KURA - NASDAQ

Hello, and welcome, everyone, joining today's Second Quarter 2025 Kura Oncology, Inc. Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] It is now my pleasure to turn the meeting over to Greg Mann, SVP of Investor Relations and Corporate Affairs. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Brittany. Good afternoon, and welcome to Kura Oncology's Second Quarter 2025 Conference Call. Joining the call today are Dr. Troy Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer; Dr. Mollie Leoni, Chief Medical Officer; Brian Powl, Chief Commercial Officer; and Tom Doyle, Senior Vice President of Finance and Accounting. Before I turn the call over to Dr. Wilson, we remind you that today's call will include forward-looking statements based on current expectations. Such statements represent management's judgment as of today and may involve risks and uncertainties that cause actual results to differ materially from expected results. Please refer to Kura's filings with the SEC, which are available from the SEC or on the Kura Oncology website for information concerning risk factors that could affect the company. With that, I'll turn the call over to Troy.

Thank you, Greg. Good afternoon, and thank you all for joining us. At Kura, we're committed to transforming outcomes for patients with AML. Today, we'll provide updates on our global development progress for our lead program, ziftomenib, regulatory status of our new drug application, preparations for commercialization with our partners at Kyowa Kirin and advances in our pipeline, including menin inhibitors for treatment of GIST and diabetes as well as farnesyl transferase inhibitors or FTIs for solid tumors. Starting with development, we were thrilled to present positive monotherapy data from the KOMET-001 trial at ASCO.

Thank you, Troy. Let's begin with highlights from our ziftomenib development program. At ASCO 2025, Dr. Eunice Wang of Roswell Park presented data from the KOMET-001 trial evaluating ziftomenib monotherapy in 92 heavily pretreated relapsed/ refractory patients with NPM1-mutant AML. The trial achieved a CR/CRh rate of 23%, surpassing historical controls, with consistent activity across prespecified subgroups, including those with prior transplant, prior venetoclax, those with numerous prior therapies and those with FLT3 or IDH co-mutations. At the time of the data cut, 63% of responders were MRD negative.

Thank you, Mollie. With the ziftomenib PDUFA date of November 30 well in sight, our pre-commercial activities continue at a brisk pace. We're confident Kura's commercial organization will be fully prepared for launch ahead of potential approval. As Mollie noted, the KOMET-001 and KOMET-007 clinical data were well received by the clinical community. We're encouraged by positive feedback from the KOLs, highlighting four key aspects of ziftomenib in the relapsed/refractory setting. First is efficacy, strong CR, CRh rates and durable responses in heavily pretreated patients with overall survival among responders exceeding the KOLs expectations. Second, simplicity. The once-daily dosing facilitates adoption and integrate seamlessly into patient care, benefiting both providers and patients. Third, compatibility. No clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions with CYP3A4 inhibitors enable combination with antifungals or other concomitant medications. And fourth, safety. The low rates of QTc prolongation eliminate the need for burdensome weekly cardiac monitoring and alleviate concerns of combining with other agents known to prolong QT. This KOL feedback reinforces ziftomenib's potentially best-in-class profile in the relapsed/refractory space and their enthusiasm for its use in combination with frontline standard of care therapy in patients with newly diagnosed AML. On commercial readiness, our team is focused on raising awareness about menin inhibition in NPM1-mutated AML, ensuring access and upon approval, communicating ziftomenib's best-in-class potential to accelerate adoption and build trust with patients and providers. Our medical affairs and market access teams are fully staffed to engage thought leaders, payers and group purchasing organizations or GPOs. We're executing educational initiatives on disease awareness and menin inhibition in NPM1-mutant AML alongside ongoing pre- approval information exchanges with key stakeholders, including payers, GPOs and other market decision-makers. We've recently onboarded our sales team selected through a rigorous nationwide screening process. The group has deep experience in hematology/oncology with over 21 years average experience in sales and over 7 years average experience in hematology. As they deploy, they will work alongside the experienced Kyowa Kirin U.S.-based field team. As the lead party in the U.S., we are building capabilities across commercial functions while working collaboratively with Kyowa Kirin on field operations, account planning, training materials and team building. Our market access, trade and distribution team has identified patient support needs and is designing programs to help eligible patients navigate their treatment journey. Finally, we are implementing a focused distribution network to maximize ziftomenib access at oncology centers, enhance provider satisfaction and drive early uptake to ensure a rapid launch of ziftomenib upon FDA approval. Together with Kyowa Kirin, we are confident in our commercial readiness and ability to deliver ziftomenib to eligible patients at launch. The relapsed/refractory AML population is our initial market entry and a critical step toward building a successful commercial product.

Thank you, Brian, and good afternoon, everyone. Collaboration revenue for our -- from our Kyowa Kirin partnership for the second quarter of 2025 was $15.3 million compared to no revenue for the second quarter of 2024. Research and development expenses for the second quarter of 2025 was $62.8 million compared to $39.7 million for the second quarter of 2024, driven by spending on our ziftomenib combination clinical trials. General and administrative expenses for the second quarter of 2025 were $25.2 million compared to $16.7 million for the second quarter of 2024. This increase was predominantly due to pre-commercial activities. Net loss for the second quarter of 2025 was $66.1 million compared to a net loss of $50.8 million for the second quarter of 2024. This included noncash share-based compensation expense of $6.9 million compared to $8.4 million for the same period in 2024. As of June 30, 2025, Kura had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $630.7 million compared to $727.4 million as of December 31, 2024. Based on our current plans, we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments as of June 30 will be sufficient to fund our current operating expenses into 2027. If we include anticipated collaboration funding and milestones under our Kyowa Kirin agreement, Kura's financial resources should support advancement of our ziftomenib AML program and commercialization in the frontline combination setting. I'll now turn the call back over to Troy for final comments. Troy?

Thank you, Tom. Before we jump into the question-and-answer session, let me just lay out our anticipated upcoming milestones. For ziftomenib and our menin inhibitor programs, we look forward to continued engagement with FDA reviewers as we approach our PDUFA target action date of November 30 for ziftomenib as monotherapy for patients with relapsed/refractory NPM1-mutant AML, initiating KOMET-017, our two independent Phase III registration-enabling trials in frontline intensive and non-intensive AML in the second half of 2025 and presenting preliminary clinical data from the KOMET-007 Phase Ib expansion cohort evaluating ziftomenib with venetoclax and azacitidine at a medical meeting in the second half of 2025. For our farnesyl transferase inhibitor programs, we expect the following milestones: to initiate one or more expansion cohorts of KO-2806 in cabozantinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma in the second half of 2025. We also plan to have a strong presence at the 2025 ESMO Congress this October with three presentations: data from the FIT-001 Phase I monotherapy dose escalation of KO-2806 in patients with RAS mutations; data from the FIT-001 Phase I trial evaluating KO-2806 and cabozantinib in patients with renal cell carcinoma; and finally, data from the KURRENT-HN trial evaluating tipifarnib and alpelisib in PIK3CA-mutant head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. As Mollie mentioned, we expect to host a virtual event around the time of the ESMO Congress in October to discuss the clinical data for our FTI programs, more details and a safety date to come. With that, Brittany, we're now ready for questions.

Our first question comes from Jonathan Chang with Leerink Partners.

A couple. First, can you give us some color on how the regulatory interactions on ziftomenib have progressed as we look towards the PDUFA date later this year? And then second question, how are you thinking about the scope of the farnesyl transferase inhibitor opportunity? Between the possible combinations and tumor types, what do you see as an area or areas that Kura can move forward with alone? And which do you see as areas better suited for a potential partner?

Jonathan, thanks for the questions. Let's take them in turn. With respect to any additional color on the regulatory interactions, Mollie, would you like to comment to the extent that we can?

Yes, sure. And as Troy is alluding to, we're currently within our active NDA review. And so we can't really provide details about every -- an evolving interaction with the FDA, but the interactions have all been collaborative. They've been very constructive, a lot of back and forth. And everything we've seen to date is in alignment with the time line for a priority review with an approval of November 30. So again, we're very encouraged by the way things have progressed thus far.

Yes. Thanks, Mollie. And Jonathan, on your second question, maybe I'll take a crack at it. And then again, I'll ask Mollie to add her comments. As she said, I think, in her prepared remarks, what I think you're going to see is really a reshaping of the FTI story. So we're showing you data not only with 2806 as a monotherapy, but in two of the three possible opportunities. So renal cell carcinoma, where there's obviously been a lot of activity with HIF-2 alpha and TKIs as well as PI3-kinase alpha, where, again, we've seen work from Scorpion, from Relay and really a lot of interesting opportunity. The third one where hopefully, we'll have something to share next year is, of course, in the KRAS space. And we've put out a lot of preclinical data that's available on our website. You'll see us set the context and I think help analysts and investors set expectations as we get closer to ESMO. But suffice it to say, with each of these areas, RCC, PI3 kinase and KRAS, they all have the common problem of innate and adaptive resistance. That's what we're looking to address, and we're looking to share further data with you. Mollie, anything you'd add to that?

No, that was a good segue. I was actually going to comment that not only does this reshape the FTI field, it also reshapes these other targeted agencies -- targeted agents, excuse me, as we look to prevent or prolong these patients' ability to respond to these drugs. And there's no reason to think that the results from one particular combination wouldn't be generalizable to similar drugs in the same class. So we're very excited to see where this leads.

We'll go next to Li Watsek with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Congrats on the progress. Maybe a little curious about your thoughts on the menin class launch so far. It looks like even in KMT2A patients, the market opportunity could be quite sizable. Any read through to your own launch of ziftomenib? And then in terms of Phase III trial starts in the second half this year, wondering if you can elaborate a little bit more in terms of the progress that you made since last quarter and then your confidence that you could still potentially be first-in-class in the frontline?

Yes. Lee, thanks for the questions. Again, let's take them in turn. So Brian, could you address Lee's first couple of questions, which is our impression of the KMT2A relapsed/refractory market opportunity and some of the results we've seen from some of our competitors and perhaps any read-through to our own thinking or our own program?

Thanks, Troy, and thanks, Li, for the question. Yes, I think we've obviously been watching closely as you have on understanding kind of the launch -- first launch in the KMT2A space of the menin class. I mean I think our first impression is that it's great news for patients that there is a new class of therapies available that could help to target a broader range of patients with a high unmet need. The KMT2A population has, as we know, is a smaller population in incidence relative to the NPM1-mutated population. And I think we're encouraged to see the preliminary uptake and activity of our competitor. When we think about what that means as we read it through into ziftomenib, first, we understand that this will be a competitive space. We feel pretty confident, as we mentioned in our prepared remarks, that ziftomenib has the properties that we believe have the potential of being a best-in-class as their profile across both the efficacy, the safety, the combinability of the drug and also the convenience. We think that as we bring or hopefully get to our FDA approval, our commercial, our medical and market access teams will be able to quickly begin communicating and be able to be competitive in this space where we see a very high unmet need for this population who are in need of new therapies.

Thanks, Brian. And Mollie, for you on the -- maybe on the second question, I'm just going to restate it. Looking at the Phase III starts here in the second half of the year for KOMET-017, can we elaborate on the progress since the last quarter? And what gives us confidence we'll be potentially first and best-in-class in those combinations?

Yes. I mean I think I'd like to remind just what the 007 data has taught us. It taught us how much need there is for this patient population, how quickly these patients enroll, how much these sites want dedicated trials to treat these types of AML. So with 017, we have put both trials under a single protocol. So what does that do? That makes it easier for every single site, every IRB, all of your contracting resources to go through one contracting process and not laboriously go through multiple stages or multiple negotiations and not have to choose one trial over another. Choosing one trial -- choosing our 017 trial gives you access to two trials in one. We hear enormous amounts of excitement coming from all of our sites that have kind of put their hands up to participate. We continue to make a lot of progress. It does take time to get a study started. We have to work out all of the contracts and everything else, as you know. But it's going quickly. And I have no doubt that we will start that trial in the second half of this year. And I have no doubt that the enrollment will be really impressive and will get us to that 2028 additional high-level data that we've been talking about all along. And keep in mind, this really does allow any patient with a KMT2A or NPM1 mutation, well, almost any patient with those mutations to have a place to go in their frontline treatment setting. So I think that the potential patient population that we will be able to address is going to be enormous. So I look forward to very robust enrollment and a broad patient base to be able to treat in this particular 017 trial.

We'll take our next question from Roger Song with Jefferies.

Great. Congrats for the progress. So seeing your upcoming milestone, you talked about the RCC expansion cohort since you already made the decision. If that's the case, what's the criteria for the expansion cohort? And then what will be the next step in timing for [ JAK2 ] and then KRAS and the program? And then second question relates to regulatory interaction. Given all the changes within FDA, have you had any recent interaction with the FDA regarding your Phase III pivotal design? And I understand you're about to start, but any last minute kind of feedback you're getting from the FDA?

Yes. Roger, if we may, Mollie is going to answer both of those questions. Mollie, maybe we can take them in reverse order. Let's start with the first one, which is any recent interactions with the agency on the Phase III designs for KOMET-017.

No. And thank you for that. No, it's the usual interactions, just making sure we're all in agreement on even the nitty-gritty. But overall, it was agreed to back months ago what the design would be, and now it's really just operationalizing. There hasn't been any additional concern or additives by people coming or going from the FDA. So all is holding pretty steady for us.

Yes. And maybe just to build on that, Roger, on Mollie's comment. I mean, this is nothing new in oncology, right? When the agency gives you the pathway to accelerated approval, whether that's monotherapy or in combo, the condition is always that you come back with the data. I think maybe what's different here is there's a recognition in AML that it may not be -- or it isn't in the best interest of patients to wait around for survival endpoints in some cases. And so there's a real willingness on the part of the FDA to consider accelerated approvals -- pathways to accelerated approval. And that's what Mollie and her team were so skilled in coordinating with the FDA. So everything is on track from our perspective. Mollie, on the first question, it's probably a little early, but Roger asked, what's our decision-making process for RCC for KRAS? Do you want to speak a little bit to that? I know it's early in where we are.

Yes, it's early. I'll focus on RCC because that's probably the easier story to explain at this point. So we're going through our dose escalation, of course, and we had our go/no-go criteria that we established prior to starting the study. I will say that we've not really shared publicly our go/no-go criteria, but we had no problems in meeting that. And currently, when we talk about our expansion cohort, it's really with the thought of correctly fulfilling Project Optimus and giving them the data that they want. So we will expand out to at least two doses and look to see which dose is best tolerated and most efficacious at the same time. And at that time, obviously, we will be -- we will look for convincing data that you're seeing more than just a cabo monotherapy activity, which these patients that have already failed cabo shouldn't be that hard to demonstrate. Similarly, with adagrasib, as we keep on with the dose escalation, we'll probably proceed in a very similar fashion.

We'll take our next question from Jason

Congrats on the progress. Maybe a high-level question for you, Troy. Now that the die has been cast regarding time lines, so to speak, can you speak to some of the puts and takes regarding the commercial dynamics in the relapsed/refractory NPM1 setting? How much is your competitors' first-to-market advantage and current inroads as a hurdle? I mean, ultimately, how quickly do you think you can overcome any residual or at least initial physician inertia here? And then maybe secondarily, what are your expectations regarding the evolution of NCCN guidelines for the class, whether they include zifto specifically or sort of just reference the larger menin inhibitor class?

Yes, Jason, thanks for the questions. Let me -- maybe I'll just make a couple of overarching comments, and then I'm going to ask Brian to speak to your question. I think if I were to distill your question down, it's really like what's the meaning of a first-mover advantage, right? What does that mean here? What I'd say is everything we're seeing, I think, is good for patients. We've seen strong interest and strong uptake in menin inhibitors. As you've heard us say, ziftomenib is potentially best-in-class. I think not only in NPM1-mutated AML, but increasingly, as you'll see in combination, we think it's going to be very competitive in the KMT2A rearranged subset. And we're looking forward to giving physicians and patients options for therapy. These patients are in desperate need. And I'll let Brian speak really to the feedback that we've heard from KOLs and sort of the positioning. And then we'll come back to your question on NCCN when he's done with that. Brian, could you maybe build on my comments?

Sure. Thanks, Troy, and thanks, Jason, for the great question. Yes, I think as Troy said, we've been working towards, I think, building that first -- our presence and first approval in this market. As you said, we're happy that patients may have a number of options available for them. Our team has been working for really the last 2 years to start to begin this preparation. We've actually, from a medical perspective, have been engaging with KOLs from -- with our MSL team over the last 2 years or more. Our market access team has actually been out in the field and engaging with payers through pre-approval information exchanges over the last year, and we're really building a strong reputation among those teams. A lot of that's actually built, I would say, as Kura Oncology based on the strong reputation that Mollie and her team have really built in executing on these clinical trials and how quickly they've been able to enroll patients and really partner strongly with a number of the U.S. physicians. So I think that there will be -- of course, we recognize there'll be some competition coming forward between potentially two approved agents in the space. We're confident in the profile that ziftomenib has that we'd be able to rapidly engage with physicians upon approval. Our sales teams will actually begin some profiling once they finish their training in the short time frame between now and as they get closer to the approval, so they could start to engage and get to introduce and engage on Kura's behalf as we get closer to our approval. So we think that we're going to -- we're doing all the right things that a company like Kura needs to do. And while there may be some initial awareness from some of the competitors, we think that the need is substantially high and the enthusiasm we've heard around ziftomenib continues to be high that we'll be in a good position once we get that approval.

Thanks, Brian. Brian, do you want to just add to that and address Jason's second question, which is around how do we think about the evolution of the NCCN guidelines? Is it menin as a class? Is it zifto-specific? Any color you want to give?

Yes, absolutely. I mean I would say at the highest level, Jason, since we only have external visibility to what the NCCN AML committee does, we can't really comment as to when they will be addressing the NPM1-mutated population. Our intent within our team is as soon as our data are published and we have our approval, we'll be submitting the application to NCCN for consideration on the guidelines as soon as possible. It's one of those key early launch metrics that we'll be putting towards to get ziftomenib on those guidelines. Mollie, would you want to add anything else to that?

Yes. I thought the question about whether they would list out individual drugs or menin as a class is an interesting one. I mean, obviously, we don't know, but as we are the only two companies that will really have strong data packages already produced, I would think, at least for the foreseeable future, it would be named menin inhibitors in the guidelines rather than just a class.

We'll take our next question from Ellen Horste with TD Cowen.

Congrats on such an exciting quarter. I'm just wondering what you think are the biggest potential risk to the pivotal program time lines, if there's anything that could potentially push initial data out past 2028. And then is there any risk to running combined studies with both the KMT2A population and the NPM1 population?

Yes. Thanks, Ellen, for the questions. Mollie, do you want to speak to that risks to time lines sort of getting extended or risks to running the blended populations?

Yes. I mean, obviously, we can't predict the future. And if something really unexpected happens, obviously, it could push out the readout dates, but we're very, very conservative. And so we only released that 2028 date when we felt very confident in our ability to be able to meet it. With regards to the mixing of the populations, again, I will go back to our 007 trial. It has taught us so much. We understand what these patients now look like in these settings to a great extent with very robust data sets. So the mixing of the populations doesn't frighten us. And we've obviously approached it from many different scenarios to make sure that this was the appropriate way for us to proceed as a company. So 007 really was the best building block for this big trial.

We'll take our next question from Peter Lawson with Barclays.

I joined late, so I apologize if the question has already been asked just around about your FDA dialogue, how that's proceeding, if it's changed in frequency or any emphasis that's changed around that? And the second question would be around importance of the AML maintenance setting. And do you think you have the ability to kind of capture that market as well?

Yes, Peter. Mollie, can you just maybe summarize the FDA dialogue for Peter?

Sure, sure. We're under active review. We are regularly interacting, as you would expect, being on a priority review time line. And we really haven't seen any change in the quality, the quantity or the frequency of interactions with the agency. So things have been progressing as expected.

And then, Mollie, maybe you can take the second question around how one thinks about maintenance, and then Brian, I'll probably ask you to build on that from a commercial perspective. But Mollie, do you want to start?

So obviously, in our 001 trial, where we're not pursuing a maintenance indication, but obviously, as we've heard, there are folks that would expect some use in that setting already. But 007 has taught us -- again, taught us a lot. And while most of our NPM1 patients don't need to go to transplant in that frontline setting, the ones that do, have in general, come back on to a maintenance protocol and the KMT2As especially are very apt to come back to trial. So I think the maintenance indication that has been built into the 017 design is going to be extremely valuable in appropriately capturing that patient population.

Brian, is there anything you'd like to add on Peter's question around maintenance?

Thanks, Troy. Maybe just to add on that. I think that the way we view it from a commercial perspective, a lot of the post-transplant maintenance or extended non-post-transplant, that would likely be something we would observe or expect to see in that -- in the newly diagnosed setting. So as KOMET-017 builds out, we think that gives us an opportunity for significant durations of treatment in both the IC and the non- IC setting. That could lead to anywhere from 12 to 24 months of continuous therapy for patients. In the relapsed/refractory space, based on what we've seen in the market so far, KMT2A, there may be more patients who would go to transplant relative to the older population of NPM1-mutated patients in the relapsed/refractory setting. So we're observing and we'll be following to see, but that -- we expect that to be a lower rate of transplant for those relapsed/refractory NPM1-mutated patients. But we'll be tracking that and try to understand. And our goal, of course, will be to get patients on therapy and to stay on therapy for a longer period of time.

We'll take our next question from Charles

This is Peter on for Charles. A couple of questions from my end. First of all, for the 2806 data in RCC at ESMO this fall, just wondering if you could provide some color on patient baselines, how heavily pretreated rates of prior cabozantinib exposure? And then second question, as you're looking down the nose of approval in relapsed/refractory NPM1 for ziftomenib, just wondering what your plans are, if any, for additional data disclosures in that setting, for example, at ASH or in a journal release? Congrats on all the progress.

Thanks, Peter. Mollie, do you want to take those questions? I mean we don't want to go into too much detail, but any additional color we can give on RCC?

That's exactly what I would say is I don't want to preempt the abstracts, but they will be sharing all of that data with you. But you can expect a typical Phase I patient population where initially it could be you are most heavily pretreated and then as investigators feel more comfortable, you come further and further in line. So you'll see a variety of patients at baseline.

Great. And Mollie, what about Peter's second question about any additional disclosures on the monotherapy, it could be the KOMET-001 study for people to look forward to?

Additional data disclosures. Well, we should be expecting, obviously -- yes, that was what I was getting at. Yes. So you should expect a publication within the coming months.

We'll take our next question from Salim Syed with Mizuho.

This is [ Eric ] on for Salim. I just wanted to get your thoughts on potential launch ramp as you get into relapsed/refractory NPM1- m given what we've seen with the KMT2A launch here recently. And given that there was no really good reason to expect any warehousing of patients with KMT2Ar in relapsed/refractory, but might there be a bit with the NPM1-m population?

Yes. Thanks, Eric. Brian, do you want to address Eric's question about any launch dynamics?

Sure. Eric, thanks for that question. I mean I think that we're -- I don't think we're ready to disclose what our expected launch ramp-up will be. What I can tell you is the focus that we've been working towards right now is to immediately get the product available for patients, get access from -- with our payers and build on the work the team is working on so far and really communicating around the areas where we see ziftomenib as differentiated, as I've said before, around our robust efficacy, the safety and tolerability, the convenience and the ability to have a kind of simplicity of dosing without some significant additional monitoring challenges as some of the competition may have. So our expectation, your second question around whether or not you would expect to see a bolus, we haven't actually -- we don't expect to see a large bolus. This is not a patient population where patients are waiting for a new therapy to come forward, unfortunately, because of this very high unmet need. These are going to be elderly relapsed/refractory patients that have probably been significantly pretreated and may not have the expected -- the expected life expectancy in this space is pretty short, unfortunately. So I think the -- there's less of a dynamic of a pool of patients we think that have already been kind of taken up by other therapies by the time we get to approval. I hope that helps with some clarity.

Yes, very helpful. To build on -- just to build on Brian's comments, another thing to look forward to is as Mollie indicated, we're going to give an update on the combinations of zifto with venetoclax. We're also looking at combinations with other standards of care, including gilteritinib. All of that data is coming. While we'll be promoting on label, we're looking really to publish as much data as possible to help inform physicians and patients. And those four pillars that Brian hit on, I think that's really ultimately going to allow ziftomenib to potentially become the market leader, the efficacy, the safety, the compatibility and the convenience. So we're excited to get out there and offer more options to patients. It's going to be an exciting next few quarters.

We'll take our next question from Jeet Mukherjee with BTIG.

Just to follow up on maybe your comments previously. Just any sense from your investigators about their willingness to use zifto off- label frontline or perhaps in the relapsed/refractory setting in combination pending a potential approval? And my second question was, can you provide any commentary on the percent site overlap you have with your approved competitor, at least among your current clinical trials?

Yes, Jeet, so let's tease those two questions apart. Mollie, do you want to speak to the feedback from what we've heard from KOLs on a -- Jeet, I think your question was sort of a willingness to combine ziftomenib with other standards of care?

Yes. I mean what we hear is ultimately, they're going to do what's best for the patient. If they have a safe way to administer our drug in combination that they feel would be more beneficial to the patient, then they would. With regards to in the front line, they have the option of putting them on our trial. So I'm hoping that they will do that so that we can fill up just as quickly as we plan to. But yes, we do hear, not just our investigators, but other KOLs discuss liking to have the information available to be able to safely use drugs in combination [Technical Difficulty] sites.

Yes, the site overlap.

Yes. That's all right. So for 001, the monotherapy study, it was very few, a handful, probably mostly in the United States. With 017, you can expect that number to drop precipitously because sites don't have the capability of conducting multiple Phase III studies in the same or similar indication.

Yes, just to build on that -- yes, Jeet, just to build on that, I mean that's part of why we designed 017 the way that we did because it's really a one-stop shop for these clinical sites. And we're really looking to build relationships with many of the leading centers all over the world. And if they can treat nearly all eligible patients in the front line with one trial, they've shown us that that's what they're going to do. So we're not -- to Li's earlier question, we're not overly concerned. It's not really first patient in. It's going to be last patient in and who gets the data. And I think we're very well positioned to compete on that. So I appreciate your questions.

We'll take our next question from David Dai with UBS.

This is Eric Musonza asking for David Dai. About the commercial readiness, could you share some more details about how Kyowa Kirin's existing commercial sales force could help expedite the commercial execution? How many salespeople do you think will be needed for a successful launch? And then just a quick follow-up on that. J&J just initiated their Phase III trials for bleximenib in frontline AML. How are you planning to catch up or potentially leapfrog?

Yes. Thanks, Eric, for the two questions. Let's start with the commercial readiness question and the relationship with Kyowa Kirin. Brian, do you want to address Eric's question?

Sure, sure. Thank you, Eric, for that question. Yes, so the -- our team, our commercial team has been -- as I mentioned, has been fully built out. Our sales organization, we'll share probably as we get up to launch a bit more details of the size of that field force and how they'll be working with KK. What I can say is that our team is building out based on the target physicians that we've outlined for the AML space, we'll have a national coverage with Kura field representatives, and they'll partner very closely with the national team that KK already has in the field. You may know that they have a product that they currently are promoting in the lymphoma space, which has a pretty significant overlap at an account level with the AML population. So what we're working on is their team will have a portion of their effort focused on ziftomenib. The other rest of their effort will be focused on their other product. And for ziftomenib, they will be partnering very closely with our team to essentially give a broader depth and breadth of our ability to reach physicians than we would if we were to be alone. So we think this is going to be a significant advantage for ziftomenib as we launch because we'll have a field force that is maybe broader, more dedicated to extend to more physicians to have more frequent interactions and contacts so that we'll be able to communicate our messages and support patients who are in the community who may need to -- or have the potential to get ziftomenib. So as we're working towards that launch, we'll be able to provide a little bit more detail, but I could tell you that the teams have been working very well together. They're going through their training to be ensured that as we get to our launch, they'll be ready to go and start to communicate both from the Kura side as well as our partners at KK.

Thanks, Brian. And Eric, I'll take your second question around the time lines for Janssen. I mean, everyone knows Janssen is a formidable development organization. I think though, the answer is kind of in your question, right? You mentioned the two Phase III trials. To our knowledge, they've only initiated the one CAMELOT study in the frontline ven/aza and as Mollie indicated, I mean, we've just seen overwhelming enthusiasm and enrollment in both 007 and enthusiasm for 017. So I think we'll be very well positioned to compete with them in terms of enrollment globally. And you'll see us initiate those trials here shortly in the second half, and we're looking forward to it. So thanks for the questions.

At this time, this concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the meeting back over to Troy Wilson.

Thank you, Brittany, and thank you all once again for joining the call today. We'll be participating in several investor conferences over the next couple of months as well as the ESMO Congress in Berlin, where as Mollie mentioned, we're planning to hold a virtual investor event to discuss our presentations of clinical data from our FTI program. In the meantime, if you have any additional questions, please feel free to reach out. So thank you all again, and have a good evening, everyone.