Asahi shares mark weekly slide after cyberattack halts production
On Wednesday, 01 October 2025, Kura Oncology (NASDAQ:KURA) presented at the UBS Virtual Oncology Day, outlining strategic advancements and challenges. CEO Troy Wilson expressed optimism about the FDA approval of Ziftomenib for relapsed/refractory NPM1-mutant AML, with a PDUFA date set for November 30. The company highlighted its financial strength and strategic collaborations, though acknowledged competitive pressures in the market.
Key Takeaways
- Kura Oncology is optimistic about FDA approval for Ziftomenib, with a PDUFA date on November 30.
- The company has a strong cash position of $630.2 million, expecting further milestone payments.
- Strategic partnership with Kyowa Kirin aims to enhance global development and commercialization.
- Registration-enabling trials for Ziftomenib in both intensive and non-intensive AML settings have been initiated.
- The FTI program, including Darlafarnib, shows promise with upcoming data updates at ESMO.
Financial Results
- Cash Position: Kura Oncology reported $630.2 million in cash at the end of the quarter.
- Milestone Payments: The company anticipates substantial milestone payments related to the Ziftomenib program, supporting a strong financial standing.
Operational Updates
- Ziftomenib (AML):
- PDUFA Date: Set for November 30 for relapsed/refractory NPM1-mutant AML.
- FDA Engagement: Positive interactions with the FDA, with no reported disruptions.
- Frontline Expansion: Trials initiated for both intensive and non-intensive AML settings.
- Combination Trials: New trials launched to evaluate combinations with gilteritinib and 7+3.
- Commercialization: A commercial team is in place, with agreements with specialty pharmacies and distributors.
- Kyowa Kirin Partnership: Collaboration focuses on global development and U.S. commercialization strategy.
- Ziftomenib (GIST):
- COMET-015 Trial: Evaluating combination with imatinib in advanced GIST, currently in dose escalation.
- FTI Program (Darlafarnib/KO-2806):
- ESMO Data Update: Upcoming data release on combination with cabozantinib in RCC.
Future Outlook
- Ziftomenib (AML):
- Potential Approval: Anticipated FDA approval around November 30.
- Frontline Data: Expected data release on combinations with venetoclax and azacitidine at ASH.
- COMET-017 Trial: First top-line results anticipated in 2028.
- FTI Program (Darlafarnib/KO-2806):
- Broad Application: Potential expansion to other tumor types and combination with targeted therapies.
Q&A Highlights
- Ziftomenib Commercial Strategy:
- Competition: Emphasis on combinations and earlier therapy lines despite market competition.
- Dual Commercialization: Overlapping sales efforts with Kyowa Kirin to maximize engagement.
- NCCN Guidelines: Plans to submit Ziftomenib for guideline inclusion upon approval.
- COMET-017 Trial:
- Design: Two parallel phase 3 trials with dual primary endpoints.
- Enrollment: Positive feedback and streamlined design expected to drive rapid enrollment.
- FTI Program:
- Cabo Combination: ESMO data to focus on response rates and re-induction capabilities.
Readers are encouraged to refer to the full transcript for a detailed account of the conference call.
Full transcript - UBS Virtual Oncology Day:
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Hi, everyone. I’m David Dye and one of the Biotech Analysts here at UBS. Thank you for joining our inaugural Virtual Oncology Day today. We continue our session with Kura Oncology. It’s our great pleasure to have Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Kura Oncology, with us. Troy, welcome.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Thank you, David, and thanks for the invitation to participate in the inaugural Oncology Day conference.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Excellent, excellent. Great. Always a pleasure speaking with you, Troy. Maybe just for the audience here who are new to the Kura story, could you maybe provide a quick overview of Kura and then we can dive into some of the latest and greatest over the next 12 months?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Sure, thanks. I’d be happy to. Maybe let’s start with Ziftomenib in AML. We have our first PDUFA date on November 30. We think we’re in a good spot for the FDA approval and getting a label that is competitive in the relapsed/refractory setting for NPM1-mutant AML. We’re encouraged by the KOL feedback that highlights the efficacy, the simplicity, the combinability, and the safety of Ziftomenib relative to competitors. Our commercial team is in place and it’s ready to go. We’ve done everything we need to do in terms of hiring, market access, pre-approval information exchanges. If we move beyond that initial indication, David, and think about frontline combinations, we are excited to be advancing Ziftomenib in combination with the standards of care in the frontline setting. We reported promising data in combination with intensive chemo at EHA.
We look forward to reporting similar data with venetoclax and azacitidine later this year, potentially at ASH. We think Ziftomenib shows promise as an early intervention in both the intensive and non-intensive setting. Your participants might have seen we announced this morning the launch of a trial to evaluate gilteritinib and 7+3 in combination with Ziftomenib this morning. Building on all of that momentum in the frontline, on Monday of this week, we announced we had initiated registration enabling trials for Ziftomenib in both intensive and non-intensive. If we look at those three settings, intensive, non-intensive, and FLT3, we have the potential to impact up to 50% of patients with AML, drive meaningful value. If we move from AML to GIST, we’re evaluating Ziftomenib in combination with imatinib in patients with advanced GIST. That trial, which we call COMET-015, is in dose escalation and going well.
Our Kyowa Kirin partnership is going well, really bolsters our global development and commercialization of Ziftomenib. We’re moving aggressively into the frontline, supported by our collaboration with Kyowa Kirin. We’re keen to work with them on the launch and build on the excitement for menin inhibitors. Finally, our FTI program, we’ve been making excellent progress there, including with our new FTI, a compound called KO-2806 or Darlafarnib. That program is addressing resistance to targeted therapies, enabling deep and more durable responses. We will have a data update there at ESMO here in just a few short weeks. Hopefully that, and then from a cash perspective, we had $630.2 million as of the end of the quarter. We’re anticipating receiving substantial milestones in connection with the progress of the Ziftomenib program, David, that should leave us in a very strong cash position. There’s a lot going on.
We’re ready to go and we’re well funded in this environment.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Excellent. Thanks for that overview, Troy. Let’s dive into some of the programs you mentioned, many different developments in the space right now. Focus on Ziftomenib, especially in the relapsed/refractory AML. The PDUFA will be on November 30, so very soon actually. We should be expecting potential approval. Could you help us understand some of the key engagement with the FDA so far? Have they performed any site inspections? Have you discussed any label discussions so far? What’s the latest development on the FDA engagement with Ziftomenib ahead of the PDUFA date?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, I mean, we haven’t really given granular details, David, as we go. What I can tell you is if you look at the FDA guidance, typically any inspections have to be completed at least 60 days prior to the PDUFA date. That was yesterday. You can kind of interpret from that where we might be in terms of your question around inspections and inspection readiness. As far as, you know, we’re now late into the review, and our engagement with FDA has been very constructive. The shutdown, notwithstanding the latest drama, we’ve been impressed by their timeliness, by their engagement through the review process. They continue to be very constructive. We’re looking forward to that November 30 PDUFA, and we’ll be ready to hit the ground running if and when we receive approval.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Yeah, as you mentioned, given all this, you know, things happening at the FDA, have you had any kind of changes in terms of interaction with the FDA so far? Has that just been things as usual, business as usual? Any updates here?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, I can only comment on our specific interactions. We’re working with the hematology oncology group within the oncology division. I think, David, that group has been relatively insulated from a lot of the change and the drama that’s gone on. The reviewers that we have on the Ziftomenib NDA are the same folks with whom we’ve been interacting on the various combination studies, the frontline registrational studies. There’s been a good continuity of experience and we’ve not experienced any disruptions to this point.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Got it. Okay, that’s really helpful. On the label discussion so far, we saw that FDA would actually perform their own adjudication of complete response assessment for AML. Could you just help us understand what are some of the differences between your assessment versus FDA’s assessment? Do you think this might lead to some differences in terms of, you know, CRA/CRH rates?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, I mean, it is true. It’s not just the efficacy data, right? The FDA goes in and performs its own analysis on everything you give them: safety, PK, exposure, drug-drug interactions, efficacy. They really do an independent review, David. I can’t comment on the specifics of where I think we’ll end up, but that’s well known, right? We were prepared for that. That’s part of the information requests and answers that go back and forth between sponsors and the agency. We’ll look forward to sharing the label with you, again, if and when. We’re optimistic. I just want to caveat it that it’s never over till it’s over. Hopefully you’ll see an approval here shortly and then we can talk specifically to the label.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: On that front, I’m just curious, is there any difference in terms of the CR assessment between the FDA’s adjudications versus yours?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: There shouldn’t be, no, because we’re using the same guidance, the guidance that they’ve put forward. Let’s see where everything ends up in terms of the label.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Where could the difference come from though? I mean, we did see a difference between your competitor, right? Their assessment versus FDA label seems to be a little bit off. What do you think that could be?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: I don’t know. We’d have to ask them. I don’t actually, it’s hard enough, David, to have visibility into your own engagement with the agency. I’d be speculating if I talked about anybody else’s. I think ours is going to be, again, very strong, very competitive in terms of safety, combinability, convenience, and efficacy. At the end of the day, I mean, let’s step back and look at the bigger picture, right? This for both us and any potential competitor, this is your first approval. If you really want to maximize the value for patients, you need to get into combinations. You need to get to the frontline as fast as possible. We are now, you know, I think, in a position to get ahead of everybody else in those frontline settings.
The 017 study, I know maybe we’ll talk about it in a subsequent question, but that is designed to really begin to outpace the competition and get us potentially to registrational data sets in the frontline. You’ll also see us publishing additional data on combinations of Ziftomenib with various standards of care in the relapsed/refractory setting. It’s less, I think, about, you know, the little differences in the labels between the two drugs and more about how do you capture that very significant opportunity throughout the continuum of care in AML.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Got it. Yeah, that’s helpful. You mentioned that you are currently preparing the launch activities, especially getting market access, hiring a commercial team. Maybe just tell a little more, for a little more granular detail around what things you’re doing right now to make sure that it’s going to be off to a good start once it’s launched, will be off to a good start once it’s approved in November.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, so we’re doing this in the context of the collaboration. November of last year, about a year ago, we signed this collaboration with Kyowa Kirin to develop and commercialize Ziftomenib globally. The funding that’s coming, you know, really helps to support this broad development strategy. We and Kyowa Kirin are working together to commercialize Ziftomenib in the U.S., which will hopefully be the first approval. Importantly, under that collaboration, you know, Kura leads global development, Kura leads U.S. commercial strategy, and Kura books all U.S. sales. We have, David, as you said, we have, you know, we call them now oncology account managers. In the old days, we used to call them sales reps. We have the sales organization, marketing, market access, and medical affairs all in place. We have the agreements in place with the specialty pharmacies, the specialty distributors. We’ll be ready to go.
The way we’re going to do it, David, is our sales organization and Kyowa Kirin will actually sit on top of each other. Rather than trying to divide up territories, what we’re going to do is call on more sites in a given territory and call on them more frequently. Our organization will look very similar probably to our competitors, but on top of that, we’ll have a similarly sized organization from Kyowa Kirin where they are allocating at least 30% of their time to promoting Ziftomenib in this initial indication. That should give us, David, the ability to work from the tier one sites all the way down, you know, into the stack to get out to as many sites, both in the academic and the community, as possible. We’re going to compete. I definitely don’t think the NPM1-mutant relapsed/refractory market is a winner take all.
We’re going to be competing very aggressively for every patient out there and looking to get, you know, share of voice with Ziftomenib. Our medical affairs team will be educating physicians, you know, nurses, study teams on the opportunities to combine Ziftomenib with other standard-of-care agents, both in the relapsed/refractory and eventually in the frontline setting. That’s how we’re going to handle it.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Yeah, I think that’s my next question, which is, you know, your competitor will launch, you know, their drug in the NPM1 setting a month before, right? You know, and they have already seen some off-label use in NPM1, you know, anecdotally. I’m curious just in terms of your strategy to kind of gain market share, you know, while you’re a little bit later to the market, but you know, your safety or your ability to combine with others might be able to offset that, you know, that lateness to the game. Help us understand the overall commercial strategy there.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, and I would say this even if we were a few weeks ahead of them in terms of our PDUFA dates. I don’t think a few weeks makes any difference, David, in this setting. The reason is, unfortunately, in relapsed/refractory AML, there’s not a large body of patients that are sitting around waiting for therapy. If you don’t treat them within a matter of a few days to weeks, they’re going to expire from the disease. It’s not like there’s a big pent-up pool of patients that somebody’s going to capture in a few short weeks. You said it exactly right, and that is you start in the labeled indication of NPM1-mutant AML. There’s as much competition, David, between the menin inhibitors as well as with other standards of care like gilteritinib, venetoclax. Half of the NPM1 population is FLT3 mutant in the relapsed/refractory setting.
That’s why I’m putting such a strong emphasis on the upcoming data that you’ll see next year of Ziftomenib in combination with gilteritinib. You need to get to combinations as quickly as possible. That also allows you, David, to get to earlier lines of therapy. Ideally, you’d like to get these patients when they’re second line because obviously there are more of them and they do better on therapy when you treat them earlier. If you have to wait until third, fourth, or later lines, then it’s harder to help these patients with their disease. You’re going to see us competing very aggressively, both on the ground with our oncology account managers. Part of the reason we did the partnership with Kyowa Kirin is it gives us the operational and the financial firepower to be able to do the broadest, deepest development strategy of any menin inhibitor out there.
Between intensive, non-intensive, FLT3, there really isn’t any standard of care we’re not currently combining with. All of that data is going to be out there. The physicians will tell you they want to use these drugs in combination. They want to use them earlier in lines of therapy. The first few quarters, we’re both going to kind of find our rhythm, David. I think it’s good to have options for patients. Eventually, you’re going to see all these drugs trying to move into combination and into earlier lines. That’s very much part of our near-term and then longer-term strategy to really become the market leader.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Interesting, Troy. You’re saying that, you know, with combination with Ziftomenib or, you know, combining 7+3 or azacitidine and venetoclax right now, is it possible to move into off-label use in the frontline setting?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: I have to answer this very carefully, right? You always, you always, you have, we will only be able to promote within the four corners of our label. That is, you know, that is clear, right? The oncology account managers will speak to the label, medical affairs, the physicians. If you ask them how do they want to use menin inhibitors, they will tell you, oh, we want to use them in combination. We have to be very careful how we walk that line. We will. Other companies do this all the time. I would expect, David, there will be some off-label use, particularly in combination. We are going to show you data at ASH, hopefully this year, of Ziftomenib with venetoclax and azacitidine, both in the frontline setting and in the relapsed/refractory setting.
Part of the reason for us doing that is we’ve heard very clearly from the physicians, you need to show data of Ziftomenib in combination with venetoclax and azacitidine because, you know, that’s how we’d like to use it. Let us, whether it’s through the NCCN guidelines or other mechanisms, work with you to make other physicians aware of the potential of using these drugs in combination. I think we’ll be able to do it all. We are going to keep our oncology account managers very focused on promoting on-label. With this ever-expanding data set, and we’re talking now, David, about hundreds of patients being treated with Ziftomenib in these various combinations, that’s going to provide a good body of data, body of evidence to help both support the ongoing registrational studies and to give physicians comfort that they can safely combine these agents together and potentially drive better activity.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Okay, great. One last question just on Ziftomenib in relapsed/refractory NPM1. We just published the COMET-001 data in Journal of Clinical Oncology last week. That also gives you fast track to potentially, you know, include Ziftomenib in NPM1 in NCCN guidelines. Any thoughts around, you know, potential, you know, timeline as to when this will be included in NCCN guideline?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, I’m glad you asked. In order to be included in the guidelines, David, a drug has to first be approved. If and when Ziftomenib is approved on or around its PDUFA date, you’ll see us immediately turn around and submit to NCCN. Now that we have that JCO paper out there, a condition precedent is a drug has to first be approved before it can be included in the guidelines. For subsequent inclusions, David, we’ll be ready to go. Those will be very close in time. The NDA approval and the submission to NCCN, expect that those are going to happen contemporaneously. The NCCN committee meets, my understanding is about every six months or on an ad hoc basis. We’ll do whatever we have to do to support them as they review the data. The timing of that, David, I can’t forecast yet.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Got it. Okay. It makes sense, Troy. Let’s switch gears and talk about the frontline opportunity here, which is a big focus, right? Especially focusing on the COMET-017 trial in frontline AML. One thing we noticed a couple of days ago was that you just initiated or first person was dosed into this trial, I believe, or enrolled into this trial. One thing we’re just wondering is, Troy, can you provide some additional kind of color around when are you going to be providing details around this trial, enrollment targets, power and assumptions, any kind of plan, interim analysis?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, there’s a lot in that question.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Sure.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: As you said, I mean, we announced the first patients into COMET-017. Just for everybody’s benefit, this is two parallel phase three trials, one in intensive, one in non-intensive, each with their own co-primary or dual primary endpoints. In intensive, you have a potential for accelerated approval off of an MRD negative CR endpoint with a survival-based endpoint of event-free survival. For venetoclax and azacitidine, it’s a CR endpoint with an OS survival-based endpoint. All in, David, it’s about 1,200 patients, more toward the intensive trial because that’s a three-arm trial designed to try to get a continuation label for Ziftomenib. Think of it as maybe 700 in that trial and about 500-ish in the Venaza trial. There really, David, isn’t an interim to your question there. There is the potential for an accelerated review. We did that in consultation with FDA.
What’s triggering the timing of that, and we’ve guided that we think the first top-line result for an accelerated endpoint could come in 2028. We haven’t yet been more specific about where in 2028, but that, David, is driven by enrollment. That’s the MRD negative CR accelerated endpoint in the intensive trial. In our mind, that’s half the market. Venaza is the other half. The reason that’s in 2028 is FDA guidance requires that you have the trial very nearly enrolled at the time at which you would unblind it essentially on an accelerated endpoint. That’s what’s driving the timing of these accelerated reviews. It’s enrollment, it’s not events. In terms of putting the two trials together, why we think we’re so well positioned, it really streamlines it with the sites. They have a single budget, a single trial agreement, a single either IRB or ethics board review.
The sites have said to us, this is what would make us prioritize your trial over any competitor. I think we’ll very quickly catch up and overtake our competition. We’ve seen the number of patients that have been enrolled in our competitor’s trial, and I would expect that we will overcome that and out-enroll them relatively quickly. Just look at the number of patients we’ve enrolled in the 07 trials, the phase one trials, David. More than 100 in both intensive and non-intensive to this point, with just a handful of sites. In 017, it’s going to be nearly 200 sites globally. I think it will go quite quickly.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: What are some of the initial feedback from physicians so far on using Ziftomenib in the frontline setting? Maybe we can share some of the feedback, especially in those open sites on the enrollment for in frontline.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, I mean, again, this is, you know, one has to take a holistic view of this, David. We talk about like what are the oncology account managers going to do, right? Your earlier questions about how do you, how do you sell in that initial setting? We are going to be at nearly every major medical center in the U.S. and most of Europe. I mean, 200 sites globally. If you ask the physicians, we are the most attractive trial because it’s a one-stop shop. They can do almost any patient who walks in the door in their clinic. They can put them into 017. The reason we did that, David, we made a very deliberate decision. If that site is already working with Ziftomenib, whether it’s a frontline trial or a relapsed/refractory trial for 07 or 08, they’re going to have familiarity with it.
They’re going, you know, these physicians all talk to each other. They’re going to want to recommend it to their patients in a commercial setting. We’ve gotten very, very positive, very strong feedback, both for the 7+3 data, which we’ve shared with you. We’ll give you an update likely next year on 7+3, as well as venetoclax, which you haven’t yet seen, kind of the frontline data. You’ll be seeing that at ASH. The docs are, you know, what the drug is doing is it’s, you’re not really going to increase CR rate in the intensive setting. You’re going to increase MRD negativity. That’s what we’re seeing, right? We’re seeing great durability, patients staying on, not needing to go to transplant. With venetoclax, you do have the prospect of actually meaningfully increasing the CR rate. That’s what we expect to see, David.
Looking forward to sharing that data with you and with your audience, you know, hopefully at ASH if those submissions are accepted.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Very interesting, actually. On the CR rate, MRD negative CR, for accelerated endpoint or accelerated approval, accelerated endpoints, I’m curious, any kind of updates on the level of CR, and MRD negative CR would be considered meaningful for the FDA and also for the clinicians?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, so one has to be careful about where you are assessing MRD. We’re doing it in bone marrow. We’re doing it at the end of the second cycle. For 7 plus 3, David, the standard is about 45% MRD negativity among the CRs just for 7 plus 3. If you look at what we’ve published at EHA, you’re seeing sort of 60 to 70%, and that number is evolving. It’s actually getting higher as time goes on. It needs to be clinically meaningful, David. That’s usually 15% above kind of baseline. We think we’re well within that range. The other thing that we’ve shown is in the phase one trial, those numbers are assessed at the site level, but we’ve done the work now to test the concordance with a central review.
That’s the way you’re going to show, to demonstrate to the regulators that you’ve actually achieved the goal. We’re seeing very good concordance between the central review and the site review. That data is going to evolve over time, but I think you’re, you say, David, is it working? These patients are staying on without having to go to transplant, right? That’s the problem with intensive chemo. You have very high CR rates, but also very high recurrence. 60% of patients recur, and then they’re relapsed/refractory, and they go rapidly downhill. If we’re able to keep them on Ziftomenib, they can delay or perhaps even avoid going to a transplant. That tells you clinically you’re having the effect that you desire. You’re keeping that disease at bay.
I think that’s going to be a very good story over the next year or two as we’re now running the 017 study on top of it in a registrational context.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Right. That’s really helpful, Troy. We have a couple of minutes left. I just want to kind of focus on, switch gears and focus on the FTI program, especially the most near-term update will be at ESMO, right, for Darlafarnib. I’m curious, for Darlafarnib, you’re going to be showing some data at RCC. Help us understand some expectations heading into this data set. What should we be looking for, for this data set here?
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Yeah, so big, to help people understand big picture, an FTI has the potential to take good drugs and make them better by addressing innate and adaptive resistance. TKIs, PI3 kinase inhibitors, KRAS inhibitors. You focused in on RCC. I think that’s appropriate. We’re going to show you combination data with cabozantinib at two different doses of cabo, 40 milligrams, 60 milligrams. The 40 milligram dose, David, in combination are going to be heavily pretreated patients, many who’ve already seen cabo. The 60 milligram will be largely cabo-naive. We did that because actually we were able to combine much better than we ever expected. We can combine at a full dose of cabo with a full dose of KO-2806. The way to think about it, David, is cabo monotherapy gives you a response rate of 25% to 28%. With the HIF2 alpha inhibitors, we’ve seen 31% to maybe 45%.
You’re going to see combo data. You want to see activity of the combo in that range. You also, David, want to see examples where we can take a patient who’s progressing on cabo and actually put them back into a response. If we can show you that with good safety and tolerability, we think we have a very competitive play. The difference from this and HIF2 alpha is we can go anywhere cabo can go. We can go, for example, to neuroendocrine. We can go to other tumor types as well as KRAS and PI3 kinase. If we’re right, the FTIs have a total addressable market of greater than 200,000 patients in the U.S. It will be a very significant drug. I think a nice complement to what we’ve been talking about with Ziftomenib.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Great. This is really, really helpful, Troy. We are at the top of the hour. I think we can just wrap up here. I really, really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us. Hopefully you all have a good time here at our Virtual Oncology Day.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: Thanks very much again, David, for the opportunity to participate. Thank you for all the questions.
David Dye, Biotech Analyst, UBS: Thank you so much, Troy. Have a good one.
Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Kura Oncology: You too.
This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.