Nykode Therapeutics (Oslo:NYKD) Q2 2026 Earnings Call

0:00 Greetings and welcome to the Nykode Therapeutics Q2 twenty twenty six Financial Results Presentation. At this time, all participants are in a listen only mode. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. You may ask a question at any time by typing it into the ask a question feature on your screen. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It's now my pleasure to turn the call over to CEO, Michael Nykode. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you very much, Kevin, and also from our side, a very warm welcome and good morning to all participants on this quarterly results presentation. We assume you are familiar with our forward looking statements. And on that note, we'll move forward. As usual, I am very pleased to have with me here today, Nykode Frederiksen, our Co Founder, Chief Scientific Officer and Head of Business Development as well as Harald Groen, our CFO.

0:56 For those not familiar with Nykode, just a few words on the company. Nykode is a clinical stage immunotherapy company with a focus on oncology and autoimmune diseases. Our lead asset is abezuga, a therapeutic cancer vaccine targeted against HPV16 driven cancer types. We have encouraging results across three different indication three trials with close to 100 patients in total, which gave us the confidence to move into the first randomized Phase II trial in first line head and neck, which is ongoing and called ability on track to deliver the first interim results in 2027.

1:43 Our second clinical asset is Vipizen neo, which is an individualized neoantigen therapy. We saw some very important validating results from the field last week, and we'll, of course, be discussing that more in-depth at this call here. We have clinical data from, Vipizen neo, from more than 10 tumor types. And based on the manufacturing process, which, of course, center around pDNA as the rest of our technology, We do feel that we have a much simpler manufacturing process, which compared to the mRNA will support a competitive COXIN turnaround time at commercial stage. Furthermore, we have, over the years, developed an AI driven target selection, which we also believe strongly will add to the competitive edge of Vipitem Neo.

2:37 The strategy for Vipitem Neo has been to position ourselves as the most attractive unencumbered asset or INT asset in the area to leverage the type of validating data that we saw last week. Third asset is our tolerance platform, which is right now focused on autoimmune diseases, utilizing the same technology as we use in the cancer vaccines, currently in preclinical stage. We strongly capitalized with a runway into 2028, which can be extended to 2029, pending the outcome of the tax case. Very briefly on the highlights before I hand over the work to our leader. It's been another interesting period.

3:24 Starting from the back last week, we saw what we consider probably the most important cancer vaccine data ever when Moderna came out with positive Phase III data for their individualized neoantigen cancer vaccine, which clinically validated not only individualized cancer vaccines, but we feel in general all cancer vaccines. So that means also the off the shelf. And we'll have our Nady discuss that in more details in a few seconds. We also showcased our data at the new engine summit in July from the neo asset. And we will also have Aniry say a little bit more about that, which goes through it. Finally, we also disclosed we have a new patent granted for BPDCN Neo, which further solidifies the IP protection around our asset.

4:18 Finally, just want to highlight that our ABILITY trial, the randomized Phase II trial with abosuba in first line head and neck, is progressing at plants, which brings us online for an interim result in 2027. I'll just say a few words on that a little bit later in this call here. With those words, I'm going to hand over to Auneel to take us through an update on BPDCN neo. Thank you, Michael. And you may notice that we start off with Nykode today on the back of the very exciting news from from Moderna and Merck last year. For those of us that worked in cancer vaccines for decades, we have been waiting for this moment to see what we expect will be the first approval of a cancer vaccine ever.

5:10 So first, I'm gonna just remind you a little bit of individualized neoantigen therapy as a class. It's a personalized cancer vaccine targeting specific mutations found in the tumor of the patient. So we identify these by sequencing the tumor and compare to healthy tissue from the same patient and identify these neoantigens, which are tumor specific mutations, can also be fully patient specific. So the INT platform means it is fully personalized per patient. That also means you need to manufacture one vaccine per patient, which makes the algorithm driven neoantigen selection part very important and that you have a validated method in order to find the relevant neoantigens.

6:02 It's also important that the manufacturing process is as less complex as possible, so it can be scaled to expand into multiple tumor indications at a stage that can be competitive commercially both on turnaround time and also cost of goods. As individualized neonsense therapy basically takes a tumor sample from the patient, you can do that no matter which tumor type. And that means this therapy can be applicable across solid tumors, however you can find mutations. Importantly now, the first trial that we've seen being successful now with Merck and Moderna Interpath trial is in melanoma adjuvant setting early stage, where you have surgically removed the tumor and then vaccinated to delay or prevent recurrence.

7:05 When you treat patients at this early stage, there is obviously a high patient number, but it's also important that the treatment can combine can have a nice safety profile and combine effectively with whatever other immunotherapies that will be given in that time period for each indication. First, a little reminder on what we saw last week. Readout of the phase three INTERPAS one trial, which is the first phase three trial of any cancer vaccine, in principle, individualized cancer vaccine in patients, as I mentioned, that is in the locally advanced or adjuvant setting.

7:58 This first one is in melanoma patients in adjuvant setting stage 2b to four. It's more than one thousand patients enrolled in the trial, and we saw with the very first readout that they already met the primary endpoint, which is the recurrence free survival. They also already announced that they met one of the key secondary endpoints with our distant metastasis free survival. So these data seem very impactful. We expect to see all the data in detail at the conference later, most likely at ESMO. Importantly, without seeing the data, they announced that both MSC and Moderna will jointly pursue regulatory approval on the back of these results, which means we are most likely looking at the first cancer vaccine being approved for commercial use.

8:55 So this is a big change for the cancer vaccine field. Cancer vaccines are now suddenly derisked as a modality, and now it's about finding the right setting and the right technology that can support competitive commercial case across lots of different indications. We will see more data coming out now in the future, both in early stage, locally advanced adjuvant setting. Also, some data we'll read out in the future in the first line setting. So we will see the the breadth of the potential for for cancer vaccine. Then, again, it's for us also important that this not only validates individualized new enzyme therapies, but also off the shelf cancer vaccine.

9:50 For individualized, there are two important points in order to to be competitive and build the best commercial attractive case is in as many indications as possible. One of them comes from the technology. It's really important that you have this target selection that can work across indications, also those indications where there are few tumor mutations, and technologies that can elicit immunoresponses against a sufficient breadth and quality that can correlate with clinical outcome. And, obviously, also, as I said, safety, reactogenicity that permits the combinations with a range of standard of care. Another very important part here is economics.

10:36 Per patient manufacturing turnaround time and cost of goods will have a much bigger role of the attractive case when it comes to a individualized therapy than an off the shelf. So this is going to be super important here. BIVI-ten is unencumbered. It's clinically validated, individualized neon sign therapy. Nykode was one of the first companies, biotech companies, that went into the clinic with individualized neon sign therapy already in 2018. Neoantigen selection platform is something we have used from the beginning as a proprietary wholly owned, wholly developed neoantigen selection platform.

11:24 We've also proven that that works. We can use that to identify neoantigens in more than 10 different tumor types, and that includes indications with low tumor mutational burden. We do manufacture and provide this as a plasma DNA vaccine, which is, per definition, a manufacturing process with fewer steps, which should give faster turnaround time and lower cost of goods. And we believe that b beta neo then will be very attractive for this kind of therapy and capture the broad potential of the market.

12:11 So going a little bit back to the data, we have with Vibetan neo, you know, our technology, we incorporate the neoantigens in the antigenic units per patient, and it's linked to our dimerization and targeting unit. Compare this, as you see here, to the to the right, we can identify a stronger immune response against the set of neoepitopes, here shown for the MC38 model. As we have clinical experience with Vb10 neo across two trials, both basket trials, in late stage cancer patients, we have been able to show that our neopitope selection algorithm that we call NeoSelect systematically prioritizes the most immunogenic neoantigens for even within the up to 20 neopitopes that we include in the vaccine, it is in principle the number one that is the strongest immune response, eliciting a strongest immune response in the clinic compared to number 20.

13:23 We have not seen that with other trials. To our knowledge, we also reported a correlation between immune responses against the neoantigens in the vaccine and overall survival. To our knowledge, we're the only one that has shown this. It's what's shown here is even in those patients with the low baseline, immune response, and those then in this group that elicits strong immune responses again in the antigens in the vaccine also do survive longer. When it comes to the manufacturing process, we have worked for multiple years on the manufacturing process with a set of selected providers that are distributed around the world.

14:25 So even with this setup, and all the experience we gained, we have reduced the manufacturing turnaround time from eighteen weeks in the beginning to, lower and lower across the clinical experience. And since we got the product back, we have some key improvements that now gives us a current optimized manufacturing process with the setup that we have with less than six weeks. That includes drug substance and drug product manufacturing processes, has now been consolidated under one roof, which is important for optimized slot utilization and shipment timeline.

15:15 We have improved DNA isolation methods and optimized DNA plasmid synthesis process, and this has led us now to a less than six weeks manufacturing process time. And then we know we are still working with multiple providers, and that includes shipments, and it includes weekends, etcetera. So further development of a simple, consolidated in house process with removal of all these holding steps can give us a clear path to four week manufacturing time. So we're already competitive at this stage and should be competitive with the further optimization that will be very logical to implement before commercial use. And to support the cost of goods statements, when you look at the number of steps in in manufacturing plasmid DNA compared to mRNA, there are just simply fewer steps in the manufacturing process, which supports why we strongly believe this would lead to a shorter turnaround time and also good just by the fact that we do plasmid DNA.

16:36 We are very happy with where we are and with the clinical data and the stage of the program. We have still we are still an innovative company, and we have worked over the last period with further improvements of our IPC targeted technology platform. And you can see here some some of the data generated over the last year where we are able to find improvements that can even further enhance the immune responses again also here in the neoantigen context. So these can be important for even further competitive edges in the future across different indications.

17:27 So to sum up, it has been an emotional week, for Nykode when it comes to the, strong now validation of cancer vaccines, in general, but also giving us all this confidence back on the individualized neonsense therapy, and VB ten neo, in particular. We have, two completed trials, actually, across certain different tumor types, including tumor types with low tumor mutational burden. We have seen between eighty eight and also in the latest trials, one hundred percent of the patients are responding with immune responses to our vaccine even in late stage cancer, and it does have a very clean safety profile, not only safety, but also very low reactogenicity.

18:29 Interestingly enough, the immune responses that we see also correlate with overall survival from what we can see with these basket trials. So to our knowledge, that is unique to this class. And not to forget competitive manufacturing turnaround. Competitive manufacturing turnaround of already less than six weeks, 100% batch success, simpler manufacturing process compared to mRNA and good timing. The US patent now also extending into to a broader protection potential against our construct. So then I hand back to you, Michael.

19:16 Abisuva is still super important, although we are enthusiastic about Phoebe and Neo as well. Certainly, Anita. Thank you very much for for that review. We'll do it keep it short on our VACBF this time here. As you all know, our current focus for VACBF is on first line head and neck. And head and neck cancer does represent a very sizable patient population with more than sixty thousand new cases of HPV16 driven head and neck cancers across The EU and U. S. Every year. The unmet medical need is still significant for this patient population with only one in five patients actually responding to the standard of care and the median overall survival, no longer than twelve months for the standard of care. Furthermore, although head and neck does receive a lot of attention right now across the field of drug developers, the main bulk of drug candidates in development for head and neck are actually focused on the HPV negative population.

20:22 So here, we are targeting a population that is not well served or addressed by current drugs in development. Finally, we are looking forward at an expected future significant growth in the HPV16 and the cancer cases and a very attractive projected market increase for the next decades. Worthwhile noticing is this is not the only area for potential area for our VESUVA. There is also very sizable patient populations, particularly in the cervical cancer that can be addressed. Right now, our focus is on first line. But if we also start looking towards the early stage settings, the locally advanced or the adjuvant, then the potential increases even more.

21:14 This, of course, is something we will have in mind as we plot the future for abirzumab going forward. Most important activity in abirzumab right now is, of course, our randomized ABILITY trial, Phase II trial, enrolling up to 100 patients and randomizing into two arms. The experimental arm is abezvous in combination with gebilizumab, which is standard of care in this patient population. The other arm, the control arm, is pembrolizumab alone. And we will be assessing objective response rate and progression free survival as the co primary endpoints in this trial. The protocol is now approved in eight European countries, so seven EU and on top of that, UK.

22:04 The first patient was enrolled in Poland in May 2026. And since then, the patient enrollment have further expanded across additional sites in The U. K, Spain and France. So we do see progress as planned in this trial. Focus going forward is, of course, to further expand the number of sites and countries. We do expect to add two to three additional countries to the list and ensure that we have full engagement and motivation from our investigators across these countries. All in all, we are still on line, our targets for an interim readout in 2027, and we'll, of course, keep you updated further as we get a better view on when in 2027 we can expect to see these data.

23:00 We have also started looking, in particular, on the back of the Moderna data last week, we feel further encouraged to that. We've started to look into exploring abisuva in a locally advanced setting. We believe there is a huge potential for abisuva in that setting also. More on that later. Just a very few words on tolerance, our third asset and aFID platform that we represent an entirely new approach to treating autoimmune diseases. It relies on the same core technologies, so targeting of the antigens to the antigen presenting cells, which is also in autoimmune diseases, a key regulator of the immune response.

23:51 And for our ASIC platform, we have adapted our technology to restore the immune tolerance in the autoimmune diseases, which really is the key to addressing autoimmune diseases going forward. We are progressing the ASTH platform forwards towards the first clinical development program, and we will be guiding you more on that path in the coming period. With those words, I'll hand over to Hans to take us through the financial results. Thank you, Mikael. Looking at the income statement, other income of $106,000 for the second quarter relates to government grants.

24:37 Employee benefit expenses for the quarter were $2,300,000 compared to $2,900,000 for the same period in 2025, reflecting a reduction in organizations. Other operating expenses were $4,100,000 in the second quarter, up from $3,400,000 in the same period in 2025, reflecting increased clinical activities following initiation of the ABILITY trial. Finance income and costs were net $400,000 negative in the quarter, which mainly relates to interest income and unrealized currency movements on Norwegian kroner exposure. So overall, we recorded a net loss of $7,200,000 for the second quarter compared to a net profit of $800,000 for the same period in 2025. Moving on to the balance sheet. We are still well capitalized with a cash position of $44,800,000 at the end of the second quarter.

25:30 With disciplined execution and strong financial focus, we will reach key inflection points within the estimated cash runway into 2028. This does not include the pending tax case, where we have booked a non current receivable amounting to $33,400,000 at the end of the second quarter, as further described in the quarterly report. Nykode is confident that we will receive a positive ruling in the tax case also based on advice from third party tax experts. The latest we have from the Secretariat in the Tax Billboard is that we can still expect to receive a draft recommendation from the Secretariat in August. We expect to communicate to the market immediately once the draft recommendation is received and we will have time to process the information. A positive outcome will push the cash runway into 2029. Moving on to equity liabilities.

26:19 We have total equity of €80,000,000 which represents a strong equity ratio of 93%. And with that, I will give the word back to Michael. Thank you very much, and we'll just conclude with the outlook before we open up for questions. As stated earlier, well capitalized with a runway into 2018. And as we said, this will further extend with a positive outcome on the pending tax case. That brings us well past a number of significant inflection points for our assets. Focus for the coming period will, as said before, obviously, be on the execution of the Ability from where the priorities right now is expand the number of countries and sites, get the sites engaged and motivate the investigators to identify the patients currently on plan for an interim readout in 2027.

27:20 In addition to that, we see a number of potentially very exciting data reading out from peers across the cancer fields, similar to what we saw last week. So we will, of course, be keeping keen eye on our most important peers in the field for the coming periods. As our leader said, the period has never been more exciting than what we're seeing right now for cancer vaccines. We are expecting, based on guidance from the authorities, first, a draft recommendation on the tax case in August. And we will continue to progress and mature the ACIP platform, bringing us forward towards the first clinical development program.

28:11 And that continues into 2027, while we do expect to see further peer data from our peers reading out as well, of course, the the being able to report the ABILITY interim results during 2027. So exciting periods ahead of us. And with those words, I think we are ready to conclude the, warm part of this call and move to the questions. Kevin? Thank you. We'll now be conducting a question and answer session. Our first question today is coming from Grier Holm from D and B Carnegie. You state that the ABILITY Phase II trial is progressing according to plan and reiterate that the first interim efficacy readout is expected in 2027.

29:02 Could you elaborate on the key parameters and milestones you're monitoring to assess the likelihood of being able to present interim data by year end 2027? Yes, sure. Thanks for the question, Gaye. And it's getting a little bit technical here. But just to give you a feeling for the kind of KPIs that we are measuring here and reviewing against our plan is obviously getting the protocol approved in countries and getting the sites up and running. So once we have approval in country, the next task for site is to get the site contract clinical trial agreements signed and get the site staff trained on all the parameters that needs to be trained before we can give every site a so called green light. And at that time point, they can start enrolling patients. So we have projections both for countries getting approved and sites getting approved. So that's the most important parameter in the beginning of this trial. Then from there, of course, we begin to monitor the number of patients entering screening before they subsequently and subject to a successful screening enters the enrolled stage. So that is where they get the first dose.

30:27 So it's a multitude of different KPIs that we are monitoring and ramping up against a predefined plan together with the Board to be able to gain confidence that we are on track towards 2027. I think that's an offset on that question, Kevin. Our next question is a follow-up from Geyer Holland from D and B Carnegie. Could you elaborate on the potential path you're considering to bring your first tolerance asset into clinical development, including the key steps and milestones required to reach the clinic? Yeah. Sure. So it's a pretty standard, path, to the clinic from where we are today. So we have worked on the platform and made sure we we can be confident on the modality and the targeting units, etcetera. And from there on, when we are selected selecting the indication that that dictates the antigenic part of our molecule, So then we move on to what we call lead selection, which is when we nail down the exact construct and the product that we want to pursue into the clinic.

31:43 And from there on, we both need to do what's called nonclinical tox. So there is a tox program. You need to make sure that the exact product manufactured under similar manufacturing process as you will do for the clinical trial is safe and considered to be safe to be given to the patients. And as part of that, you need to move that manufacturing process onto also a GMP manufactured product. And then all the documentation of this goes into a regulatory filing through the authorities together with the then designed clinical development plan for the first trial.

32:31 And when we get that approval, we're basically back to what Michael just explained from from getting the approval in each country and setting up the sites, etcetera. Part of this, depending on which indication, will decide whether we do these studies for the first part in house or with a commercial partner or an academic partner or any partner. Thank you. Next question. Our next question is coming from Gaspar Verin from Arctic. MRNA vaccines are believed to have more efficient delivery as the mRNA only needs to reach the cytoplasm, whereas plasma DNA has to cross both the cell membrane and the nuclear membrane before expression can occur.

33:22 However, your vaccines encode protein that targets antigen presenting cells, APCs. Would you say you can compensate for less efficient DNA delivery through biological targeting after expression? So this is a long I can talk about for a long time. MRNA and DNA are both genetically based, but they do have very different mechanisms of action in principle. DNA is basically the template for making the mRNA. So if you inject the DNA, the DNA will make mRNA. So there's a huge difference. You can either give the mRNA directly. It's a product that only needs to reach the cytoplasm.

34:07 That's true. But if you don't have the DNA, the mRNA you inject will be the mRNA that you can rely on. There will no not be a new DNA that can encode the mRNA and multiple new mRNAs. So meaning when you give the mRNA, you give it, it reaches cytoplasm, and when that is degraded, there is no new genetically encoding new vaccine protein, which means there is a very different kinetics. So DNA It needs to go into the nucleus, but they will then start to make mRNA and can do that over a longer period of time than giving the mRNA as the only product. Then, obviously, the protein that we're encoding, maybe one point first, the dose that we give of DNA is higher than what we give of RNA, so that also gives you something. That is also based on the safety process because both RNA and LMPs that they formulate is more reactogenic than DNA, so we can give a higher dose of the DNA than you can of RNA.

35:14 Then the protein that is being encoded, whether it's first starts with the DNA, goes through the mRNA, and then code the protein, or you give it as mRNA yourself, needs to be taken up processed and antigen presenting cells processed and presented on the surface of these antigen presenting cells to T cells, and that's where the our technology with the three components we have in our protein makes that part more efficacious as to how we elicit the immune response. So they all have different methods in order to achieve the end goal, and the end goal is to elicit the optimal T cell response.

36:00 So there are lots of things coming into consideration here. I think, importantly for us, DNA manufacturing costs, durability of expressing new proteins, and also the our technology and the way we elicit the T cell responses Mhmm. Is of importance. Thank you. We can go to the next. Yep. Our next question is a follow-up from Gaspar Veran from Arctic. Your current time for VB-ten neo from biopsy to injecting the vaccine in a patient is approximately six weeks. How fast can you compress it to four weeks? And what needs to happen to achieve this? Thank you very much, Gaspar. Although a good question.

36:50 So importantly, the optimizations we have seen so far and the optimizations we are looking forward at is basically optimizing the current process that we have. So we are looking at refinements and adjustments of our supply setup by combining things under one roof and further optimizing the logistics. The improvements from our current level at around six weeks or just below six weeks towards four weeks is more of the same. So that would mainly see further investment. It would see more intensive shifts, things like weekend work to basically avoid the hold times that occurs when you shift between the different stages of the production. So it's more a matter of actually investing into the process and see more intensive labor processes than inventing new steps.

37:53 So this can be done in a pretty effective way, should the investments be warranted. So we're quite confident that would be quite easy fix. Next question. Thank you. Our next question today is coming from George Tigalano Birke from ABG Sundal Collier. George says, good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. I have two. In the report you state that ABILITY continues to progress according to plan with enrollment having expanded across additional sites in The UK, Spain and France. Can you provide some detail on the ratio between screening and full enrollment that you have seen so far?

38:40 And secondly, can you provide any color on the extent to which you have already seen a meaningful increase in partner interest or discussions following last week's news on intramersome autogene from Moderna and Merck? Thank you. Yes. Thanks, Gil, for these questions. I'll take the first question and then hand over to the first question. On the first question, it is too early to conclude on any meaningful trends. These countries do have some of the processes that are necessary for setting up the sites are, a little bit unique to the country. So we do see the countries coming online, if you could so also, with activation of the sites, a little bit in waves. And therefore, any trends that you see right now would not be meaningful to conclude anything on.

39:34 So it's too early to say anything. So far, we are happy with the both activation of sites across the countries and the engagement we see from investigators. Also, we've not seen anything concerning in terms of screening failures. So as I said, I'm repeating myself here. To date, we are quite happy with the start up progress of the ABILITY trial. And it has also been the full focus of the organization. So as said before, this is priority number one, two and three, and it's all hands on deck for this trial here in the team. So very happy with what we're seeing so far. I'll hand over to our Nykode for the second part of this question here.

40:21 Yeah. Thank you, Jorg. I mean, we can't comment on details on what's happening directly with the dialogue with potential partners. Of course, what I can say is that we should I would be surprised if would be surprised if the partner interest in cancer vaccines, including individualized cancer vaccines, would not increase on the back of this news. Importantly, I think you should know that this comes on the back of the first ever trial of any cancer vaccine tested in a phase three setting in adjuvant in the adjuvant setting where you have removed, the bulk of the tumor, and then you vaccinate and you prevent recurrence.

41:17 So it does not come on the back of other technologies failing, or it does not and it does not come on the back of other cancer vaccines failing in other cancer indications in the adjuvant setting. So that should, in my mind, lead to a lot of curiosity for pharma partners as to explore the potential of additional cancer vaccines, both off the shelf and individualized, in a range of other indications and and seek which one is the best. Others have just simply not been tested yet in that setting. And then, I mean, we've seen this happen before with the GLEPs, with antibodies, with checkpoint inhibitors, etcetera.

42:09 So on the back of the first success, usually, there is an increased change in the strategy of of multiple pharma companies wanting to be part of the new wave of a new, modality. You. Our next questions today are coming from Eric Hoffman from Eric Investments AS. You have previously shown that NEO Select's ranking correlates with actual immunogenicity in patients. Do you feed clinical data back into NEO Select to improve future vaccine designs?

42:54 And does this mean that NEO Select could potentially become better as you accumulate clinical data from more patients and vaccine designs? Yeah. So this is both a technical question and a regulatory question, or an answer at least to your question. So, yes, I mean, everything we learn currently, we assess whether that can be used in order to further improve NEOCELLEX. So we take that very seriously. And where the amount of clinical data and the established high quality competence that we have have in this company is something that I feel is a competitive edge.

43:41 And then, as we know, part of a clinical development program within certain indications, etcetera, at a certain time point, you need to lock down the neoantigen selection method. So that we will also obviously keep in mind and do that at the right time. Next question. Thank you. Our next question is a follow-up from Eric Hoffman from Eric Investments AS. Following the positive Phase three results from Merck and Moderna, what do you now see as the key characteristics that differentiate VB-ten neo from other individualized neoantigen vaccines? Yeah. So, I mean, that's a long list that I went through in the in the webcast.

44:29 So we do think there are multiple, multiple features that are key differentiators. If I were to select one, from now on, I do think the less complex manufacturing is, going to be extremely important We don't see so far that the immunogenicity data generated by the quite limited clinical reports from Moderna is not scary for us, but we also don't know at this stage what the immune responses are needed and across different indications. So the manufacturing process is the key, and then it's all the technologies' abilities to be applied in additional indications and provide efficacy in those as well in addition to what we've now seen in in melanoma adjuvant setting will be, interesting.

45:45 You. Next question. Certainly. Our next question is coming from Eric Hoffler from American Investments AS. Regeneron agreement already demonstrated in 2021 the value of combining large amounts of patient data and antigen selection with Nykode's platform. How important do you believe data and machine learning will be as a competitive advantage for Nykode over the next five years? I think we have just seen an increasing applicability of AI and ML in the last few years. And the longer we've been around as a company and the more data we generate both preclinically and clinically, and, obviously, the entire field of AI and ML from also the outside of the world, when you combine all of those, there is quite impactful improvements that we can take advantage of on the drug design.

46:50 Importantly, I think since we started with individualized neoantigen therapies very early, We have built that experience earlier than most other companies, and we have also now generated clinical data, but also importantly preclinical data with our construct, with a very high number, I would say the number, of constructs and can use all these data in order to learn what would be the optimal cancer vaccine design and also, obviously, in tolerance. So for future potential of additional cancer vaccines and, obviously, for the individualized and the tolerance program, we will make sure to take advantage of what we've built.

47:44 Thank you. We reached the end of our question and answer session. I'd like to turn the floor back over for any further or closing comments. Thank you very much, Kevin, and thank you very much to everyone dialing into this results presentation and for your engaged questions. We feel you are as enthusiastic as we are for the coming period for cancer vaccines and look forward to keep you updated on our future efforts and achievements. So with those words, I wish you all a good day, and talk to you soon. Thank you. That does conclude today's webcast. You may disconnect your line at this time, and have a wonderful day. We thank you for your participation today.