NASDAQ:BLTE Belite Bio Q1 2024 Earnings Report $62.50 -0.16 (-0.26%) Closing price 05/5/2025 04:00 PM EasternExtended Trading$62.58 +0.08 (+0.12%) As of 05/5/2025 04:05 PM Eastern Extended trading is trading that happens on electronic markets outside of regular trading hours. This is a fair market value extended hours price provided by Polygon.io. Learn more. Earnings HistoryForecast Belite Bio EPS ResultsActual EPS-$0.27Consensus EPS -$0.34Beat/MissBeat by +$0.07One Year Ago EPSN/ABelite Bio Revenue ResultsActual RevenueN/AExpected RevenueN/ABeat/MissN/AYoY Revenue GrowthN/ABelite Bio Announcement DetailsQuarterQ1 2024Date5/13/2024TimeN/AConference Call DateTuesday, May 14, 2024Conference Call Time4:30PM ETUpcoming EarningsBelite Bio's Q1 2025 earnings is scheduled for Monday, May 12, 2025, with a conference call scheduled on Tuesday, May 13, 2025 at 4:30 PM ET. Check back for transcripts, audio, and key financial metrics as they become available.Conference Call ResourcesConference Call AudioConference Call TranscriptSlide DeckPress Release (8-K)Earnings HistoryCompany ProfileSlide DeckFull Screen Slide DeckPowered by Belite Bio Q1 2024 Earnings Call TranscriptProvided by QuartrMay 14, 2024 ShareLink copied to clipboard.There are 7 speakers on the call. Operator00:00:00Hello, and thank you for joining us to discuss BLi Bio's First Quarter 2024 Financial Results. Joining the call today are Doctor. Tom Lin, Chairman and CEO of BeLive Bio Doctor. Nathan Mata, Chief Scientific Officer and Hauwan Zhang, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, let me point out that we will be making forward looking statements that are based on our current expectations and beliefs. Operator00:00:24These statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially. We encourage you to consult the risk factors discussed in our SEC filings for additional detail. Please note that you can submit questions throughout the call today by clicking on the Q and A box at the bottom of your screen, and we'll respond to questions following our prepared remarks. Now, I'll turn the call over to Doctor. Lin. Speaker 100:00:47Thank you, Judy. Thank you, everyone, for joining our reporting for the Q1. I'm Tom Lin, CEO of Pillai Bio. Joining me is our CSO, Nathan Mata and CFO, Hao Yuan. I'd like to start off with an overview. Speaker 100:01:03Telenorabant is a novel once a day oral tablet designed to bind to certain retinal binding protein, not as RPP4, as a means to specifically reduce retinal delivery to the eye. This approach is intended to slow or stop the formation of the toxic retinal derived byproducts, which are generated in the visual cycle and are implicated in progression of Stargardt disease and geographic atrophy. BeliBio believes that early intervention directed at emerging retinal pathology, which is not mediated by inflammation will be the best approach to potentially slow disease progression in STARAS studies and GA. There is still a significant unmet need for both indications as currently there is no approved treatments for starless disease and there are currently no approved oral treatments for TA and we are already in global Phase III trials for both indications. So far, we have been granted Fast Track designation, Rare Pediatric disease designation and Orphan Drug designation in U. Speaker 100:02:11S, EU and Japan. We have several patent families and with composition of meta patents lasting until 2040s and with patent term extension and new patents to be filed, we will have patent protection past the 2040s. For Stargardt indication, at our last week, we presented further positive findings and treatment results from our end of Phase 2 results, which our CSO will be presenting. The Phase 3 is already fully enrolled and estimated intra readouts by end of 2024 or early 2025. We've also initiated a Phase 2 study in THALGAS, which will recruit Japanese patients that is required for NDA in Japan. Speaker 100:02:58For GA, dry AMD indication, we currently have about 100 subjects enrolled in our Phase 3 in GA. And with this, I would like to pass it on to our CSO to give this clinical and scientific update. Nathan? Speaker 200:03:13Thank you, Tom, and thank you everyone for attending. What we'd like to share with you today are some new analyses that we have from our open label Phase 2 study in adolescent Stargardt disease. This trial enrolled 13 adolescent Stargardt subjects aged 12 to 18 years of age and it was a 2 year study in which patients took oral timlarevat 5 milligrams daily. The first analysis I want to show you is a genetic analysis of all of our patients in study. This has not previously been reported. Speaker 200:03:40You'll see for each subject there are 2 entries. That's because there's an allele for each ABC84 mutation and so we're looking at 2 of them. And you can see 11 of 13 subjects have severe bivalent mutations. This analysis by the way was conducted by Doctor. Rando Aleckmetz who the identifier of the Stargardt gene, the ABC84 gene. Speaker 200:04:01So the point here is that our cohort is very, very prominently affected with the severe mutations. There are only 2 subjects, subjects 35, who have a moderate allele of ABC84 on their important to note the way these genes are classified is through a score called the combined annotated dependent depletion score. In this analysis, scores above 20 are predicted to be among the 1% most deleterious and you can see all of our subjects with the exception of those alleles on subjects 35 have scores well above 20. So this is a very severely affected cohort. The next analysis I'd like to show you is that of these subjects, 5 of them, subjects 1, 3, 4, 12, and 13 never spawned in a trophic lesion. Speaker 200:04:47This is important because in this particular study, subjects came in with only autofluorescence lesions at baseline. So we were monitoring the transition of the autofluorescence lesion to the atrophic lesion type. And then once the atrophic lesion formed, we measured the growth rate of that lesion. And we previously reported a remarkably reduced growth rate in the overall population. Now we're showing you in those subjects that did not grow an atrophic lesion over 24 months, they had very severe mutations. Speaker 200:05:14So the absence of lesion growth in these subjects could not be attributed to benign or mild mutations. The next analysis is a very important one because it shows us that 4 subjects have the exact same allelic mutation. Subjects 9 and 10 are siblings. They are 2 brothers. You can see there they have the exact same mutations across alleles. Speaker 200:05:34And subjects 12, 13 are brothers, sister. They also have the very same mutations. The reason this is important is because other investigators have suggested that identical genetic mutations predict identical disease course. I can tell you right now that is not what we're seeing in the Phase 2 study. And I'll show you some of that information right now. Speaker 200:05:54Here we have the visual acuity analysis of all subjects before they came in to the study and they all have different disease duration. What we did is we looked at subjects that had bilateral vision loss, that is vision loss in each eye over the period of between the time they were diagnosed and the time before they came into the study. And what we found is there were 6 subjects who had a very severe bilateral vision loss of 10 letters per eye, a mean annual loss of 10 letters per eye. That's significant because, well, for two reasons. 1, it tells us that autofluorescent lesions in the fovea do in fact cause visual acuity loss. Speaker 200:06:33Remember, these subjects have not grown atrophic lesions yet. The other thing that's important is if you look at the sibling subjects again, 9, 10, and 1213, you can see their visual acuity loss is very different. Subjects 9 and 10, again, are their 2 brothers. They have similar disease duration, but subject 10 lost vision, whereas his brother, subject 9 did not. Same thing for subjects 1213. Speaker 200:06:56Subject 12 has an 8 year of disease duration, whereas the sister has only 2 years, yet the sister with only 2 year disease duration lost significant letters whereas the brother did not. So these data tell us in fact that identical genetic mutations do not necessarily predict identical disease progression as so far as it pertains to visual acuity loss. This is an analysis of the visual acuity of all subjects on the left hand side and then those 6 subjects shown on the right. I want to first say that in all subjects over 24 months, the mean loss was only 5 letters, that is over a whole period of 24 months, all subjects lost only a mean of 5 letters over 24 months. So that's roughly 2.5 letters per year. Speaker 200:07:38Now, if we just focus on the 6 subjects that came in losing 10 letters per year, we now see over 24 months, they've only lost about 3.8 letters, which is roughly about 2 letters per year. So we've taken the significant 10 letter per year loss down to 2 letters per year. That is a substantial preservation of visual acuity in these subjects. The next analysis I'd like to show you is the lesion growth analysis. And it's important to note that these autofluorescent lesions convert to atrophic lesions and a visual of that is shown on the graphic on the upper right hand side. Speaker 200:08:12This is the actual lesion growth data from Subject 10. You can see at baseline, there's this very large autofluorescence lesion, which is referred to as questionably decreased autofluorescence or QDAF. Over time, atrophic lesions will be spawned within the autofluorescence lesions. The autofluorescence lesions are referred to as definitely decreased autofluorescence lesions. So here we're looking at the transition of the autofluorescence lesion to the atrophic lesion type and we're seeing if there's a proportionality between the decrease of the autofluorescence and the increase of the atrophic lesion size. Speaker 200:08:46And that graphic is shown on the lower right hand side. As I said before, 5 of 12 subjects, 42% never grew in atrophic lesion. We're not including subject 7 in the analysis because that subject was lost to follow-up at month 12. But in those subjects that did grow atrophic lesions, you can see a very clear correlation between the decrease of the autofluorescence area and the increase of the atrophic lesion area showing that the atrophic lesion does grow certainly within the autofluorescence zone, but nowhere else. So we have confined lesion growth to within this zone and we know that lesion growth from prior analyses is significantly lower than in natural history. Speaker 200:09:25There's only one subject, subject 5, that grew an atrophic lesion outside of initially identified autofluorescence area. And we believe that could be due to reading error of the image software, which I'll get to right now. We typically use and most people use a software called the Heidelberg region finding software. This is a software that accompanies the imaging camera that allows ophthalmologists to grade lesions in the back of the eye, retinal lesions. The problem with this software is that it is affected by human error. Speaker 200:09:57So humans have to actually look at the lesions and demarcate the zone of atrophy. And sometimes readers don't agree. So you can have a case where you have a difference of opinion and it has to go to an arbitrator. So this can be a very time consuming and error prone process, but this is what is being used today. Our reading center has developed a new algorithm for reading lesions, which does not rely on subjective reader bias. Speaker 200:10:21In fact, it uses a mathematical classification of lesions based on the proximity of the lesion and the density to that of the optic disc as well as healthy retinal tissue. And it focuses just on the 6 millimeter macular area, which is the most important to look at when you're talking about visual acuity loss. And as I said before, it's independent of reader bias. So it's looking at just pixel densities across the lesion area and really all the reader is doing is getting the data back from the software and reporting whatever the computer algorithm provided. So I want to show you a reanalysis of our data using this particular image grading software. Speaker 200:11:00What we found in fact was that if we looked within the macular area using this new grading algorithm, we find that there's 12 eyes of 8 subjects that did in fact have macular lesion involvement at baseline. And we monitored the lesion growth of the macular lesion of these patients over time and you can see that on the left hand side. The solid lines and dots show you the actual data from the lesion growth and the dotted line shows you a 3rd order polynomial fitted through the data so you can see the trend line. You can see it's very clear. The lesions do grow from baseline out to about month 16, but then starting from month 16 to month 24, there was absolutely no further growth of the lesion. Speaker 200:11:41As you can see on the right hand side, the percentage involvement of the atrophy within that 6 millimeter macular zone. The 100% would indicate that all 6 millimeters of that zone are occupied by atrophy. As you can see here, our subjects are showing no more than a 7% encroachment of the atrophic lesion into the macula and it's static from 16 to 24 months. So we're very pleased to report this data and it is consistent with the stabilization of visual acuity that I showed you earlier. Finally, I want to talk a little bit about our Phase 3 study in geographic atrophy. Speaker 200:12:16It's important to note that the Phase 3 trial design in Stargardt disease and the Phase 3 trial design in Stargardt are very, very similar. They have the same dose. They have the same duration, 2 years with the same interim analysis. There's the same 2:one randomization. And of course, we're looking at all the same safety and efficacy assessments that we're looking at to judge atrophic lesion growth and adverse events. Speaker 200:12:38There's only two differences in these studies. First, the indication GA instead of Stargardt and then secondly, a higher predicted enrollment population for the GA study to reflect the higher prevalence of the disease in the population. So with that, I'll turn it over to Hal Lund to discuss financials. Thank you. Speaker 300:12:56Thank you, Nathan. So in Q1, twenty twenty four, we had R and D expenses of $6,800,000 compared to 5 point $7,000,000 in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to increase in expenses due to 1st, conducting the DRUGEN study 2nd, initiating the Dragon 2 study and 3rd, wage and salary due to our R and D team expansion and share based compensation granted in the Q3 of 2023. On G and A expenses, in Q1 2024, G and A expenses was $1,600,000 compared to $1,200,000 in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to increase in share based compensation granted in the Q3 of 2023. Speaker 300:13:42On net loss, we had a net loss of $7,900,000 in Q1 2024, compared to $6,900,000 in Q1 2023. In terms of cash, we had totaled $95,500,000 in cash and investment in short term U. S. Treasury bill in Q1 2024, as compared with $77,800,000 in cash in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to last year's follow on offering and the exercise of the warrants issued in the follow on offering in our ATM offering. Speaker 300:14:15In Q1 2024, we raised $12,500,000 from the exercise of the warrant issued in the following offering and ATM offering. In addition, we raised additional $25,000,000 from our registered rep offering in April. We expect cash runway beyond 2026. Thank you. Back to you, Tom. Speaker 100:14:35Thanks, Hao. I would like to conclude with the key milestones to expect for this year. We are still making good progress in the Phase 3 in GA. Many sites have been initiated at our enrolling subjects and more sites will be initiated. Interim data for Phase 3 study in Star Wars disease is expected to be in December this year or early next year depending on data collection and when the DSMB can convene. Speaker 100:15:03Thank you for participating and we'll leave some time for Q and A. Thank you. Speaker 400:15:53Our first question comes from Yi Chen with H. C. Wainwright. Yi, your line is now open. Speaker 500:16:02Hi. Thank you for taking my question. With respect to the novel grading algorithm, is it being deployed in both Dragon 1 and Dragon 2 trials? Speaker 200:16:13Hi, Yi. This is Nathan Ma. I'll answer the question. So we have not yet formally deployed the grading algorithm in either clinical study. We are going to speak with the FDA first about a validation process to determine how they would like us to proceed with this new algorithm in terms of demonstrating its robustness and reliability. Speaker 200:16:32That meeting will occur within the next month or so. But there is a chance, there's every chance that obviously we can implement it before end of study and retrospectively grade the images once we have FDA's approval to use it as a formal grading analysis, it will always be combined with whatever or be compared to I should say with what we obtained with the Heidelberg region finding software. Okay. And to follow-up with the DRUGON-one and DRUGON-two trials, do you intend to enroll patients with at least some degree of atrophic lesion in both trials? Yes, certainly. Speaker 200:17:09For our Phase III studies where the endpoint of course is slowing the growth of the atrophic lesions, all subjects will come in with some measure of atrophy at baseline. But again, as part of our differentiation, we are picking patients with smaller lesions at baseline because we believe that early intervention will be a more appropriate sort of approach for this particular disease, both diseases, GA and Stargardt. Speaker 500:17:34Does that suggest that earlier stage patients without atrophic lesion may not be a suitable population for the treatment? Speaker 200:17:44That's not the case. The case is actually a more regulatory concern because the agency FDA and even EMA are not convinced that autofluorescence in of itself is actually causing photoreceptor cell death or dysfunction, whereas atrophic lesions represent dead retina. And of course, that will lead to loss of vision. So until there's more clinical data to demonstrate that autofluorescence by itself is actually affecting photoreceptor function. And we have some of that data as I mentioned in the presentation. Speaker 200:18:12We have these kids who have autofluorescence lesions at baseline. They don't have atrophy many of them, but they're losing vision. So we'll need more data like that to convince the agency that in fact the autofluorescence is impacting photoreceptor function, then it would be a valid endpoint. But we've shown you here a slowing of the transition from the autofluorescence lesion to atrophic lesion. And then once the atrophic lesions are formed, a slowing of growth of those lesions. Speaker 200:18:36So we believe in both contexts that slowing the transition as well as slowing the growth of the atrophic lesions, this treatment approach is appearing to be effective at both of those different scenarios. Speaker 400:19:08Our next question comes from Mark Goodman with Leerink Partners. Marc, your line is now open. Speaker 600:19:15Hi, good afternoon. This is Basma on for Marc. We have a question regarding the interim readouts. Can you remind us again of your regulatory plans if the interim is positive? And again, positive interim, does it mean that the separation between the treatment arm and the placebo arm has to be statistically significant? Speaker 600:19:37That's our first question and we do have a follow-up question as of this one. Speaker 200:19:40Yes. Hi, Basma. This is Nathan. I'll answer the question. So the way the interim analysis will be handled, it will be independently assessed by our DSMB. Speaker 200:19:51Ourselves on the sponsor side will remain masked. So we will not know the treatment effect nor can we announce a particular treatment effect. The DSMB will do an analysis based upon a predefined statistical window that tells us whether or not we need to add patients. So if we don't need to add patients, there's a very good chance we've fallen within the statistical window in which the treatment effect would be consistent with what something the FDA would approve that is 20% or greater. If we are asked to add patients that means we're not at that particular point yet. Speaker 200:20:22So, we would be adding more patients to sort of increase the conditional power. I should mention that that statistical analysis was developed when we found the enrollment at 90 subjects. We had since over enrolled the study at 104 subjects. So, we actually already have a buffer of subjects that probably we won't need to add. So, I'm pretty confident that number that is the treatment effect number will be consistent with our statistical window. Speaker 200:20:49There is an outcome where we are not in the statistical window and it would be futile to add patients, but this is a non binding futility. So if we do get that outcome, we will still continue the trial to the end of 2 years because it is very likely that you could get a better treatment effect during the 2nd year of study. So those are the 3 different outcomes. I hope that was clear for you, Bosma. Speaker 600:21:11Right. So like you're not going to if okay, so my understanding now is that if there's a positive outcome, there's no change in plans, there's no change in enrollment and okay. Correct. Our follow-up questions regarding the 5 hour out of 12 patients with pathogenic variants that you showed that did not develop any atrophic lesions throughout the 24 months of the Phase II trial. Speaker 100:21:39Can Speaker 600:21:39you remind us again patient with these kinds of variants based on natural history studies, how long does it take them really to develop atrophic lesions from QTAF to TGF just to know treatment effect to have a better understanding of the treatment effect? Speaker 200:21:58It really depends on their baseline status. So if you look at the baseline status of our subjects, the size of their autofluorescent lesions predicts growth within 2 years. That means predicts atrophic lesion growth within 2 years. So the majority of subjects should have had atrophic lesion growth. There's probably 2 subjects. Speaker 200:22:19I can't identify them by numbers. I don't have the data in front of me, but I believe there was 2 that had relatively small areas of autofluorescent lesion, but it was encroaching the fovea. So they're still losing vision. But the short answer is in our cohort, it was expected that the majority of subjects, at least 75% of subjects would have converted by 2 years, would have converted to an atrophic lesion. So the fact that we're seeing 42% of subjects not convert is actually a very, very promising finding in addition to actually slowing the growth of atrophic incident lesions once they are formed. Speaker 400:23:03This now concludes our Q and A portion of the call. I would like to turn the call back over to Tom for final remarks. Speaker 100:23:13Well, thank you everyone for joining this call and asking questions on the trial. Please look forward to more updates from us and as we're making good progress on both studies. Thank you very much and we'll see you soon.Read morePowered by Conference Call Audio Live Call not available Earnings Conference CallBelite Bio Q1 202400:00 / 00:00Speed:1x1.25x1.5x2x Earnings DocumentsSlide DeckPress Release(8-K) Belite Bio Earnings HeadlinesBelite Bio, Inc. Appoints New AuditorMarch 28, 2025 | tipranks.comBelite Bio price target raised to $80 from $79 at BenchmarkMarch 27, 2025 | markets.businessinsider.comShocking AI play that’s beats Nvidia by a country mileYou’ve seen the headlines about Nvidia. Now Tim Sykes is sounding the alarm — because what CEO Jensen Huang is about to announce could change the AI market once again. Experts already predict the total addressable market could climb past $20 trillion. But Sykes believes most investors have missed what’s coming next. He’s tracking a new shift — and says the biggest gains are still ahead.May 6, 2025 | Timothy Sykes (Ad)Promising Pipeline and Strategic Advancements: Marc Goodman Recommends ‘Buy’ for Belite Bio, Inc.March 19, 2025 | tipranks.comBelite Bio Advances in Retinal Disease Trials and Financial PositionMarch 18, 2025 | tipranks.comBelite Bio, Inc. (BLTE) Q4 2024 Earnings Call TranscriptMarch 17, 2025 | seekingalpha.comSee More Belite Bio Headlines Get Earnings Announcements in your inboxWant to stay updated on the latest earnings announcements and upcoming reports for companies like Belite Bio? Sign up for Earnings360's daily newsletter to receive timely earnings updates on Belite Bio and other key companies, straight to your email. Email Address About Belite BioBelite Bio (NASDAQ:BLTE), a clinical stage biopharmaceutical drug development company, engages in the research and development of novel therapeutics targeting retinal degenerative eye diseases with unmet medical needs in the United States. The company's lead product candidate is LBS-008 (Tinlarebant), an orally administered once-a-day tablet for maintaining the health and integrity of retinal tissues in autosomal recessive Stargardt disease and geographic atrophy patients. It is also developing LBS-009, an anti-retinol binding protein 4 oral therapy that is in the preclinical development phase targeting liver disease, including non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, and type 2 diabetes. Belite Bio, Inc was founded in 2016 and is based in San Diego, California. Belite Bio, Inc is a subsidiary of Lin Bioscience International Ltd.View Belite Bio ProfileRead more More Earnings Resources from MarketBeat Earnings Tools Today's Earnings Tomorrow's Earnings Next Week's Earnings Upcoming Earnings Calls Earnings Newsletter Earnings Call Transcripts Earnings Beats & Misses Corporate Guidance Earnings Screener Earnings By Country U.S. Earnings Reports Canadian Earnings Reports U.K. Earnings Reports Latest Articles Is Reddit Stock a Buy, Sell, or Hold After Earnings Release?Warning or Opportunity After Super Micro Computer's EarningsAmazon Earnings: 2 Reasons to Love It, 1 Reason to Be CautiousRocket Lab Braces for Q1 Earnings Amid Soaring ExpectationsMeta Takes A Bow With Q1 Earnings - Watch For Tariff Impact in Q2Palantir Earnings: 1 Bullish Signal and 1 Area of ConcernVisa Q2 Earnings Top Forecasts, Adds $30B Buyback Plan Upcoming Earnings American Electric Power (5/6/2025)Advanced Micro Devices (5/6/2025)Marriott International (5/6/2025)Constellation Energy (5/6/2025)Arista Networks (5/6/2025)Brookfield Asset Management (5/6/2025)Duke Energy (5/6/2025)Energy Transfer (5/6/2025)Mplx (5/6/2025)Ferrari (5/6/2025) Get 30 Days of MarketBeat All Access for Free Sign up for MarketBeat All Access to gain access to MarketBeat's full suite of research tools. Start Your 30-Day Trial MarketBeat All Access Features Best-in-Class Portfolio Monitoring Get personalized stock ideas. Compare portfolio to indices. Check stock news, ratings, SEC filings, and more. Stock Ideas and Recommendations See daily stock ideas from top analysts. Receive short-term trading ideas from MarketBeat. Identify trending stocks on social media. Advanced Stock Screeners and Research Tools Use our seven stock screeners to find suitable stocks. Stay informed with MarketBeat's real-time news. Export data to Excel for personal analysis. Sign in to your free account to enjoy these benefits In-depth profiles and analysis for 20,000 public companies. Real-time analyst ratings, insider transactions, earnings data, and more. Our daily ratings and market update email newsletter. Sign in to your free account to enjoy all that MarketBeat has to offer. Sign In Create Account Your Email Address: Email Address Required Your Password: Password Required Log In or Sign in with Facebook Sign in with Google Forgot your password? Your Email Address: Please enter your email address. Please enter a valid email address Choose a Password: Please enter your password. Your password must be at least 8 characters long and contain at least 1 number, 1 letter, and 1 special character. Create My Account (Free) or Sign in with Facebook Sign in with Google By creating a free account, you agree to our terms of service. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
There are 7 speakers on the call. Operator00:00:00Hello, and thank you for joining us to discuss BLi Bio's First Quarter 2024 Financial Results. Joining the call today are Doctor. Tom Lin, Chairman and CEO of BeLive Bio Doctor. Nathan Mata, Chief Scientific Officer and Hauwan Zhang, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, let me point out that we will be making forward looking statements that are based on our current expectations and beliefs. Operator00:00:24These statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially. We encourage you to consult the risk factors discussed in our SEC filings for additional detail. Please note that you can submit questions throughout the call today by clicking on the Q and A box at the bottom of your screen, and we'll respond to questions following our prepared remarks. Now, I'll turn the call over to Doctor. Lin. Speaker 100:00:47Thank you, Judy. Thank you, everyone, for joining our reporting for the Q1. I'm Tom Lin, CEO of Pillai Bio. Joining me is our CSO, Nathan Mata and CFO, Hao Yuan. I'd like to start off with an overview. Speaker 100:01:03Telenorabant is a novel once a day oral tablet designed to bind to certain retinal binding protein, not as RPP4, as a means to specifically reduce retinal delivery to the eye. This approach is intended to slow or stop the formation of the toxic retinal derived byproducts, which are generated in the visual cycle and are implicated in progression of Stargardt disease and geographic atrophy. BeliBio believes that early intervention directed at emerging retinal pathology, which is not mediated by inflammation will be the best approach to potentially slow disease progression in STARAS studies and GA. There is still a significant unmet need for both indications as currently there is no approved treatments for starless disease and there are currently no approved oral treatments for TA and we are already in global Phase III trials for both indications. So far, we have been granted Fast Track designation, Rare Pediatric disease designation and Orphan Drug designation in U. Speaker 100:02:11S, EU and Japan. We have several patent families and with composition of meta patents lasting until 2040s and with patent term extension and new patents to be filed, we will have patent protection past the 2040s. For Stargardt indication, at our last week, we presented further positive findings and treatment results from our end of Phase 2 results, which our CSO will be presenting. The Phase 3 is already fully enrolled and estimated intra readouts by end of 2024 or early 2025. We've also initiated a Phase 2 study in THALGAS, which will recruit Japanese patients that is required for NDA in Japan. Speaker 100:02:58For GA, dry AMD indication, we currently have about 100 subjects enrolled in our Phase 3 in GA. And with this, I would like to pass it on to our CSO to give this clinical and scientific update. Nathan? Speaker 200:03:13Thank you, Tom, and thank you everyone for attending. What we'd like to share with you today are some new analyses that we have from our open label Phase 2 study in adolescent Stargardt disease. This trial enrolled 13 adolescent Stargardt subjects aged 12 to 18 years of age and it was a 2 year study in which patients took oral timlarevat 5 milligrams daily. The first analysis I want to show you is a genetic analysis of all of our patients in study. This has not previously been reported. Speaker 200:03:40You'll see for each subject there are 2 entries. That's because there's an allele for each ABC84 mutation and so we're looking at 2 of them. And you can see 11 of 13 subjects have severe bivalent mutations. This analysis by the way was conducted by Doctor. Rando Aleckmetz who the identifier of the Stargardt gene, the ABC84 gene. Speaker 200:04:01So the point here is that our cohort is very, very prominently affected with the severe mutations. There are only 2 subjects, subjects 35, who have a moderate allele of ABC84 on their important to note the way these genes are classified is through a score called the combined annotated dependent depletion score. In this analysis, scores above 20 are predicted to be among the 1% most deleterious and you can see all of our subjects with the exception of those alleles on subjects 35 have scores well above 20. So this is a very severely affected cohort. The next analysis I'd like to show you is that of these subjects, 5 of them, subjects 1, 3, 4, 12, and 13 never spawned in a trophic lesion. Speaker 200:04:47This is important because in this particular study, subjects came in with only autofluorescence lesions at baseline. So we were monitoring the transition of the autofluorescence lesion to the atrophic lesion type. And then once the atrophic lesion formed, we measured the growth rate of that lesion. And we previously reported a remarkably reduced growth rate in the overall population. Now we're showing you in those subjects that did not grow an atrophic lesion over 24 months, they had very severe mutations. Speaker 200:05:14So the absence of lesion growth in these subjects could not be attributed to benign or mild mutations. The next analysis is a very important one because it shows us that 4 subjects have the exact same allelic mutation. Subjects 9 and 10 are siblings. They are 2 brothers. You can see there they have the exact same mutations across alleles. Speaker 200:05:34And subjects 12, 13 are brothers, sister. They also have the very same mutations. The reason this is important is because other investigators have suggested that identical genetic mutations predict identical disease course. I can tell you right now that is not what we're seeing in the Phase 2 study. And I'll show you some of that information right now. Speaker 200:05:54Here we have the visual acuity analysis of all subjects before they came in to the study and they all have different disease duration. What we did is we looked at subjects that had bilateral vision loss, that is vision loss in each eye over the period of between the time they were diagnosed and the time before they came into the study. And what we found is there were 6 subjects who had a very severe bilateral vision loss of 10 letters per eye, a mean annual loss of 10 letters per eye. That's significant because, well, for two reasons. 1, it tells us that autofluorescent lesions in the fovea do in fact cause visual acuity loss. Speaker 200:06:33Remember, these subjects have not grown atrophic lesions yet. The other thing that's important is if you look at the sibling subjects again, 9, 10, and 1213, you can see their visual acuity loss is very different. Subjects 9 and 10, again, are their 2 brothers. They have similar disease duration, but subject 10 lost vision, whereas his brother, subject 9 did not. Same thing for subjects 1213. Speaker 200:06:56Subject 12 has an 8 year of disease duration, whereas the sister has only 2 years, yet the sister with only 2 year disease duration lost significant letters whereas the brother did not. So these data tell us in fact that identical genetic mutations do not necessarily predict identical disease progression as so far as it pertains to visual acuity loss. This is an analysis of the visual acuity of all subjects on the left hand side and then those 6 subjects shown on the right. I want to first say that in all subjects over 24 months, the mean loss was only 5 letters, that is over a whole period of 24 months, all subjects lost only a mean of 5 letters over 24 months. So that's roughly 2.5 letters per year. Speaker 200:07:38Now, if we just focus on the 6 subjects that came in losing 10 letters per year, we now see over 24 months, they've only lost about 3.8 letters, which is roughly about 2 letters per year. So we've taken the significant 10 letter per year loss down to 2 letters per year. That is a substantial preservation of visual acuity in these subjects. The next analysis I'd like to show you is the lesion growth analysis. And it's important to note that these autofluorescent lesions convert to atrophic lesions and a visual of that is shown on the graphic on the upper right hand side. Speaker 200:08:12This is the actual lesion growth data from Subject 10. You can see at baseline, there's this very large autofluorescence lesion, which is referred to as questionably decreased autofluorescence or QDAF. Over time, atrophic lesions will be spawned within the autofluorescence lesions. The autofluorescence lesions are referred to as definitely decreased autofluorescence lesions. So here we're looking at the transition of the autofluorescence lesion to the atrophic lesion type and we're seeing if there's a proportionality between the decrease of the autofluorescence and the increase of the atrophic lesion size. Speaker 200:08:46And that graphic is shown on the lower right hand side. As I said before, 5 of 12 subjects, 42% never grew in atrophic lesion. We're not including subject 7 in the analysis because that subject was lost to follow-up at month 12. But in those subjects that did grow atrophic lesions, you can see a very clear correlation between the decrease of the autofluorescence area and the increase of the atrophic lesion area showing that the atrophic lesion does grow certainly within the autofluorescence zone, but nowhere else. So we have confined lesion growth to within this zone and we know that lesion growth from prior analyses is significantly lower than in natural history. Speaker 200:09:25There's only one subject, subject 5, that grew an atrophic lesion outside of initially identified autofluorescence area. And we believe that could be due to reading error of the image software, which I'll get to right now. We typically use and most people use a software called the Heidelberg region finding software. This is a software that accompanies the imaging camera that allows ophthalmologists to grade lesions in the back of the eye, retinal lesions. The problem with this software is that it is affected by human error. Speaker 200:09:57So humans have to actually look at the lesions and demarcate the zone of atrophy. And sometimes readers don't agree. So you can have a case where you have a difference of opinion and it has to go to an arbitrator. So this can be a very time consuming and error prone process, but this is what is being used today. Our reading center has developed a new algorithm for reading lesions, which does not rely on subjective reader bias. Speaker 200:10:21In fact, it uses a mathematical classification of lesions based on the proximity of the lesion and the density to that of the optic disc as well as healthy retinal tissue. And it focuses just on the 6 millimeter macular area, which is the most important to look at when you're talking about visual acuity loss. And as I said before, it's independent of reader bias. So it's looking at just pixel densities across the lesion area and really all the reader is doing is getting the data back from the software and reporting whatever the computer algorithm provided. So I want to show you a reanalysis of our data using this particular image grading software. Speaker 200:11:00What we found in fact was that if we looked within the macular area using this new grading algorithm, we find that there's 12 eyes of 8 subjects that did in fact have macular lesion involvement at baseline. And we monitored the lesion growth of the macular lesion of these patients over time and you can see that on the left hand side. The solid lines and dots show you the actual data from the lesion growth and the dotted line shows you a 3rd order polynomial fitted through the data so you can see the trend line. You can see it's very clear. The lesions do grow from baseline out to about month 16, but then starting from month 16 to month 24, there was absolutely no further growth of the lesion. Speaker 200:11:41As you can see on the right hand side, the percentage involvement of the atrophy within that 6 millimeter macular zone. The 100% would indicate that all 6 millimeters of that zone are occupied by atrophy. As you can see here, our subjects are showing no more than a 7% encroachment of the atrophic lesion into the macula and it's static from 16 to 24 months. So we're very pleased to report this data and it is consistent with the stabilization of visual acuity that I showed you earlier. Finally, I want to talk a little bit about our Phase 3 study in geographic atrophy. Speaker 200:12:16It's important to note that the Phase 3 trial design in Stargardt disease and the Phase 3 trial design in Stargardt are very, very similar. They have the same dose. They have the same duration, 2 years with the same interim analysis. There's the same 2:one randomization. And of course, we're looking at all the same safety and efficacy assessments that we're looking at to judge atrophic lesion growth and adverse events. Speaker 200:12:38There's only two differences in these studies. First, the indication GA instead of Stargardt and then secondly, a higher predicted enrollment population for the GA study to reflect the higher prevalence of the disease in the population. So with that, I'll turn it over to Hal Lund to discuss financials. Thank you. Speaker 300:12:56Thank you, Nathan. So in Q1, twenty twenty four, we had R and D expenses of $6,800,000 compared to 5 point $7,000,000 in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to increase in expenses due to 1st, conducting the DRUGEN study 2nd, initiating the Dragon 2 study and 3rd, wage and salary due to our R and D team expansion and share based compensation granted in the Q3 of 2023. On G and A expenses, in Q1 2024, G and A expenses was $1,600,000 compared to $1,200,000 in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to increase in share based compensation granted in the Q3 of 2023. Speaker 300:13:42On net loss, we had a net loss of $7,900,000 in Q1 2024, compared to $6,900,000 in Q1 2023. In terms of cash, we had totaled $95,500,000 in cash and investment in short term U. S. Treasury bill in Q1 2024, as compared with $77,800,000 in cash in Q1 2023. The increase was primarily due to last year's follow on offering and the exercise of the warrants issued in the follow on offering in our ATM offering. Speaker 300:14:15In Q1 2024, we raised $12,500,000 from the exercise of the warrant issued in the following offering and ATM offering. In addition, we raised additional $25,000,000 from our registered rep offering in April. We expect cash runway beyond 2026. Thank you. Back to you, Tom. Speaker 100:14:35Thanks, Hao. I would like to conclude with the key milestones to expect for this year. We are still making good progress in the Phase 3 in GA. Many sites have been initiated at our enrolling subjects and more sites will be initiated. Interim data for Phase 3 study in Star Wars disease is expected to be in December this year or early next year depending on data collection and when the DSMB can convene. Speaker 100:15:03Thank you for participating and we'll leave some time for Q and A. Thank you. Speaker 400:15:53Our first question comes from Yi Chen with H. C. Wainwright. Yi, your line is now open. Speaker 500:16:02Hi. Thank you for taking my question. With respect to the novel grading algorithm, is it being deployed in both Dragon 1 and Dragon 2 trials? Speaker 200:16:13Hi, Yi. This is Nathan Ma. I'll answer the question. So we have not yet formally deployed the grading algorithm in either clinical study. We are going to speak with the FDA first about a validation process to determine how they would like us to proceed with this new algorithm in terms of demonstrating its robustness and reliability. Speaker 200:16:32That meeting will occur within the next month or so. But there is a chance, there's every chance that obviously we can implement it before end of study and retrospectively grade the images once we have FDA's approval to use it as a formal grading analysis, it will always be combined with whatever or be compared to I should say with what we obtained with the Heidelberg region finding software. Okay. And to follow-up with the DRUGON-one and DRUGON-two trials, do you intend to enroll patients with at least some degree of atrophic lesion in both trials? Yes, certainly. Speaker 200:17:09For our Phase III studies where the endpoint of course is slowing the growth of the atrophic lesions, all subjects will come in with some measure of atrophy at baseline. But again, as part of our differentiation, we are picking patients with smaller lesions at baseline because we believe that early intervention will be a more appropriate sort of approach for this particular disease, both diseases, GA and Stargardt. Speaker 500:17:34Does that suggest that earlier stage patients without atrophic lesion may not be a suitable population for the treatment? Speaker 200:17:44That's not the case. The case is actually a more regulatory concern because the agency FDA and even EMA are not convinced that autofluorescence in of itself is actually causing photoreceptor cell death or dysfunction, whereas atrophic lesions represent dead retina. And of course, that will lead to loss of vision. So until there's more clinical data to demonstrate that autofluorescence by itself is actually affecting photoreceptor function. And we have some of that data as I mentioned in the presentation. Speaker 200:18:12We have these kids who have autofluorescence lesions at baseline. They don't have atrophy many of them, but they're losing vision. So we'll need more data like that to convince the agency that in fact the autofluorescence is impacting photoreceptor function, then it would be a valid endpoint. But we've shown you here a slowing of the transition from the autofluorescence lesion to atrophic lesion. And then once the atrophic lesions are formed, a slowing of growth of those lesions. Speaker 200:18:36So we believe in both contexts that slowing the transition as well as slowing the growth of the atrophic lesions, this treatment approach is appearing to be effective at both of those different scenarios. Speaker 400:19:08Our next question comes from Mark Goodman with Leerink Partners. Marc, your line is now open. Speaker 600:19:15Hi, good afternoon. This is Basma on for Marc. We have a question regarding the interim readouts. Can you remind us again of your regulatory plans if the interim is positive? And again, positive interim, does it mean that the separation between the treatment arm and the placebo arm has to be statistically significant? Speaker 600:19:37That's our first question and we do have a follow-up question as of this one. Speaker 200:19:40Yes. Hi, Basma. This is Nathan. I'll answer the question. So the way the interim analysis will be handled, it will be independently assessed by our DSMB. Speaker 200:19:51Ourselves on the sponsor side will remain masked. So we will not know the treatment effect nor can we announce a particular treatment effect. The DSMB will do an analysis based upon a predefined statistical window that tells us whether or not we need to add patients. So if we don't need to add patients, there's a very good chance we've fallen within the statistical window in which the treatment effect would be consistent with what something the FDA would approve that is 20% or greater. If we are asked to add patients that means we're not at that particular point yet. Speaker 200:20:22So, we would be adding more patients to sort of increase the conditional power. I should mention that that statistical analysis was developed when we found the enrollment at 90 subjects. We had since over enrolled the study at 104 subjects. So, we actually already have a buffer of subjects that probably we won't need to add. So, I'm pretty confident that number that is the treatment effect number will be consistent with our statistical window. Speaker 200:20:49There is an outcome where we are not in the statistical window and it would be futile to add patients, but this is a non binding futility. So if we do get that outcome, we will still continue the trial to the end of 2 years because it is very likely that you could get a better treatment effect during the 2nd year of study. So those are the 3 different outcomes. I hope that was clear for you, Bosma. Speaker 600:21:11Right. So like you're not going to if okay, so my understanding now is that if there's a positive outcome, there's no change in plans, there's no change in enrollment and okay. Correct. Our follow-up questions regarding the 5 hour out of 12 patients with pathogenic variants that you showed that did not develop any atrophic lesions throughout the 24 months of the Phase II trial. Speaker 100:21:39Can Speaker 600:21:39you remind us again patient with these kinds of variants based on natural history studies, how long does it take them really to develop atrophic lesions from QTAF to TGF just to know treatment effect to have a better understanding of the treatment effect? Speaker 200:21:58It really depends on their baseline status. So if you look at the baseline status of our subjects, the size of their autofluorescent lesions predicts growth within 2 years. That means predicts atrophic lesion growth within 2 years. So the majority of subjects should have had atrophic lesion growth. There's probably 2 subjects. Speaker 200:22:19I can't identify them by numbers. I don't have the data in front of me, but I believe there was 2 that had relatively small areas of autofluorescent lesion, but it was encroaching the fovea. So they're still losing vision. But the short answer is in our cohort, it was expected that the majority of subjects, at least 75% of subjects would have converted by 2 years, would have converted to an atrophic lesion. So the fact that we're seeing 42% of subjects not convert is actually a very, very promising finding in addition to actually slowing the growth of atrophic incident lesions once they are formed. Speaker 400:23:03This now concludes our Q and A portion of the call. I would like to turn the call back over to Tom for final remarks. Speaker 100:23:13Well, thank you everyone for joining this call and asking questions on the trial. Please look forward to more updates from us and as we're making good progress on both studies. Thank you very much and we'll see you soon.Read morePowered by