translational analysis and have no data presented at this stage, but both will be put onto the website.
Thanks. One final question. You elaborate a little bit on it, but what is the significance of the recent external TCR-NK clinical results for Zelluna?
This is a very important point because what we have explained is the different levels of de-risking that we have been able to advance on account of really the great work of the team. I think one element that has remained around the concept, since it's a novel differentiated concept, is whether the concept and the approach is able to drive responses in patients. I think this external validation provides that piece of information that demonstrates that a TCR-NK is a different product for a different target and a different disease setting. Nonetheless, the approach itself, driving natural killer cells with T-cell receptors and targeting cancers that way, is being demonstrated to work and drive deep response in a myeloma patient, a complete response in a late-stage myeloma patient.
If you like, that remains the one, had remained the one uncertain element around the concept, can it work? This data shows that it can.
Thank you. I am pleased to say we have answered all questions. Thank you all for participating at the call. We hope you will enjoy the rest of your day.
Thank you very much. Have a good day.