ImmuPharma plc ($IMM)

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the ImmuPharma plc corporate update. [Operator Instructions] Due to the significant attendance on today's call, the company may not be in a position to answer every question received during the meeting itself. However the company can review these questions and publish responses via the platform in due course. Before we begin, we'd like to submit the following poll, and I'm sure the company will be most grateful for your participation. I'd now like to hand over to [indiscernible] team from ImmuPharma plc.

Thank you, Mark. Good morning, everybody. Thank you very much for joining us here today. And the purpose of today is to give a pretty detailed rundown of the details of the funding and the reasons for the funding that we announced earlier this week. And as you'll see on the screen, I've got my 2 colleagues with me, so let me introduce myself. Chief Executive Officer, Tim McCarthy. On my left, your right is Dr. [ Sebastian Gudru ], who's our Chief Scientific Officer; and on my right, your left, Dr. Tim Franklin, who's our Chief Operating Officer. And we'll all be taking different parts of the presentation to explain the details of each section. So if I can just go back to this slide here. Before we get into the detailed presentation itself, we've already had quite a number of pre-submitted Q&As and various feedbacks during the week from the shareholder base. So I just wanted to address 2 or 3 pretty important key points before we get into the detail. So firstly, I want to make absolutely clear to everybody listening today that [ P140 ] remains an absolute focus. Whatever we're doing with Kapiglucagon, which we'll explain in detail through the presentation, doesn't take away anything at all from our focus on P140. That is our main value driver. It remains on track for licensing deal in this year. And again, we'll come back to talk about that in a little bit more detail. But I think it's really, really important that people do not get diverted from that message and believe that reasons -- any reason, or reasons that we have done this deal this week has anything to do with our losing faith in P140, or it's not progressing on track. That's not the truth. So I just wanted to put that right up front, but we will come back to P140 and give you a little bit more detail on that. The second point is why have we raised money. Tim McCarthy, CEO, has said quite consistently that we are not raising money. We're concentrating on taking forward P140. That's the questions I get back and the feedback I get back. And I understand that. And it was never our intention to raise money. There is no need to raise money from a financial perspective at all, and that's some of the other observations that have been addressed this week. The only reason for even considering taking this money on board was because we were approached by a number of our long-standing shareholders who had money to deploy. They recognize the fact that the company was undervalued, and they were keen to help us, in my description, build the company. And this is about building the company. It is not about running away from P140, which is some of the questions, or comments which have been made, quite the opposite. And so the third point I just want to make is why we've chosen [indiscernible], and we will go into that in a lot more detail. But it was done on a very, very strict criteria of how we do all our project evaluations. And when we decide to invest shareholders' money into any of our developments, we have to go through a proper professional evaluation, which has a lot of criteria to decide whether or not it's a valid project. And Kapiglucagon ticked all those boxes. And I'll let [ Seb ] speak to this later on in the presentation. But I think you'll understand when Seb talks about [indiscernible] his excitement for it and the uniqueness of that product, you will understand why when we got offered the funding to dedicate to that development. It was a decision that was easy to make at the end of the day. But it is about building the company. One company is not built on one program, in other words, P140. And since we took the management of the company 5 years ago, this is what we've been building towards, to build a sustainable company with a wide portfolio and build shareholder value. So I just wanted to make those points upfront. We'll be going into each one in a little bit more detail as we go through. So let's just run forward to the detailed slides. So this comes back right upfront to P140. It is absolutely our total focus. It's our core value driver as the title says. And you will remember all of you that know the company very well that we had some big advances in that program last year. In September, we announced a new patent filing, which was based on the work that [indiscernible] and his team had put in over the previous few years. So taking P140, or what some of you remember used to be called [ Luposor ], but now we call P140, taking it from a program which had one disease indication that was targeted on, i.e., lupus, into an area where we now have the opportunity to treat up to 50 autoimmune diseases, i.e., the ability to treat autoimmune diseases across the piece, not just one. And that was a result of the scientific progress that [indiscernible] and his team achieved. So we've been able to recognize and understand what the mechanism of action is, or MOA, as we call it, the dosing regimens we need for treatment of diseases, and also made great advances on how do we identify those patients that will respond to P140, what we call M types. And not forgetting the fact that we've also, in all of that, we're now able to diagnose patients. So putting the diagnosis and treatment together is very, very powerful as we go forward. And that's all a result of the work we've done in-house and what we announced last year through the patent. And that patent, which was filed last September, is progressing through. It's in the inquiry phase now through all the different jurisdictions that we filed in. And Seb, I think might say a little bit more about that and his confidence for that going forward. And going back to the core point of where is P140, what's its next step? Yes, let me address the point that last year, when we put the patent announcement out, I said quite clearly that we were looking to close a deal with a partner by the end of '25. We didn't meet that objective. And I recognize that, and I think I said so when we updated the market in November. However, we are making great strides on that this year, and I'll let Tim speak to that when we come on to the activities around the licensing. But knowing what we know and all the discussions going on, that's why we've got very, very high level of confidence of concluding that deal this year. Just an introductory slide on Kapiglucagon. So I think I mentioned in my introduction that this wasn't something that we were looking to take forward now. We wanted to move it forward, but we just didn't have the financial resources. And as all small companies in our sector know, we are cash starved. We have to rationalize or rationalize, I should say, where the cash resources go to. And very much over the last number of years, that's all been dedicated into P140. So the fact that we had the opportunity completely from left field, not that we were looking for it or went out to ask anybody to fund this program. The fact that we had the opportunity to devote some cash directly into Kapiglucagon was both unexpected but also a delight. And as we'll go on to demonstrate, there were certain criteria that we looked for to say, is this a program suitable for us to take extra funding on board? And yes, it was. And Seb, I think, will run through that when we get to the more detailed slides. But I want to make, again, the emphasis that deciding to go forward with Kapiglucagon does not take away the value from P140 at all. And we are building a strong company here with a broader portfolio. And there's a slide later on in the presentation, which talks about the individual value of Kapiglucagon on its own. And I think that will help everyone to understand why we've decided to take this extra funding on board because the value of Kapiglucagon on its own stands up. And I know a number of shareholders and commentators have asked, well, why are you diluting at this point? I would answer that in this way. there's a way of looking at dilution in two ways. You can look at dilution as being a percentage, i.e., people are concerned that when we take more money on, we issue more shares, we dilute their interest in the sense they don't have the same percentage of the company that used to have. That's one way of looking at dilution. The other way of looking at taking more money on is does the net impact of taking that extra cash on and issuing more shares lead to a greater overall value of the company, and so increased shareholder value down to each and every one of you, whatever the number of shares you own, it's very much about what they are worth, not the percentage of the company. And we are absolutely convinced that bringing Kapiglucagon on now with the opportunity to fund it all the way through this accelerated program for the next 2 years, will add that value more in excess of if we hadn't taken money on now. So just before I hand over to the next slide, I just want to bring [ Seb ] in on those first 2 slides. So, would you just like to give your view on where we are with P140 and where we are in the stage of development?

Yes, sure. I mean with P140, we are basically on track. Nothing changed really, except from the fact it's more positive. I mean P140 is unique, like we say, like we mentioned, the results are, I would say, incredible. It's very exciting when you look at the data that we have already discussed about, but the data we have on human cells that we can see the effect on P140, what is doing. So I mean, this is very exciting on a scientific perspective. And all the discussion I had with scientists, they were all excited about this. So I mean, there's no -- there's absolutely no issue there. Everything is on track. The patent is on track. I mean when we can, we'll make new announcement on this. But yes, I think very exciting. Now it's not about P140. The thing is actually in R&D, we are doing more than one project. So there's many projects actually going on. And of course, we don't talk about everything. But one of the projects that actually I was myself promoting and strongly since 2024 was Kapiglucagon. So that's -- how can I say it's like -- it's my little baby project in the sense that I designed the molecule in 2017, and then we developed it with the team at the time. So -- and we did a lot of work on it, and we know it works. We saw at the time. When it was developed, there was a push toward the rescue product and then you had some on the market that arrived. So the project was put a little bit on hold, but then we saw the clear possibility for the [indiscernible] pump system, and this is really where we can shine. For me, there's no doubt we have the best product, and I'm really happy that we can finally move forward with it.

Okay. I'm going to hand over to Tim to take us through the Kapiglucagon from his perspective.

Thanks, Tim. So the Kapiglucagon product profile is -- it's ideal for type 1 diabetes market, and I'll explain to you why. But first of all, let's just go through the disease itself and what causes it. So you're probably all aware of someone that suffers from type 1 diabetes. So it's a result of the pancreas not producing insulin, not producing enough insulin to manage the blood glucose levels in the body to normal levels. Interestingly, type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease. So it's a parallel to what we're doing with P140. And this disease attacks the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas, the beta cells. It typically occurs from the age of 4 to up to 14, 15 years of age. That's when it generally peaks, but it can still appear at any age. Currently, there is no cure for type 1 diabetes. So as many of you are aware, the treatment aims are to keep blood glucose levels as normal as possible using insulin either in the form of injections, the use of [ pens ] or pumps, which I'll come on to in a moment. Yet despite the widespread use of insulin in the market over many years, and there have been lots of different types of insulin, short-acting, long-acting that have been used, People with type 1 diabetes still have a shorter life expectancy, up to 20 years in some cases of shorter life expectancy. And what generally happens over a long period of time, because glucose levels are not managed as tightly as they could be, that a lot of patients will develop serious complications over their lifetime, affecting the eye, foot ulcers, heart disease, high blood pressure kidney disease. The moment someone starts to develop type 1 diabetes, the kidney disease clock is ticking, and it takes many, many years for the effects of high glucose to affect the fine, if you like, filtration mechanism of the kidneys. So not only that, but of course, those serious complications over lifetime lead to massive economic burdens for society. So for example, in the U.S., there's about $800 billion in cumulative societal costs. So a huge impact. Not only that, but we're faced with that problem increasing over the years. As you can see here, you've got increasing prevalence of type 1 diabetes forecast in all the markets around the world and growing faster in some of the developing markets as well now. So let's come back to pumps for a moment and consider their place in insulin therapy. Pump use in the U.S., and the U.S. is pretty much more advanced in terms of the market activities there. So pump use, and this is insulin pump use, is used in around 50%, 60% of cases. And this is an example of the [ Beta Bionics ] [indiscernible] system of where we are today. These are really cool sort of [indiscernible] technologies now with very small miniaturized systems with glucose sensors on the body. And then there's a cartridge, as you can see there, it's in this case, an insulin cartridge. And that delivers insulin through the skin. The beauty of this, and one of the important things about insulin or insulin therapy is, you don't need to count your carbs, or carbohydrates because that produces glucose. And a lot of the sort of advantages of these systems is that they can constantly monitor your glucose levels without the need for [indiscernible] or that sort of invasive procedure. There's a little point at the bottom there saying that [ bio-hormonal ] pump is in development with Beta Bionics. Just remember that, and I'll come back to that in a moment. So if one looks at the insulin pump market, and this is taking just the insulin pump market forecast from a market research group. The forecast is for that to become worth around $13.6 billion by 2035. That includes the devices, all the consumables and obviously, the cartridges with the insulin in the form part of that. Our own internal forecast for Kapiglucagon over the next 10 years -- well, 10 years post approval is $3 billion. And I can pretty much say that, that's quite a rigorous conservative approach built up through prevalence figures, what we know in the market today in terms of pricing and uptake. So to control blood glucose normally in the body, it's not just insulin that is involved. There's actually another hormone called glucagon. So ideally, the combination of both of these hormones gives better control of blood glucose and blood glucose is measured by something called HbA1c, which is the glucose attached to the blood in the system. So -- you can see on the right-hand side there, if the glucose levels go too high, you need insulin to bring the glucose levels down. And if it goes too low, you need glucagon ideally to bring that back to normal. So it's a balancing act of trying to keep the glucose levels within a tight range without going too high or too low over time. If they go too low, you get hypoglycemia, low glucose, which is due to dysfunction of glucagon secretion from pancreatic alpha cell. So this is the aim to ideally look at both insulin and glucagon. So why is that not being the case? There are three main messages from this slide. One with respect to glucagon itself. The second in terms of where do we go from insulin pumps. And the third, well, it's actually happening at the moment. So the first one addresses the fundamental problem in the market today, and that is the need for a novel, stable glucagon liquid formulation. There just isn't one. There are formulations that try to meet this requirement, but they're falling well short. The second statement is in regards to an article in The [indiscernible] which clearly showed that you get much better control of glucose levels by using insulin and glucagon in a [indiscernible] fully closed-loop system. Now not the ideal glucagon, but nevertheless, they managed to get some good results there. Thirdly, there, you'll see that Beta Bionics, this is the device I showed you earlier in the slide deck, is not only in the monoinsulin area, but it is now developing an automated delivery of insulin and glucagon using another glucagon formulation, which Seb will come on to is not ideal. So the drive is there to move to [ biohormonals ] pumps. And clearly, it's a market where there will be significant growth where you should see switching from mono insulin devices to dual hormone devices or biohormonal devices over time. However, we need a stable form of glucagon to do that. And I'll hand over to Seb.

Yes, indeed, because glucagon is inherently unstable in liquid solution. It aggregates [indiscernible], degrade rapidly and can [ gel ]. This makes formulation particularly challenging for pump use where clogging can compromise reliable dose delivery. Without stable liquid formulation, continuous glucagon delivery is not feasible. No currently available formulation fully meets the requirements for chronic pump use. Existing approaches rely either on non-ideal excipients or on glucagon analogs with potential safety concerns. Kapiglucagon addresses this barrier while preserving the benefit of n glucagon without risky metabolite. So what does it mean is that what has been preventing the development of [indiscernible] pump was the fact that it's really difficult to make a cartridge with glucagon in solution in a physiological solvent like saline. So different approaches have been developed to go -- to solve this problem. So for example, to change the formulation, so to use nonphysiological solvent, which would be the approach of [indiscernible] which with the problem, ideally, you want to have like water-based solvent. So -- and the other approach that have been used is to modify the peptide, so modify the sequence, which would be the approach of [ Zealand Pharma ] with [indiscernible]. So in that case, you can improve the solubility, make it soluble and cine solution. But then you modify the sequence, you don't have the same pharmacodynamic and in their case, introduce, for example, nonnatural amino acid, so you don't have natural metabolite. So in our case, with Kapiglucagon, the approach we use basically to solve all those problems is to use a [indiscernible]. So you have the best of both worlds, meaning that you can increase -- well, actually making it soluble in saline solution while having the active being glucagon. So like I mentioned earlier, this was discovered in my lab in 2017, and we filed a patent in 2018. So Kapiglucagon is a [indiscernible] of glucagon converted in the body into glucagon and natural amino acid. This approach is designed to combine the benefit of native glucagon with a favorable safety and tolerability. Yes, almost [ profile ]. We intend to pursue approval via the U.S. FDA 505(b)(2) pathway. This pathway enables partial reliance on existing FDA data for approval for an approved drug, in this case, glucagon together with product-specific supporting data in our case, Kapiglucagon. So compared to a full NDA, this pathway is expected to provide a more efficient development and regulatory route. And of course, the patent protection may be further extended through [ PTSPC ]. So yes, so the bottom line is basically, we think we have the best glucagon for the [indiscernible] pump. And the fact that it's a prodrug allow us to make a very quick development at lower cost.

So just carrying on from that, picking up the point that is very important here. One of the key reasons why we chose Kapiglucagon to get funded through this methodology was the ability to move it through this regulatory pathway, which Seb just described, which for us, it lasts approximately 2 years from when we start sometime in the near future. And this slide is on there to illustrate two things. One, to illustrate the pathway through and all the different steps that we're taking, and to demonstrate that we have a high level of confidence that we can meet those timetables, and get this product into commercialization from our perspective extremely quickly. In fact, ironically, although we are only just picking up this program at this point now, this will get to market way before P140. Now obviously, there's lots of value-added points of P140 over the next period, not least the partnering deal we're going to do this year. And then as we move it through with our partner, it will go through further clinical studies, and that will continue to add value, et cetera, et cetera. But even taking the quickest route of P140 to get a product onto the market, this Kapiglucagon program is going to beat it by years. So again, back to the value adding of Kapiglucagon, that's a really important point to take on. The other reason for putting this slide out like this is we're a small biotech company, a listed company. We live the [indiscernible] on our [ news flow ], and don't we know that. And this is our presentation to you of where we believe that positive news flow is going to come over the period of the development over the next 18 months, 2 years, very, very regularly. So we've blocked it out here in half years. But you can see there's an awful lot of news, which is coming in the very near future, which will, one, confirm that the program is on track, but also just feeding the messaging that we are on track and we're adding value. And that value is going to lead to this product being commercialized, as I say, sometime within the time frame of the 2 years. And if you look halfway down, we've got highlighted potential partnership deal at any time from this point. And that is, if you look at the graph at the bottom, we've got the first 2 sections. So the pre-IND meeting is what we're going to be moving into very quickly to discuss with FDA the details of the study, although we've already got outside opinions from consultants on this. So we're pretty confident of what we've got. The next is the actual work, so the [ CMC ], the preclinical, et cetera. And then you move to a point where you just get confirmation from FDA on an IND that you can take it into a human study, which we're calling the [ SAD ] study. But once you've got to the point of achieving an IND, that is extremely valuable, both in terms of ticking the box that we've got this product ready to go into studies, but also very valuable from a partnership point of view. And we've already been reaching out last year when Tim was doing a lot of background work in Kapiglucagon just from a market perspective and reaching out to some of those companies that are -- well, all the major companies that are in this pump market. There is a tremendous level of interest from those parties and said, look, if you can crack this, then you've got an absolutely stupendous product, and all of them would be interested in talking to us about this. So we've got a ready list of people, which are the top companies in this pump market that we're ready to go to. And certainly, we will keep them informed running through the program. We will definitely be picking up the discussions at that point we get the IND. So it may be that we do a partnering deal at that point, and then the cost and the development is done by a partner, or we decide that it's worth the investment ourselves to add even more value to get the data from that SAD study. And that's the decision we can take at the time. But this is, I think, a really good slide to illustrate one of the main reasons why we've taken this extra money on now to develop Kapiglucagon. So just to emphasize the point without going over the top on this. The investment proposition for Kapiglucagon was very much, as I think I said right at the front of this presentation, that when we were offered the opportunity to take money on to develop a product in our portfolio, we went internally and we all got together and said, right, well, what do we have? And we've got a number of products at early stage of development. But from our perspective, there was no rationale for taking money at this point when we said very clearly, we weren't going to take any on, and putting it into some of our very early sort of preclinical programs, maybe anti-infectives, for example, which we've talked about before. There was no way we were going to add value quickly enough and in the right amount in order to justify taking this money on. And so we were very, very aware of we're taking the decision here, which will take people by surprise, not least the fact that nobody was expecting us to raise any more money, and we said we weren't and we weren't intending to. But when you look at the facts of Kapiglucagon, the way that Seb has just explained it from a technical point of view, the way that Tim has just explained it from a market perspective, the fact that we've got a very, very accelerated program between 18 months and 2 years, which follows a well-trodden path for these types of developments, not in insulin per se, but in these type of products. It's there. We can add value extremely quickly. And I go back to the value proposition of, yes, we are diluting existing shareholders, assume they don't follow their money in this particular deal. But we're diluting to add extra incremental value. And it's about where the value of the company arrives at and the shareholding you have and what that shareholding is worth, not the percentage of the company. I'm very aware, and I want to make that clear of people's concerns about dilution. But all of our decision-making was based on we are only going to take this extra money if it means we can get straight on with Kapiglucagon without waiting any further and it's going to add value in the short term. And it will do. We're absolutely convinced about that. And the bottom of the slide is repeating a little bit, just give a little bit more detail where Tim was speaking earlier about our internal projection of Kapiglucagon sales around [ GBP 3 billion ] per year. And that's based on the usual analysis that we do when we evaluate any project and which we did for this one, obviously. And it's a matter of taking assumptions on the growth of the market, the market penetration, which we believe Kapiglucagon can have, the pricing. And you'll see that we're not being overoptimistic in terms of the percentages. So for example, we're looking at a market share of 34% in the U.S. and 17% in Europe. If you understand what Seb was saying about the absolute superiority that Kapiglucagon has about anything else on the market, and there's nothing else coming up to challenge Kapiglucagon. It's absolutely on its own. To project 34% and 17% is our market share, is pretty conservative. But that's one of the basic assumptions where we come to that sales revenue. Now you convert that into value for the company and what we normally sort of run our NPV models and what the underlying value of the company will grow. That's why we made the decision to take that money and invest in capital. Let me just touch on the fundraising. So we have announced this week that there is a GBP 6 million investment from [ Landstead Capital ]. A lot of you will be very familiar with Landstead because we've had Landstead on our shareholder register for the last 10 years now. This will be the eighth deal we've done with Landstead. And let me just take a moment to talk about that. Landstead have been a fantastic supporter of the company. And as we've managed -- or sorry, had to raise like all small biotech companies, capital at various points over the period, we go out to the market and to existing shelves and potential new investors to come in and support our programs. We're in a difficult market for small biotechs. We have been for a long time. A lot of the traditional funders of our type of company, if I go back 15, 20 years, they've all disappeared for various reasons. And it's very, very difficult to keep funding a company like ImmuPharma to go through. And Landstead, I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, and there's lots of criticisms of the way that Landstead put the money in, in terms of the sharing agreement. But they have been there for us every single time we've gone to raise money. And their money alongside other investors' money, has been the reason why we've been able to progress P140 to where it is and have such an extremely valuable asset in P140. And again, they're coming behind the investment into Kapiglucagon for the same reasons, because they're practical investors, pragmatic investors, they don't just put money in if they don't see a value proposition. And I know that a lot of people talk to me about Landstead and say, well, we don't like the way that Landstead operate in terms of sharing agreement and you don't get as much money as you have committed or perhaps you do sometimes. This is all based on news flow. And when I said earlier about news flow drives a company like ours and share price and valuation. Yes, we've had ups and downs on some of the sharing agreements with Landstead over the years. We've had some very good deals where we've received a lot more in the commitment than was originally pledged without any further dilution of shareholder interest. And we've had less. And again, that doesn't affect the dilution in any way, shape or form. But there is a direct correlation between the news flow that we put out and the return we get on that deal. So if I pick up the latest -- the last one that we did last year, which is a relatively short one for 7 months, that coincided with the announcement of the patent announcement on P140. And we all saw the share price rise from similar levels to where it is today, touching 18p or even touching intraday 20p at one point. And if you equate that sort of performance to what we're currently going into a deal with Landstead, so we -- they pledged GBP 6 million. We've got what they call a benchmark price of 8p. So if we average 8p across the 20 months of this agreement, we will get GBP 6 million in total across the period. If you look at that 8p, and we put this year a deal announcement out on P140. We confirm that we are pushing ahead with Kapiglucagon and go back to that news flow slide that we talked about. And there may be other things that we can update the market on in terms of what else we're doing, progress on the patent prosecution for P140, for example. There's lots and lots of news flow coming up over the next 6 to 12 months. That, by its very nature, is going to drive positive sentiment. It's going to drive share price. So if we go from -- do simple maths from 8p to 16p on an average across, we will get an extra GBP 6 million for no further dilution. And that extra money can go straight back into the portfolio to keep developing other products, again, for no further dilution for shareholders. And that's adding value for all shareholders, even those who are not participating in this particular round. So I'm acknowledging that the Landstead sharing agreement arrangement is not everyone's cup of tea. I think the decision to take that Landstead money this time, we're taking at exactly the right time for the benefit of all shareholders, and that's why we're keen to take it. Now associated with that is the wrap, which closes today, in fact, at 2:00 for anything up to GBP 1.5 million, and we deliberately put that in there because we wanted to give the opportunity for all shareholders to participate. The issue price is 6p. And again, that funding is dedicated to the fast tracking of Kapiglucagon. We didn't need to raise this money. We weren't going to raise this money. It's going to be dedicated to Kapiglucagon, and that's going to drive that value that I keep talking about. And as I've said more than once, we absolutely expect to generate that strong positive news flow over the next 12 to 24 months during the period of capital. So just to finish on this slide, we have not changed direction. We have not lost faith in P140. We are doing this transaction to strengthen our portfolio, build real value for shareholders going forward. And certainly, the feedback we've been getting on the discussions on the P140 licensing deals are very positive. Tim gave you an overview of that. In fact, I might ask Tim in a moment just to give you a little bit more detail on that because I know we've had lots of questions on where are we in that process, what exactly is going on, et cetera. So we'll try and put a little bit of skin on the bones for that for you in a moment. But the summary I would say is those are going very well. And that's why we're very, very confident of that news flow coming through on P140 this year. Accelerating capital we've talked about and just concentrate on the fact that it's an accelerated 2-year program. And it has an absolutely individual appeal to that marketplace, and we've had that confirmed from the leading players to us and said, if you can get this developed, we will take it from you. And it will just change the market profile absolutely. We've talked about Landstead and the near-term catalysts. And I've also said that the retail -- the retail offer is there for the shareholders, and that closed at 2:00 this afternoon. And I do believe if I got my presentation right that, that is the last slide.

That's great, Tim. Thank you very much indeed for updating investors. [Operator Instructions] I just like to remind you a recording of this presentation along with a copy of the slides and the published Q&A can be accessed via your Investor Meet company dashboard. Tim, as you can see, you've had a number of questions from investors today. So thank you to everybody for your engagement. If I may just hand back to you to take us through the Q&A.

Thank you, Mark. So I've got the questions in front of me. So there have been a number of pre-submitted questions, i.e., before we start the presentation. And if I flip down to the bottom, yes, there's a few come through whilst we've been on air today. Now certainly, a lot of the presubmitted ones, I haven't had a chance to read that the ones have just come through yet, but a lot of pre-submitted ones, I think we have covered in the presentation. And there's a few that are repeated for obvious reasons because they're coming in from all lots of sources. So I think the way that we can handle this is I'm going to ask both Tim and Seb, if you like, my question, which is amalgam of all the questions which are coming in to try and cover all the inquiries. And just put a little bit more detail for all the listeners, for all of you today on what I think are the key points and what you are indicating to us sort of Q&A of the key points. So I mentioned just before we finish the formal presentation about the partnering discussion. And I know that there's a high level of interest in what exactly we're doing with whom, how the sort of feedback is going, et cetera. So I'm going to ask Tim actually, if you wouldn't mind just giving an overview, because you're leading the charge here with obviously being hopefully ably supported by myself and [ Seth ]. But could you just give us an overview of where we are?

Sure. Well, it's the [indiscernible] question, isn't it and a very relevant one, of course, and I can completely understand that. If you cast your minds back to the -- one of the previous slides, we submitted the new patent September last year. We had a tremendous response to a lot of the scientific output that hit the market last year. And as a result of that, of course, we had a seismic shift in the engagements, if you like, of various number of companies. Ones that were already -- we were already talking to plus new ones as a result of those insights. Because remember, initially a few years ago, we were just talking around [ Lupus ] and CIDP and maybe 1 or 2 others, but those 2 primarily. But last year opened up the floodgates to huge potential clinically for the application of P140, not just in those diseases, but across a huge range of autoimmune diseases. Tim mentioned up to 50, which is certainly the case. And obviously, there's a shift in the thinking around what these companies want to do with that product. There's a lot more opportunity for companies to think about aligning their therapeutic focus and what they're looking at with this new opportunity with P140. Things take time. And we had a huge euphoria towards the end of last year. But a lot is out of the company's hands in terms of how quickly those partners can do their own due diligence. And it's fair to say, I think that the new data, the new information, the new scientific information that's coming through has greatly increased the dialogue with these companies. It's been extremely interesting and helpful in formulating our own ideas and how we move forward with those companies. It is complex because you're not talking about one indication, there's many. We do know that this is a huge, hugely interesting area for licensing and M&A, the area of autoimmunity, inflammation, those diseases caught under that umbrella and still a huge amount of significant medical need there. So there's been a lot of activity. It's not going to stop. I think we're well positioned to fit with the right partner at the right point in time. But we just need to, unfortunately, be a little bit patient on -- with them on their side. But we're providing all the support that we can at the moment and enabling those discussions to move forward to the right point.

Thanks, and if I can bring [indiscernible] in at this point because there's been many questions, all sort of slightly differently phrased, but all going to the same point. Are we having problems in those discussions? Are we getting pushback from the R&D teams and the companies we're talking to on a scientific level? Do they not buy into the scientific rationale that we're putting forward. So this is more Seb's area. Tim has talked about the sort of commercial side and due diligence, et cetera, and the discussions. I'd just like to bring Seb into -- if you don't mind, Seb, just to -- I mean, you're obviously leading the discussions on the scientific side with the scientists in these companies and the due diligence they're going. Without prompting you one way or the other, can you just give us your flavor of your discussions and the interactions that we have?

Yes. Of course, now the interaction are very good, actually, but everybody are really impressed by the results. So it's -- they're really interested in the science. So it's -- we have good discussion. And actually, well, that's something I wanted to say as well is we are planning -- well, we are working on the publication right now of the results. So we plan to publish everything as soon as possible so then everybody can judge by themselves about the result, but we're very confident with what we have. So yes.

One of the question, was very direct and said, are you getting pushback on the scientific rationale or the data that we are presenting? Are any of the companies disbelieving what we're presenting to them?

No, no. No would be the answer. No. I mean, we present results facts, right? So they're quite interested and impressed about the results.

Okay. All right. Forgive me if I hesitate for a minute. I'm just trying to pick up some of the questions which came in while we're on air. Okay. I'm actually not going to say who -- the names of the people because I don't feel comfortable putting names to questions when they come in. So forgive me. There's one here. Are you fielding potential buyout deals? Or is the objective for licensing deals on P140. Interesting. No, we're not looking at buyout deals. I'll be quite straightforward about that. We're talking, as Tim has described earlier, on partnership deals or licensing deals. We did have another question on a similar vein. Can we talk about the types of deals we might expect from P140? And Tim, I don't know whether you want to address that?

Sure. Yes. Well, there's probably two key avenues for a deal, but the primary one really is to have a deal where you get an upfront fee. I mean, this is the typical deal, and this is where you see most of the licensing deals being structured. So an upfront fee, some milestone payments depending on certain milestones up until the filing and approval of the product, so a final milestone on approval. And then you've got a royalty structure stream, which could be whatever those percentages are according to the time which it's done. And then those are probably -- those royalty rates are probably geared on specific sales targets. The other sort of routes could possibly be some sort of optionality type agreement where they pay for so much, get to a certain point in time and then have the option to come in and develop it in a certain way for a certain fee as well and with milestones and royalties.

Okay. There's one here, which is an interesting question. Are the new shares being ring-fenced so the GBP 6 million funding for the new super drug cannot be sold if P140 actually does get sold. I've been a long-term shareholder for over 7 years. Let me just try that one again. Are the new shares being ring-fenced? So it's specifically -- the question specifically mentioned the GBP 6 million fund, but we shouldn't forget that there are going to be additional shares issued under the wrap by the retail offer. But I guess it's the same principle that can -- are they ring-fenced such that they cannot be sold, i.e., by the shareholder who buys them, or the investor who buys them, if P140 actually does get sold? Okay. I think what the question is asking is -- we are -- I think if I can interpret that, if we're taking money on to develop Kapiglucagon, can we -- or is it linked in some way to the P140 getting -- is sold here, I think it probably means license. I mean the short answer to that is no. I mean there's no way that we can differentiate one set of shares from another. And it's not only the GBP 6 million we're getting from Landstead, their shares, we're also getting shares from anybody under the wrap as well. And in all of the fundings that we've done, we've just got one class of share. Everyone has the same rights to deal with those shares, buy, sell, whatever they want to do. And there is no connection whatsoever between having some restriction on those shares against whatever we do with P140. So I can just -- that's the only way I can answer it because there's all sorts of sort of implications from that sort of question, which it's just fairly straightforward as I'm concerned. We're issuing new shares for new cash. That's being applied to Kapiglucagon. And at any point in the future, anyone who holds those shares can buy some more or sell what they've already acquired. And it's not linked in terms of your shareholding to Kapiglucagon or P140 or anything else in the portfolio. Right. There's one here. How is P140 deal going to work alongside [ Avion ]? And there's a number of questions asking about Avion and where they sit in this whole area of how we take P140 forward. We're in constant dialogue with [ Avion ]. Obviously, we've worked on for a number of years now. We've got a very, very good partnership with them. And yes, we want to progress P140 on a worldwide basis, and that's the solution that we're working towards. And that clearly, obviously, involves bringing Avion into those discussions and finding the best route forward for shareholders. So I hope that answers the question. So another in [ November '25 ], [indiscernible] said there were multiple deals possible on P140. Now we are only talking about a single deal. How do investors need to interpret this? Okay. I honestly can't remember talking about multiple deals per se. I mean, we might have said something like there's a possibility of one deal or more than one deal. The reason there will be multiple deals is because we might break it out in geographic territories. It's very -- like we have, for example, with Avion the U.S., and we still retain in the rest of the world. It's very difficult to break intellectual property and programs like this into any other way. So for example, we've now got applicability with P140 across all autoimmune diseases. We could do it, but it would be a lot more difficult to try and license that by indication, for example, because of the intellectual property situation and sort of market dynamics and pricing and which indication gets to market sooner. Tim, you want to -- you might want to comment on that actually.

I think, yes, when it comes to licensing deals, you have -- from the very top, you've got global partnering deal with one company. And then you've got a whole series of options below that, which could be U.S. and ex U.S. or various [ regs ], Asia, Europe, U.S. So that's the only thing that comes to mind for me. And you're right, you can't split up indications. You can't split these indications by different deal for the market access reasons that you've described. Yes.

Yes. Actually, there's really -- I think we need to talk to our brokers about this one. Somebody is indicating that [indiscernible] website is down today. And so can we do something about it because there might be people wanting to invest through the platform? I think we're going to have to pick that up after we finish this presentation, but thanks for alerting us to it. There's one here. Will we reach 19p again in 2026? I think my [indiscernible] would tell me that I can't do forecasts or sort of projections on where I think the share price is going to be. But I will answer it in this way. We are very, very confident that we will get that positive news flow coming out throughout this year. So there is a direct correlation between positive news flow and share price appreciation we saw last year, which I mentioned earlier when we had the patent announcement. And it's a testament to how quickly these prices can move in our area, especially for small biotechs. So for obvious reasons, because I get my knuckles wrapped, I can't comment on that particular projection of 19p. But hopefully, I've answered it in a satisfactory way for you. Forgive me being a little bit hesitant. I'm just trying to get through all these questions. So another one on a similar theme, and I'm probably going to have to answer it in the same way. Tim, you're on interview saying the market was just getting started when we were approximately 12p to 13p. You also talk of the business being undervalued. That's just your feeling of a fair market value for ImmuPharma. What is it? Again, I'm not going to put a number on it. But it's pretty clear to anybody when you look at just P140 on its own, let alone potential value of Kapiglucagon, we've explained today that the business is undervalued, looking at the potential revenue streams, the markets we're going into. But this is the world we live in. We are a small cap on [ AIM ]. And we've got actually pretty good liquidity for a small company on AIM. And our share price directly relates to news flow -- is directly related to news flow. And even that news flow as it comes through, will never truly reflect the underlying value of our intellectual property. And that will take a few years to come in. And we're not talking about a few years without putting a number or projection on it. We're talking about many, many multiples of where we are now, because there just is no correlation between the potential of our products in the market and the potential revenue stream to ImmuPharma and where we are now in terms of market capitalization. There just isn't. But we're not alone in that, frankly. So that is just a feature of our capital markets, unfortunately. Tim, you had something to add?

I think it's important to note that ImmuPharma today is not the ImmuPharma of yesterday. And the product is the product and the team is different, liking the product maybe through a football and a good football team is going to school many goals with the same football, bad team isn't. So I think that we've had a very short time as a new team to get this ball [indiscernible], so to speak. But we are in a much better position than before. We understand the product significantly more than before. There's been some fantastic science, and that all helps to create a lot of conversation with our ultimate customers, the biopharma industry.

And Seb, and I'm going to wrap this up in a moment because a lot of these questions are repetitive in the sense they're asking similar things in just a slightly different way. But I think I'm going to finish on this one because it's an interesting question for Seb. And if I can find it again, where did it go. Will ImmuPharma also develop commercial solutions for type 2 diabetes? Could there be a spin-off from the type 1 diabetes [ Kapiglucagon ] program?

Yes, I think it's possible. I think that for now, for now, it has been focused like the [indiscernible] market have been focused on type 1 diabetes, but I think there are opportunities for type 2 clearly. But yes, that's type 1 diabetes, it's the way to go to the market and then we can expand, I believe so.

Okay. All right. So I think we're going to wrap up there. Let me just thank you all for taking the time. I don't know how long we've been on air, just about an hour. So I hope we've reached our objective of doing this presentation today to address your obvious questions about why we've done the deal this week. Some broader questions on the strategy of the company and the progress over the last 3, 6, 9 months, addressing what obviously are some conflicting statements we've made and trying to explain to you why we made a statement at one point and then it changes. We're not flinching away from any of those. And I hope that we've had the opportunity today to address all of those. I know there's the facility to keep putting questions in. So if there are any more questions that come in after the presentation, then we'll try and address those. But at this point, I'm going to hand back over to Mark.

That's great. Tim, thank you and to the rest of the team for updating investors. If I could please ask investors not to close this session as we will now redirect you for feedback. On behalf of the management team of ImmuPharma plc, thank you for your time, and have a good afternoon.