Kazia Therapeutics Limited (KZIA) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Iain Ross, and as Chairman of the Board of Kazia Therapeutics, I'd like to welcome you to today's meeting. At this time, it's now 10:00 a.m. in Sydney. A quorum is present, and I formally declare the 2022 Annual General Meeting of Kazia Therapeutics Limited open. I'm aware that feelings are running high at the moment, and I'd like to outline how I plan to conduct this meeting so that we address the concerns of shareholders, and we hear from management, and we do that in an orderly fashion. Now we've changed the order of events this year. And after this introduction, I'm going to call on the CEO to present to the meeting and addressing -- before we start addressing the formal agenda. Can I ask that you hold any questions on the business and ask them at the end of James' presentation, we'll deal with questions on the resolutions at the appropriate time during the meeting. We will be dealing with questions in the room and online and Kazia's Company Secretary will be assisting me with this. Over the last couple of years, we've done these all virtually, and I've sat in London and read a script and nobody's noticed I'm doing it. So I do apologize because I am going to have to read this because it is a formal meeting. So as set out in the notice of meeting, the '22 -- sorry, 2022 Annual General Meeting is being held as a hybrid meeting. We have shareholders attending in person here in the room. Also, we have shareholders join us virtually via dial in The virtual attendees have access to the slides and the audio for the AGM proceedings, but we'll be able to access the video, audio and slides for the CEO presentation. [Operator Instructions] Now I'd now like to take the opportunity to introduce my fellow directors on the end, our Managing Director, Dr. James Garner; next, Nonexecutive Director, Dr. Bryce Carmine and Non-Executive Director, Steven Coffey in the center. Also, we have Kate, who is moderating this meeting. And we also have Gabrielle Heaton, who's our Director of Finance and Administration and Treasurer, just showing how lean we are, one person doing all those things. Also in attendance is our company Secretary, Cate, who will act as a moderator. I'd also like to welcome Madina Aziz from the company's auditors, Grant Thornton. Now before I ask James to present, I will take a moment to outline the process for asking questions, not wait until we turn to the old days of just everybody being in the room. [Operator Instructions] I'll now invite James, our CEO and Managing Director, to present to the meeting.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, good morning, and welcome again to the 2022 Annual General Meeting of Kazia shareholders. It's wonderful as you've heard, to be able to do this in person once again to see some familiar faces in the room. And of course, we have a number of shareholders who have joined us online. Really grateful for your time this morning. And I'd like to just thank imparts well, our corporate counsel at Baker McKenzie for their very generous hospitality and hosting us this morning. It's been an eventful year for Kazia, and there's a great deal for us to discuss this morning. So I want to make sure that we make efficient use everybody's time. I'm going to give a short presentation this morning, just about a dozen or so slides, and I'm going to ask if I may that we save questions to the end of the presentation. Some of them may be addressed in the presentation. And at the very least, it will hopefully provide some useful background for our discussions thereafter. So a brief presentation. And then as I say, if we can save the questions till the end of the presentation. So next slide, please. And next slide again, please. I just wanted to start with some key points of the year, just to outline some of the things that have been going on for Kazia this year. And this is a greatest hit slide that I presented a little bit of last year. And as you can see here on the slide, we've had over 350 patients now treated with paxalisib in our clinical trial program. That number last year was about 200. So we've almost doubled the number of patients now that have been exposed to the drug through our clinical trials. And that's an important number because as regulatory agencies look at the drug in the context of potential approval, I'd like to see a critical mass of patients that have been treated. And I think we're starting to get into the range where we have enough data to talk credibly to regulatory agencies about the drug. We've had 10 data readouts this year at international conferences, and we'll touch on a couple of those in a moment, but it's been actually a very productive year for us in terms of data. We learned a lot about our drug. And we've had the opportunity to put it in front of a great number of clinicians and researchers, 2 special designations from the U.S. FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, 2 regulatory designations, really denote partly, I think, the credibility that attaches the drug from a regulatory standpoint. There are currently -- there is currently clinical trial activity in 8 countries for paxalisib, so an incredibly broad range of work that's going on. And as you can see here, we've had 2 clinical trials that advance that graduated, if you like, to a second stage of their development. It's very fashionable at the moment for clinical trials to be run in these multistage designs. 2 of our trials are breast. One of them, of course, has not, and we'll talk a little bit more about that in a few slides. And 9 ongoing clinical trials across the 2 drugs in our pipeline. So again, just a huge breadth of work ongoing at paxalisib. We won't talk a great deal today about [ EVT ]. One, we'll have a great deal more to say about that, I think, in the new year. But just to note in passing that progress is going well there. We have, as you know, a Phase I clinical trial underway in Europe. And we have to date had about 85 patient weeks of treatment, a slightly cumbersome measure, but it just gives you a sense that trial has been moving nicely. And over 2 dozen CT scans now that have been evaluated as part of that. We don't really have a lot of data to share with you today. But as I say, I think we'll have more to say about that study next year. Next slide, please. Now I wanted to just zoom out and try and show you the total picture of what's been happening with paxalisib this year. And this is a very dense slide and just say that all our slides today are available on the website, it's easy to go back and look at this material afterwards. But this is a list of all the work that's going on with paxalisib. And I won't go through in detail here, but I'll just pick out a few points. The first line on the slide shows the study that we have ongoing the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in combination with radiotherapy for brain metastases. And we reported great data from that. In August, this was -- this study showed every patient responding to a combination of paxalisib and whole-brain radiotherapy. To give you a point of reference, about 20% to 40% of patients respond to the radiotherapy by itself. So when we're seeing evidence of clinical response in every single patient, this is really a knockout result. And so this got to invite you for an oral presentation at the [ ASCO ] conference. We go sadly, it came 4 days after the [ GBM Agile us ], which we'll talk about in a moment. It's got a little round out, but this is really stellar, I think is in one leap opened up brain metastases as an indication press. Another brain metastases study, the Alliance study that's being run with multiple drugs that has advanced to a second stage in breast cancer brain metastases. Now this study is blinded. We don't have data shows common refrain, I'm afraid today, but we know that it's advanced for the second stage in breast cancer, brain mets, ongoing in lung cancer and other cancers. But again, it only advances if the drug is showing some evidence of activity. So I think a very positive signal there. And by the way, the green ticks on this slide are data readout [ saying ] positive. We've got a third study in brain mets ongoing breast cancer brain maps at Dana-Farber constitute. I'll be honest and say the study is moving like triple on a cold day. It's been slow progress. But we did sit down with the investigator in September. He's promising us great things in the near future. So I think we'll have more to say about that study before too long, but for now, that's just ongoing. GBM AGILE we'll talk about more in a few slides time, but I think the best way I can describe the news that we heard from that study in August is that it's ambiguous. We have no data from the study. It remains ongoing. There are still patients being treated with the drug. There are still patients in ops evolving day by day. And at the moment, nobody apart in a group of perhaps half a dozen statisticians has any visibility today at all. So I think the best we can say about this study is we don't know what's happening there. But as I say, we'll talk more about that at a moment. But for now, we just put a [ amber ] question mark against that. And then as you can see here, DIPG, we've had some positive results there, the PNOC study, the Phase II study that's ongoing with our drug in this childhood brain cancer, has expanded internationally. It's now opened at 2 sites in Australia, shortly to open in several European countries and in Israel. And suffice to say, these studies don't expand to multiple countries unless something is happening. These people aren't in clients to waste their time. So we think this is a good signal from this study. And again, we'll expect to see some more data out of this next year. And then finally, towards the bottom of the slide here, some really great preclinical data at [ carts ] really opened some new areas of possibility for the drug throughout the year, some stellar data in melanoma in September a Society of Melanoma Research Annual Conference. Some very promising engagements, ATRT, atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumors, a rare childhood brain cancer. And then finally, of course, many people in the room are familiar with the work of Professor Matt Dun, Newcastle Hunter Medical Research Institute, and he's actually presenting this week at the Society for Neuro-Oncology Annual Meeting, his latest data with paxalisib in DIPG. So a great deal happening. And of all the things that we reported this year, I would say, in aggregate, we're 7 to 8. We've had 7 projects that are unambiguously showing positive results. and one where I think the jury is out. And of course, that's GBM AGILE. And I'd say that drug development is a test where you never score 100%. So in aggregate, this is actually pretty good going. I think we got a lot of the wrong attention in August. But I would say, to borrow line from Mark Twain, the reports of Texas and demise have been greatly exaggerated. I've been in oncology drug development for over 20 years. This is not the picture of a drug that is failing. Next slide, please. And you don't have to take that for me because we work, of course, with some of the leading experts in the world in brain cancer. And they continue to support the development of this drug wholeheartedly. So we announced earlier this year the formation of our Scientific Advisory Board, John de Groot and Patrick Wen. They are 2 of the leading experts in Glioblastoma, very senior investigators in the GBM AGILE study, [ Pacilibrastanos ] at Harvard Medical store, one of the world experts in brain metastases, [ Alanvero ], an expert in the development, PI3K inhibitors, the class to which our drug belongs and in fact, the inventor of paxalisib. We're meeting with these clinicians tonight in the U.S., and they continue to support the drug enthusiastically and wholeheartedly. We will be discussing with them its progress across all the different diseases that I've spoken about. So we still command very, very enthusiastic engagement from the clinicians that we work with. Next slide, please. And I think setting aside from Glioblastoma, I think one of the signature frames of this year has been that paxalisib has really started to demonstrate its credentials in a broad range of diseases. We've spoken of the last couple of years about the fact that we really have always seen this drug as more than a Glioblastoma drug, more even than a brain cancer drug. We've seen this as a very, very broadly applicable cancer drug. But I think this year, we finally started to deliver on those expectations. And what's resolved, I think, over the course of this year is indications, 3 disease areas that we see as core to the development of the drug, brain metastases, and enormous potential market opportunity, some 200,000 patients a year in the United States. Obviously, 3 ongoing clinical trials there. Glioblastoma, you've heard plenty from me in previous years about that. A small opportunity, about 13,000 patients a year, 2 ongoing clinical trials there. And then [ child ] brain cancer, in particular, this group of diffuse midline Glioblastoma. So that's a newer term for DIPG, but for today, we can regard these 2 as roughly equivalent. A smaller opportunity, thankfully, about 800 kids a year in the United States, but nevertheless, a very, very important opportunity. And in economic terms, we do have the ability here to earn this priority review voucher from FDA. As previous AGM tennis will recall, this is something that's given to incentivize the development of drugs for children, they sell in the secondary market for about $110 million at present. So 3 lead indications that have emerged very clearly for the drug, positive data across all of them, and then a whole host of other opportunities coming out behind those, primary CNS lymphoma, ATRT, melanoma, breast cancer, even so a lot of work going on behind the sense in these other diseases. Next slide, please. And I think the beauty of the paxalisib program is that it's at a stage of maturity where we're not talking here by and large about experiments in a handful of mice and a petri dish, we're talking about clear clinical programs, each of which has a path to market. So if we look at the diffuse midline the owners, the childhood brain cancers will be seeing data, we anticipate in the first half of calendar 2023. And on the basis of that, I think we'll start making decisions about how best to move that transform towards a commercial market. And I would say that study is fully funded. It's externally funded by grants and by the academic organizations that are running it. So we have no further material financial commitments there. Glioblastoma we'll see data from the GBM AGILE study in the second half of next year. And again, that study, as it turns out is now fully funded. We have no material further financial commitments for that study either. And then brain metastases a little bit further behind. This is a newer entrant to the paxalisib portfolio. And we're looking at how we can get that into some pivotal study for registration next year. We had a great meeting in September with some of the leading experts in brain metastases in the U.S., and they encouraged us to waste no time whatever in getting this into a clinical trial. So we're just talking through how to do that. Now we'll have to work out how to fund that as well, but we have some very warm leads that hopefully should substantially support that study through [ blastoma funding. ] So overall, notwithstanding the news that we had in August, I think this really -- or I hope that this paints a picture of a program that's actually in pretty rude health and that has a great deal of work going across a very, very broad range of indications. Now of course, this is not reflected in the share price of the company as it stands today. And I realize this has been an enormous frustration for shareholders as it has been for all of us. And if we go to the next slide, please, I'd like to start talking a little bit about why some of that is. So this slide is a complex one. On the right hand, it shows our share price over the last few years. And as of yesterday, we're trading around about $0.10 on [ assets ]. We've had some long dark nights that we sold before in Kazia. I think the period from 2018 to 2020 was a pretty challenging one for all of us as well. And it's been incredibly frustrating that we've given back a lot of the gains that we've made over the last 2 years since then, in fact, trading a little bit below. Now part of what's happening is clearly that this is one of the worst markets for biotech companies that we've seen in decades. And the bar charts on here reflect some of those data in the left-hand cluster of bars, you see some of the key indices that we referred to, the S&P500 the NASDAQ Composite NASDAQ Biotechnology Index. The NBI has actually done quite well, and it's held up by some really large-cap companies like Amgen. But when you look at the light blue bars, which are biotech ETFs generally focus on smaller growth companies, probably a better comparator for companies like ours. They're generally down about 40% in the year to 31st of October. It's been a terrible year for PI3K companies, those the [ green buyers ] therapeutics, Verastem, MEI Pharma. These companies down about 80% to 90% over the course of the year. And then it's actually been quite a tough of brain cancer companies as well, chimeric, Y-mAbs and Kintara therapeutic shown in the chart purple bars, again, on average, down 80% to 90%. So this has been an incredibly challenging year for all listed biotech companies, and there's not many that have been riding high in 2022. But this clearly isn't the only thing that's going on because the reality is that Kazia has been suffering more than the companies on this slide. And so there's clearly some specific things that have been happening to our company. And I want to talk a little bit about a couple of those. So next slide, please. Now one of the things that's happened this year, of course, has been the news we received from the GBM AGILE pivotal study in August. Now again, just as a reminder for everybody, this study is -- was designed to seek registration for [ Glioblastoma ] drugs. It's constructed in 2 stages. So every drug that enters it recruits a first stage of up to 150 patients and then a second stage of 50 patients. And in between the 2 stages, there is a graduation analysis. Now the specifics of this graduation analysis are, first of all, very complicated and second, somewhat confidential to the organization doing the study. So I'm not going to go into the detailed statistics behind this analysis. But suffice to say, the bar to which drugs in the study are held is high. This is really a very, very demanding hurdle for a drug to get over. And now the positive to that is that if we had cleared that bar, I would be almost completely confident that we would be looking at an FDA approval for paxalisib. Frankly, I would be introducing you today to our new Chief Commercial Officer, and we'd be in the business of hiring our sales force. We would be that confident, I think, of the drug being imminent launched. We don't have quite that level of confidence today, but I think we certainly a very long way from the flip side to that. And I think there are some reasons why we think that perhaps this non graduation use has been overinterpreted. And I outlined some of these things here on the slide. So the first thing to say is, as I mentioned, the threshold to graduate to the second stage is very high. This threshold is set by the study. It's not set by FDA. And we think that the threshold for an FDA approval of a new drug in Glioblastoma may be somewhat more flexible. And to give you a comparison point, the last drug that was approved for Glioblastoma was [ best in it ] was approved over 10 years ago. It's only approved a late stage for current patients. It's only improved in a handful of countries. But that drug has never shown any survival benefit in Glioblastoma. It's never shown any evidence that it prolongs the life of patients with this disease. And I think what this reflects is that a disease like this where there are so few drugs available. Remember, only 1 drug approved for first-line patients only works for 1/3 of those patients. The bar is low. And so we think there's a space where a drug may not quite get the gold medal and GBM AGILE, but may still be very acceptable to FDA. It's one of our shareholders but a recent conversation. If you think of this as rolling at dice, we haven't rolled 6, which would be graduation. We have a role on either because there is a futility analysis in this study. If the drug just plain doesn't work, it gets dropped, and that has not happened here. That is not the situation we find ourselves in. So there's enough reason for the study to proceed, and that's what's happened. We're still treating patients with paxalisib today, we're still monitoring these patients. So we've rolled at this stage somewhere between 2 and 5. And it may be that perhaps a 4 and 5 may yet see us to an FDA registration. A couple of other things going on in the study, and I don't want to bury you in detail here, but I think it's important just to share with you our discussions and our analysis here. The statistical power of any clinical trial, the ability of a clinical trial to pick up differences between treatments is based partly on the number of patients in the study, but also in the period of time for which those patients have been followed. If you recruit 150 patients yesterday and you look at them today, very unlikely you're going to see a result. I you recruit 150 patients 3 years ago when you look at them today, well, if you're [ jobs won't ] see anything at all, which chances are, you'll see it. Now we know that GBM AGILE has recruited about 4x faster than was ever originally envisaged. And because of the COVID pandemic last year, that recruitment has probably been quite backloaded. We actually think the majority of our patients probably came in, in the first half of this year. So as a result, we've had a much shorter average period of observation in this study than I think was originally visited. And we hypothesize that the graduation analysis may, therefore, have occurred with much, much less statistical power than the study was designed for. Now we can only really speculate on this. We don't have the data to confirm these things, but I think we've got a pretty reasonable guess that this is part of what's going on here. But then even putting that to one side, you can see in the third panel on the slide in any clinical trial if you look too early, the curves are usually very close together. And over time, as you follow them, they separate. Now the final analysis for GBM AGILE will occur next year, and it will be fully 12 months after the final patient recreated. And an awful what can happen to a clinical trial in 12 months. So we think this study is still got a great deal of potential to support the registration of paxalisib, we think that this has been overinterpreted this on graduation of decision. And we think that we're going to have to wait and see what the data looks like next year. Next slide, please. So what happens when we do get that data next year? Well, look, we'll have to read it and see that there's a number of ways this could still support us. So one possibility is that the first stage of the study. Remember, 150 patients on paxalisib, roughly the same number of patients, again, in the control group. So effectively, a randomized controlled trial of about 300 patients. That could still support a full FDA approval next year. Another possibility is that FDA granted the call accelerated approval. So they say, look, this is pretty good and patients need new therapies. You can get out there and sell your drug, but we want you to do another clinical study in parallel, and we're very happy to do that. This is a common occurrence for cancer drugs, but we'll be selling the drug in the background. And so this would be absolutely no problem at all. There's a variance of this where I say, look, you're almost there, but we want you to do another study of, say, 50 patients just to really confirm this and lock it down. And again, I think we'd be quite happy to do that if we have to. Another possibility is they say, look, you're not quite hitting the target in the overall population, but in patients under 65 or patients with good renal function or patients who've had a total reception of their tumor, actually the drug is working really well. So we'll approve in that group. And again, this happens all the time content and that's fine because we can get out and sell it. So there's a lot of ways this could move forward. And we'll only know next year when we start seeing data, but this is not a busted flush. Next slide, please. Now this has been one event that I think has really had a lot of impact this year. But I think there's been a background anxiety as well for the company, and that's around financial position. And again, this is a complex slide, but we wanted to really share all the data with you. This is drawn entirely from our public filings on ASX, our Appendix 4C filings. And as you can see, the dark red bars here represents our expenditure R&D, the light pink sections, our G&A expenditure, light blue, licensing and dark blue financing and the gray is for other things like [ barex ]. A couple of points to jump out here. First of all, just reiterate a point we've made in previous AGMs because he is one of the most efficient biotech companies on ASX. We spend about $0.80 of every dollar on R&D, and that continues to be the case. And our cash burn, as you can see here, is roughly a little under AUD 6 million a quarter. I hate that some cash burn to be honest, because we don't burn a single sentence. We invested in clinical trials and in research and the payoff for that investment is the data that we present and that we've seen throughout the year. But nevertheless, we spend a little under $6 million a quarter, and that's been fairly constant for the last little while. Now we have actually fully funded that expenditure over the last couple of quarters, and we'll talk a little bit more about that in a moment, too. But the company has been running as a result at a pretty flat cash balance. You see around $7 million in the first quarter, around $7 million in the second quarter, a little bit lower than around $5.5 million, I think, in the third quarter. We actually then brought another $1.4 million in October, so a bit of a timing mismatch there, but would be back to about $7 million after that. So we run at a constant cash balance throughout the whole year of about $7 million, and we spent about a little under $6 million a quarter. Now the trouble with that is that people look at us and they say, "Well, you've got about $7 million at the bank and spend a little under $6 million a quarter. So you've got about 1/4 of cash at the bank and things are looking [ here ]." We've actually had about 1/4 of cash at the bank all year, and we're still going strong. But this -- the analysis that simple analysis of cash divided by burn rates really makes us look a little more fraught than I think we really are. And I think this has weighed on investor sentiment over the course of this year. Now why have we been doing it this way, you might ask. Well, if we move to the next slide, I think one of the background realities here is that this has been an enormously challenging year for capital markets. We touched on this a few slides ago, but I just wanted to share some data here about capital markets transactions during 2022. As you can see from the left-hand panel, there has been vastly fewer transactions and very, very much less money raised in 2022 than in either 2021 or 2020, the market for new equity raises has absolutely dried up. When you're in the U.S. and you talk to the bankers, they used to be doing 3 or 4 transactions a week. They're now doing perhaps 2 or 3 a month, and they've already started quite substantial downsizing on Wall Street. These transactions have been taking place at very punishing terms, as you can see in the middle panel here for companies our size under about $100 million, typically 20% plus discounts. And this is actually -- makes a little better than it really is because most of the deals that are taking place have been led by insiders and the few deals that are bringing in predominantly new investors, that figures closer to 30% to 40%. And I should add that the typical transaction comes with at least 100% warrant coverage. That is to say for every share that's issued as at least one accompanying call option. And as a result of these very [ onerous ] terms, the aftermarket performance, you can see on the right-hand how has not been great. And we've been very reluctant to subject our shareholders to the very diluted deals that this represents. So what have we been doing instead? Well, next slide, please. We put in place earlier this year an at-the-market financing facility stat, which is led by Oppenheimer & Company. Now for those who aren't familiar, and ATM facilities are now very [indiscernible] from about half of NASDAQ biotech companies have them allows us to play shares directly into the market and raise money very economically. We sell and we can only sell at the bid price at that moment. So there is no discount. There's no warrant coverage. And we paid about 3% fees to bankers compared to about 6% to 8% in a more conventional financing transaction. Now there's been a lot of debate, I think, combined solar shareholders about what this does to the share price, what this means. And I would say, again, this is a pretty ubiquitous instrument. It's been more high profile for us because we have higher disclosure requirements under ASX than a typical NASDAQ company. But we're a science company. So we answer these questions with data. And this is the data. We've used the instrument 18x over the past 6 months. So somewhere between once a week and once a 4 type, we dip into the market on average. And in general, on average, we've taken in any given month, a little under 5% of the trade on NASDAQ. We obviously don't take any of the trade on ASX. There's a facility that is not break here. So less than 1 in 20 shares sold in Kazia by us. The other 19 out of 20 shares are sold by other parties by existing holders, nothing to us, nothing to [ ASX ]. What happens to the share price and we use it, well, very, very difficult to make a like-for-like comparison. But in general, on the 18 days that we've used it, our share price has gone down a little bit on a volume-weighted average, but it's gone down less than it has on the days where we haven't used it. So there really isn't a clear signal here that the ATM has any suppressive effect on the share price. And we've done other analysis here we've done linear regressions and all sorts of things to really see if we can find any relationship between our participation in the market and the share price and take it for me, there is none. But this instrument has raised $7.2 million for us, about AUD 10 million. And that money has been raised at an average of a 9.4% premium to the days share price. So we are one of the only companies out there in our market cap bans that is raising money at any premium. And again, no options, no warrants, very low fees. And the average price, I can't quite read the slide, but I think the average price is around $2.40 on NASDAQ. It's the equivalent of about AUD 0.36 a share in Australia, very roughly speaking. So we've succeeded in raising this money at a good price. Now I don't want to spend too long trying to justify it. So we recognize that as shareholders, nobody likes to see the company issuing any shares. And the Board of the company feels the same way. We'd rather not issue shares at all. But in a market where we have to continue to finance the company, this has been the best way to do it. Now it's clearly not something we can continue to rely on. This is not a long-term solution. It's never really intended to be a primary source of financing for the company will put in place. I'm very glad we've had it as a safety net this year, but we are going to be looking at other things as we move forward. So next slide, please. And this is my last slide. I think it's just a nice segue into talking about what we do over the course of next year. And we've been spending a lot of time over the past couple of months in the Boardroom and among the management team talking about how we move Kazia onward for success and how we recoup some of the some of the withdrawal that we've had during the course of this year. And so I've listed here some of the things that we've completed from this. And you'll hear more from us over the course of the year ahead on this because we'll be tracking ourselves for these objectives and encourage your shareholders to do the same. The first thing we're going to do is we're going to reduce cost in the company. We spend our money on R&D, but I think we need to recognize that money is an expensive commodity at the moment, we need to ease off here. And so you will see from us a 50% cost reduction in 2023 versus 2022. That's actually beginning already in the fourth quarter, but it will really start to hit as we head into the new year. And then now have to peer around here to see the slides here. So we also will be investigating other sources of capital for the company. I think the [ ATM ], as I say, has been a great safety net for us, but we don't want this to continue to be the primary source of financing for the company. So work underway to look at other ways to finance ourselves. We'll be looking, of course, nondilutive opportunities on a couple of irons in the fire there. The warning I always give to shareholders is that particularly grant opportunities are slow and you have to put in a lot of submissions to be successful. But we do have the backing of some great researchers and cremations. We've got some very strong projects ongoing. So we think we've got a lot to play for here. We continue to diversify what we're doing beyond Glioblastoma. I think one of the things we always wanted to make sure we're not a one-trick pony single Glioblastoma. And I think I'm very glad that we have the work that's ongoing childhood-onset, brain maps, you'll see a lot more focus from us on those things as we move into 2023. And I think one of the things we're also very sensitive to is that because of the way we do our clinical trials because we're more than usually reliant on the clinicians we work with, we're a little bit at their mercy in terms of data readouts. And that unfortunately goes to the territory, but we'll be working really hard to try and lock these guys down to very, very clear timetables for data in 2023. My colleague, Dr. John Friend, our Chief Medical Officer is actually in Florida right now, meeting with most of our investigators at the Society for Neuro-Oncology annual meeting. And one of the things he's really going to be doing is saying, when are you going to have data for us? Let's make sure we make this very crystalline. And then last few things here, as you can see, one of the key things I really want to think out the last thing at the bottom is we need to get out there and talk more to investors and to our shareholders. And the timely thing is that with all the restrictions on site have the pandemic listing – lifting, it's a lot easier for us to get out and speak to people. And we clearly need to get out there and remind people what we're doing, remind people of the enormous potential and promise inherent in both of our molecules, and thereby, I think to start rebuilding the value of the company. So ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to stop there, and I'd be very happy at this point to take your questions.

[indiscernible] [ given as on key combination there ]. Is there any ability to do that given the long as we see demand? [indiscernible] is there any expect to go back in the [indiscernible].

Yes. Steve. So the question again, just for those online with whether there's any opportunity to reenter GBM AGILE. And look, I think the first thing says we probably won't need to. I think we're still expecting that when we see data next year, at the very least, it should give us a clear answer for paxalisib as a monotherapy. So can fundamentally they tell us the drug works or it doesn't. That's our expectation. GBM AGILE is purely a Glioblastoma study, so we wouldn't look to that study to explore the drug and say, brain test metastasis from childhood brain cancer. That's just not why it's designed to do. It's purely Glioblastoma. The one scenario where we could conceivably consider reentering it would be if we had, say, combination data in Glioblastoma. And we do have a study ongoing with ketogenesis and hyperinsulinemia, which we haven't really spoken about today because we'll have more to say about it next year. If that data came out next year and looked stellar, we could look to become a new arm GBM AGILE there. Look, if you'd ask me that question, Steve, in August, I would have said urban hell freezes over. We'll go back to one of these studies. I think that would be unduly harsh. I think we have to be open-minded here. I think let's wait and see the final results before we decide whether we do another one of these academic-led studies or whether we try to do this more ourselves.

Do you have any [indiscernible]?

Yes. It's a great question. So again, the question was, why has this been such a bad year or PI3K companies and brain cancer companies? Brain cancer is fair to say is an unloved disease area. And the simple reality is it's been failure. A lot of people have tried. There's been a lot of tens of vaccine approaches. There's been an immunotherapy approaches, even people trying to do things like IT and brain cancer. And so far, it's all tanked. And so investors are wary and in a market where people are very risked off as the analyst says the market and people are very, very resistant to these more complex stories, disease areas like brain cancer are often the first to suffer. So I think that's what's going on there. In the PI3K class, there's something a bit more specific that's been happening. There have been 5 drugs approved by FDA in the PI3K class. Now 4 of those are approved for blood cancers, and they were approved on relatively thin data at the time. And FDA over the course of this year in particular, has been coming out and saying, well, actually, we have concerns now about the long-term safety of some of these drugs, and we think maybe the data that was used to prove them was a bit too thin. So 2 things have happened. FDA has said for any future PI3K inhibitor approvals in blood cancer, they want to see randomized controlled trials with survival endpoints. And the second thing is that because of this new requirement, at least 2 of the drugs in the class, well, one of them has been withdrawn from the market, TG Therapeutics [ Nuconic, ymbralasib ]. And I think one of them is in the firing line. I think it's still hanging on by its finger now, but [ duvelisib COPIKTRA from SecuraBio. ] So I think this has put a cloud over the PI3K class. Now what does this mean for us? Well, look, short answer is, it means nothing for us. We already have a randomized controlled trial with a survival endpoint in GBM AGILE. So we are already providing the data that FDA is so they want to see and then some. Second, we're in a disease that's very, very different from lymphoma and CLL, the diseases that these drugs have been targeting. The kinds of diseases we are treating do not have other treatment options. Lymphoma is actually quite busy at the moment. There's a lot of new therapies that have been coming on, a lot of new treatments. FDA can set the bar quite high. But for brain cancer, it's the exact opposite. There is nothing. It's a desert. And so I think the agency is likely to be a little bit more open-minded to drugs in this disease area. And then finally, in the 350 patients -- or sorry, of clinical experience [ that tells you ], we have not been seeing any of these safety concerns with our drug. We haven't been seeing any evidence of liver toxicity, any GI perforations. We haven't been seeing really any significance [ brand neutropenia ]. And any of these things that have been scary with some of these older drugs in the class, we think we actually have potentially a best-in-class safety profile here with paxalisib. But this has certainly been a much less scary development program than some of these older. So we only get matters for us, but sentiment is against PI3K at the moment.

[indiscernible].

I don't think it makes a difference, to be honest. I think we're in such a different disease area that I don't think there's going to be any [ crosshold ], if you like. And I think if we were targeting blood cancers, to be a little more nervous. And there are some companies that are doing it. So one of the companies on the slide there, [ Mifarma ] is how a PI2 inhibitor are developing for blood cancers. And that's why the share price is down, I think, 89%. But we've taken a very, very different direction with our drug, we've deliberately stayed away from those kinds of indications.

On the dual investing, where would in set up obviously for benefits to being in market as capital went the U.S. marketplace growth companies, FDA or over there. But at obviously, they some clear [ now not on ] a person in the U.S. share [ of a lot of plants. ] [indiscernible] Is there [ an circle way lease ] goes back to [indiscernible]?

Thank you. And look, I'll try and just summarize that very briefly for those online. So the question was really around just some of the response of the stock to use in the U.S., in particular, is for nominal way, sometimes get a really good start in the day and that that tails off, and the question is around is the shorting going on and so on. Look, -- so first thing to say is this isn't actually completely unusual. I saw some analyst research out of Morgan Stanley in roughly the middle of the year, and they went through all the news release to the NASDAQ biotech companies. And they looked at what happens when the company release in years. And they found that if the news was negative, on average, the company's share price declined by 50% on the day horrendous, but no great surprise. And of course, that's what happened to us in the 1st of August when we came out with this GBM AGILE. So it rings true. But interestingly, they found that when a company releases positive news, their share price declines by 10% on a day. So a bit of a Catch-22, the completion may be the best thing is just to keep quiet. So we're probably not the only company that sees a little bit of this. Now we've asked the question is, well, what on earth is going on? Now we don't think that short selling is any very significant contributor to this. There's just not an awful lot of stock to borrow, frankly. Most of our stock is in retail hands. It doesn't get bent out for shorting. And frankly, we're a lousy candidate for shorting because when you short a stock, you want to be pretty confident it's going to go down and you want liquidity, where you want a stock that's overvalued and liquid, we're undervalued and relatively illiquid. So we're -- and biotech in particular, is one of these industries. So one good readout can double or travel the share price in a day, and that can be very unfortunate if you've got a big short position. So we do -- the only data source we can look to is NASDAQ itself. They do provide data on stocks available for shorting. When we look at Caveat there, we show an absolutely tiny short interest. It's next to nothing. Now whether that's the [ holster Anos ], I can't tell you, but on all available information we really can't identify it. We have spoken to a number of analysts and advisers and bankers and said, what is this strange profile? I'm glad to hear, by the way, I'm not the only person that stays up to 1 or 2 in the morning watching the share price, makes me feel a little bit less lonely when I'm watching the NASDAQ open. But one suggestion that's been put to us, and I'm not nearly enough of a financier to really know if it's range true, but the suggestion is the stock is attracted the interest of day trackers. They see press releases go out, they buy the stock without even necessarily reading it. They just wait to see it. It doubles in price and if it doesn't, they sell out and we move on. We got this churn. And that certainly, again, rings true because we see a lot of the volume in the morning, which is burst of activity, it tails off morning or afternoon. Whatever the explanation is, there doesn't seem to be an awful lot we can honestly do about it except just to get out there and tell the story. I think the reality is the share market is often imbalanced in the short term. I do believe it generally gets it right in the medium to long term. I think we just have to focus on the long game and maybe not be too distracted by these kinds of day-to-day ups and downs because I think that is the thing that -- whatever is going on, we'll clear it out is really being able to demonstrate that long-term trajectory. I'm conscious of time, but I just want to address another point that Steve touched on, and we may have time for just to take questions from online. But the other question that was wrapped up there is around NASDAQ around our bid price, which as you say, is under -- and for those that are familiar with NASDAQ, be aware that there is a requirement on asset to maintain a minimum bid price of $1, we are currently trading under that threshold. And if we trade under that threshold for 30 consecutive trading days, we will receive a NASDAQ deficiency notice. And we do expect to receive that at some point in the next few weeks. Now the consequences of this are limited in the short term. We have a 6-month cure period to get our share price above $1. And we can then ask for an extension to get this year, which essentially gets us another 6 months. So practical butters, we likely have 12 months to get ourselves back above $1 before there is any possibility of delisting from NASDAQ -- and it's fair to say with the market being where it is, we are not the only company in this position. In fact, several of the companies on one of my slides there have also recently received NASDAQ efficiency notices. There's a lot of it's about. It's on welcome. I won't deny it be frustrating and annoying but it has no real near-term implications for business and say we've got 12 months to fix it and I'm extremely optimistic. The share price will be back over $1 in that period. I want to make sure we don't shortchange those online. So if we have another minute or 2, perhaps we can just address a couple of the questions that have been coming through from online, just to make sure we do justice to everybody.

And James, probably one of the questions that comes on and another one in the part. You mentioned [indiscernible].

And again, the question for everybody online you didn't hear is the company thinking about suspending any of the activity around [ EVT ], our second drug to conserve cash. Look, ideally not, I think we haven't really spoken much about it today just because of where this drug is and its development, but we're actually also really excited about [ EVT ], we think it genuinely has huge potential. We would have brought it in if we didn't feel that way. So I think it would be very reluctant to short-change [ EVT ] at this stage. What we might look at doing is just altering the sequencing of events a little bit over the course of next year. We might move a few things around. We might bring some things forward, push other things back and just change the sequence of things a little bit, partly to phase our cash expenditure a little bit better over the course of next year, and I think that could give us some savings in 2023 and partly also to try and drive that to data that we can then take out to investors as early as possible. I think we want to be able to talk to investors about the potential we see in that drug. And so the earlier we've got good credible days the better. So we are looking at some ways to tinker with it. We may adjust it a little bit. But I think it will be a terrible shame if we stopped working on it, and that's not our plan at this stage.

[indiscernible]

Correct. Yes.

Look at [indiscernible].

Yes. Mark, it's a good question. So again, for online, the question was around the company's own Phase II study of paxalisib in Glioblastoma. And whether if we had a more equivocal results [ outage ], whether we can pull the 2 together. And to some extent, that always happens. So FDA will always examine the totality of the evidence for a drug cannot just the pivotal clinical study with all the other works going on, the aggregate safety data, even the preclinical data. So they do take a very, very broad range of look at things. Our Phase II study was not designed to support registration. And it's a relatively small study, about 30 patients. So there's probably a limited sense to which it would directly outweigh a negative result in GBM AGILE, if that ends up being the result this year. However, it certainly would help us to interpret that data. I think we would look at it closely. And if we did get a different opportunities studies, I think we'd look very closely to understand why. And just as a reminder, that study reported overall survival of 15.7 months. The comparison point there for existing standard of care at 12.7 months. The data was presented this year at ASCO, at ESMO, the European cited meto oncology, and it is being presented this week at the Society for neuro-oncology meeting in Tampa, Florida. So it gives you a sense that the state has been subject of high interest. So it all feeds in, it's all breast to the mill, very difficult at this stage to know quite what role it's going to play in the overall picture. But look, it's going to be an input, but perhaps not a casting vote.

Okay, James. I think we are at the stage where you've done enough. And there's going to be more questions as we go through the formal business, I'm sure. But thank you very much indeed.

Thank you very much.

Okay. So moving to the more formal business of the meeting. The minutes of the previous Annual General Meeting of members of the company, which was the Annual General Meeting held on the 10th of November 2021 were approved by the Board and signed by myself as Chair of that general meeting in accordance with the provisions of Section 251A of the Corporations Act. The original minutes are tabled and there are copies of those minutes available for inspection. The notice of meeting has been given in accordance with the company's constitution, and I'm going to take it that the notice of meeting has been read. Proxies the Company Secretary, Cate Hill, will advisers to the proxies received.

Mr. Chairman, we've received proxies representing around 60 million votes, which represents about 37% of the issued share capital of the company. And the proxy position is shown on the slide.

Okay. And I now have to read my formal Chairman's address, which was loaded to the ASX platform this morning before the start of the meeting. So I will rattle through that as you've all read it already. And also, it actually backed up a number of things that James has been presenting. So ladies and gentlemen, behalf of the Board of Directors, welcome to the 2022 Annual General Meeting for Kazia Therapeutics. I'm grateful that we are actually able to return to a live format this year and have an opportunity to reconnect with shareholders in person. I'll say from the outset that the past year has been one of the most challenging not only for our industry but particularly for Kazia. We've seen a rapid and very substantial contraction of equity investment in Life Sciences, which has greatly depressed valuations across the sector and the few financing tractions that have occurred have generally taken place an extremely arduous terms with the majority of companies having to rely on the use -- sorry, on the support of existing shareholders to see them through this period of turbulence. Against this backlog of turbulence, Kazia had to deal with a number of additional challenges, none more than the untimely but mandatory disclosure by the company of an ambiguous update on the GBM AGILE trial, which led to an immediate 50% 1-day fall in the share price. In addition, the company has had to be overly reliant on its ATM facility for funding, which has been a point of concern for some shareholders. we recognize the need to restore this instrument to its intended place, an occasional tool to strengthen the balance sheet opportunistically but not a primary source of funding. Nevertheless, the notion that a company with 2 high-quality clinical stage assets, boasting a wealth of positive data from almost a dozen clinical trials could trade at a market cap of less than AUD 20 million would have been unthinkable 18 months ago. As a shareholder myself, I can fully appreciate the extent to which this situation tests the nerves of members. The complex technical progress of drug development is difficult, whereas the day-to-day movements of share price are readily visible and appears straightforward. It is easy for short-term fluctuations in the latter to eclipse the underlying bedrock of scientific achievement and commercial opportunity. Let me take this opportunity just to restate the fundamentals of our company. We have 2 world-class oncology drugs in our pipeline. They were invented by 2 of the most successful companies in the industry and entrusted to us on competitive commercial terms because they believe this team was judged to know how to develop them. We've gone on to initiate 11 clinical trials at some of the premier cancer research centers in the world with the collaboration of some of the leading global experts in the field. So compelling is the science that many of these institutions have made substantial in-kind and even financial contributions to their work, and we have benefited from many millions of dollars of competitive grant funding. This year alone, we've presented 10 data readouts at international scientific conferences. Every one of these data readouts has been positive and several have been left short – little shorter remarkable. The U.S. FDA has awarded us 2 special designations to our lead program, paxalisib. And as of today, we're managing clinical research activity across 9 clinical trials in 8 countries with a team comprising just 8 full-time employees, approximately $0.80 out of every dollar that we spend is invested progressing this pipeline. The news at Paxalisib would not graduate to the second stage of the GBM AGILE trial in August was an unwelcome surprise and not -- I will not reiterate here the reasons why we believe this event may have lesser implications than the market as assumed. I'll simply point out that the study remains ongoing with all patients continuing on our paxalisib or in follow-up according to the protocol. The paxalisib arm has been declared [ futter ], not declared [ futter ] nor it has been terminated due to any concerns over safety. We're completely blinded to the data, which continues to mature on a daily basis as patients proceed through this study, and we expect to see first and final data from the study in the second half of 2023, and there's every chance that the data will support a marketing authorization for paxalisib and glioblastoma. Regardless of the eventual outcome of the GBM AGILE trial, there are many other ways for us to win with paxalisib. Over the past several years, we have carefully deployed a broad clinical trial program partly to expand the field of opportunity for the drug and partly to hedge against risks such as this. That work is already paying off with stellar data in brain metastases and growing excitement around childhood brain cancer, emerging as just 2 of the most promising paths forward for paxalisib. I would argue, therefore, that movements in the share price this year do not reflect any part of the underlying reality of the company. The time share prices are driven more by abstract sentiment than by any objective consideration of the science and economics. The primary task of this board of management of Kazia as we head into 2023 and to reconnect the company with the investors, to reaffirm the enormous value of our pipeline and to resource some sensible valuation to our stock. Those tasks are summarized in the plan that has been described by the CEO and work is already underway. I'm actually entirely confident that by executing it carefully and patiently on our plans, we will return this company to its rightful stand. Kazia has been through difficult times before, but I can assure you that we have the experience, the commitment and the resolve to see the job through. Quite simply, there's too much at stake to do otherwise. I'll conclude by once again thanking my fellow directors, our CEO, Dr. James Garner and his management team for their hard work through the year. Despite this challenging backdrop, it's actually a testament that both to the value of our pipeline and the professionalism of team that actually the sentiment within Kazia remains entirely positive and forward-looking. Finally, I wish to thank the shareholders for your continuing support of the company. It's not been the easiest 12 months to be an investor in Kazia. However, you remain invested in the company with enormous potential and your board will leave no stone unturned to ensure that this potential is realized and recognized. So before we address the resolutions, I'm going to have to make a few comments on voting procedure, which will be adopted today. Voting will be conducted by way of a poll and all items of business. [Operator Instructions]. Financial statements and reports for the year ended 30th of June 2022. I'll take the financial report, directors' report and the auditor's report as read and received. We're pleased to answer any questions from the floor relating to the financial report, directors' report and auditor's report. I remind you only the shareholders are able to ask questions. If necessary, I may also comment by my further directors or company executives to comment on particular questions or matters in relation to the annual report. Are there any questions on the financial report? In the room? Online? Okay. Thank you. That concludes our consideration of the financial statement reports. I will now explain the procedure for the remainder of the meeting. The following items of business require a formal vote and all resolutions will be decided via poll. I appoint Paul Natinski of Computershare Investor Services as a returning officer. The poll is now open, and you may register your vote any time during this formal part of the meeting. At the end of polling process, I will formally close the poll and then close the meeting. Paul and his team will collect the results of the poll, which will be announced to the ASX and posted on our website as soon as they're available. Moving now to the next item of the notice meeting. Our first resolution concerns the adoption of the remuneration report. This requires an ordinary resolution and is nonbinding. Resolution 1, the remuneration report to consider and if thought fit to pass the following as an ordinary resolution. That for the purposes of Section 250 or Brackets 2 of the Corporations Act and for all other purposes, the remuneration report for the year ended 30th of June 2022, as set out in the annual report for the year ended 30 June 2022 be adopted on the terms and conditions set in the explanatory statement. Now the slide shows, and I'm going to speak off turn here – how to turn. The slide shows the proxy votes. And as an investor, I can see that this is not going to reach the level required. And I would just say to you that I'm really disappointed that after this meeting, the only thing that will be reported in the press is that the remuneration report went down. And yet again, people will be talking about things that really aren't important. They won't be talking about our science, and they won't be talking about all these data that we've actually produced. But that is understandable. I think under the circumstances, there's the largest abstention vote and we take it on the chin, and I just want you to know as Chairman. We are going to review that, and we will listen to what the shareholders say. But I think it is a great shame because there are 8 people here doing their dander to make this company successful. So I'll move that the remuneration report in the annual report be adopted. Are there any questions that anybody would like to ask us? Anything online? In the room?

Have the directors so taking a couple of some of the remuneration take in the short term [ part of the cost-cutting ]?

Yes. We're considering everything at the moment. What we are considering is we are going to have to take a hit all of us, which includes some of the people who we've employed in the last year, which is interesting because we have to incentivize and we have to get the quality of people to run this business. But the answer to your question, Mark, is everybody is actually most likely going to take a hit. Okay. So I move the remediation that adopted. We've done the questions. I'll now put the resolution to the vote. Please now register your vote. The next item is a little bit more enjoyable and set out to the new meeting – sorry?

This is for the online-only mode. [indiscernible].

No. Everything is -- we want to make sure everybody votes. I know some people that like to do it just in the room and I sneak things through. We've decided we're taking everything. The next item is set out in the notice of meeting relates to the reelection of Steve Coffey as a Director. A brief biological data and scheme is set out in the explanatory notes latest meeting. No other nominations have been received in accordance with the company's constitution. The resolution as follows: the reelection of Mr. Stephen Coffey as a director to consider and if thought fit to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution, that for the purposes of Listing Rule 14.4 and close is 21.1% and 21.7% of the constitution, Stephen Coffey, who retires by rotation and being eligible is reelected as a director. Next slide shows the [ proxy ] votes. So I move that Mr. Coffey reelected as a Director of the company. Are there any questions? Would you like him to give a 20-minute presentation on his background? Okay. I'll put the resolution to the vote. Please register your vote and mark up your cards. The next item is set out in the notice of meeting related to the grant of options to Dr. James Garner. You'll be aware that the directors have withdrawn this resolution prior to the meeting. So we'll move on to resolution 4. With the Chairman just saying, it is a great shame that the person that's leading this company now is no longer has any equity incentive apart from the shares that he continues to buy. But you have expressed your views, and we will take them on board. So the next item he set out in the notice of meeting relates to the ratification of the prior issue of shares. The background to this resolution is set out in the explanatory notes to the notice of meeting and the resolution as follows: ratification of prior shares of ATM shares to consider if thought fit to pass -- sorry, prior issue of ATM shares to consider and thought fit to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution that for the purposes of listing rule 7.4 and for all other purposes, shareholders ratify the prior allotment and issue of 17,160,230 ATM shares on the terms and conditions set out in the expansion statement. The next slide shows the proxy votes received in relation to this resolution, and I move that the prior issue of ATM shares be ratified. Are there any questions in the room or online? Okay. I'll now put the resolution to vote. Please register your vote. Next item that's set out in the notice of meeting relates to the approval of additional placement capacity. The background to this resolution is set out in the explanatory notes to the notice of meeting. The resolution is as follows: approval of additional placement capacity under Listing Rule 7.1A to consider and if thought fit to pass the following resolution as a special resolution. But for the purposes of listing Rule 7.1A and for all other purposes, shareholders approve the additional capacity of the company to issue equity securities up to 10% of the issued capital of the company at the time of issue, calculated in accordance with the formula prescribed in Listing Rule 7.1A2 and on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory statement. Next slide shows the proxy votes received in relation to that resolution. I move that the additional placement capacity be approved. Are there any questions? I put the resolution to the vote. Please now register a vote. The next 2 items are set out in the notice of meeting relate to updates to the company's constitution. The background of this resolution is set out in the explanatory notes of the notice of meeting. The resolution is as follows: Resolution 6, adoption of a new constitution to consider in a thought fit to pass following resolution as a special resolution, that for the purposes of Section 136 of the Corporations Act and for all other purposes, the current constitution of the company be repealed and the new constitution of the form as signed by the chair for identification purposes, excluding clause 14 be adopted as the new constitution of the company. The next slide shows proxy votes received in relation to this. I move that the new constitution be approved. Are there any questions on this? I'm really excited, you want to explain it. I'll now put the resolution to the vote. Please register your vote. A final item of formal business today also concerns the company's constitution. Resolution 7 is approval of proportional takeover provisions to consider and if thought fit to pass the following resolution as a special resolution. But for the purposes of Sections 136 and 648G of the Corporations Act and for all other purposes, the proportional takeover provisions contained in Schedule II to the explanatory memorandum be inserted as clause 14 into the new constitution approved under Resolution 6 and that the next slide shows the proxy votes received in relation to this resolution. I move that the appropriate clause be inserted into the new constitution. Are there any questions on this?

Just in layman's terms, can you talk about what is has been... What's the background of…

Yes. So it's quite a -- first of all, it's quite a common cause for companies to put in their constitution. So essentially, if you don't have the stores, somebody could offer everybody to take -- sorry, essentially, if you don't have these floors, then if a bidder offered to take over 60% of everybody's shareholding and if they gained acceptance from shareholders, essentially a bidder could own the majority of the share as everyone else could own a small number. And obviously, that would -- they would be disadvantaged. So essentially, these provisions mean that if a proportional bid is made, the shareholders actually vote on whether to go ahead with that proportional takeover. So essentially, it's a protection for shareholders against some gaining of control by sales. And I got a nod from the lawyer. Thank you. Yes, it has to be renewed as…

[indiscernible].

Yes. So it's actually shareholder protection.

Okay. I'll put that resolution to the vote. Please register a vote. So that's the end of the resolution. Please ensure that you registered a vote for each resolution. I'm going to wait a couple of moments before closing the poll to ensure that you've all had time to register your votes. And then Paul and his team can collect the voting cards from the attendees in the room. If there are any remaining questions, then we can also deal with these now. Want to ask something, Steve?

Can I just make a comment -- that's the options for James. And then more about direct to... Given the external focus on the company... We've been not erectile seeing that if the directors could see a reduced dollar amount that invested. And I recognize that the register all particularly James, that for new [ locations ] at market price on more where you guys paid $1.40 as the [ mines ] more than 12 months ago. So I understand a bit more about the potential from the public view of the company in terms of the forwards, continued faith in the business, and there's much good stuff going on and whatever. Do you think there's merit in putting some external statement forward that...

Yes. To be honest with you, Steve, I'm the one obstacle to that at the moment because I'm paying on my own dollar to come here and do the job. And actually, it makes not a title of a difference to the overall cash burn of the company. What makes a difference is what we do on the big things. So the question about [ EBT 801 ] was really appropriate. How can we actually change that, still continue to do it and make sure that we have extend the cash runway. The other thing is, I think the directors are going to have to work their backsides off to try and convince people, as James said, get out and spend more time with investors, spend more time. I chair a company on NASDAQ. So when I go to the states, I actually meet James and for nothing, I work with James. So yes, if it makes a big difference, I'm happy to take a hit -- but I actually don't think that's the issue in this company. What I think is, is about finding ways to get real amounts of money in to actually allow us to progress going forward. So as I mentioned, I chair a company on NASDAQ, which went back to in April 2019. By the way, the share price has gone up tenfold, but we were running on a shoe stream until last year. We delisted in London. We stayed on NASDAQ, and we raised a lot of money because we spent a lot of shoe-leather talking to investors. And so I think that's what we've got to do. I think price is extremely well connected, both here in the United States. I'm connected in both areas, also in Europe, and James does spend a lot of shoe-leather. But if it makes people happy, yes, we will put out a statement and say that the directors are taking a hit.

What you're saying is have a... Share the sentiment that might comment, adjusted options for games. I think a lot of people were viewing that 20 and the emit was when the share setpoint was put at $0.26 per share were at 18%. So the initial reaction was on great we're all 70%, 80% underwater, but in terms of a 15% then. And so the comment that I made was is certainly supportive of options [ the game. ] So we'd prefer to see them at a further state...

Yes. And I think that's a -- I think that's a valid comment. And certainly…

Certainly, they're not punishing anyone, but in fact, being [ punishable to rewarding people ] for effort no issue that philosophically. I guess it was more at the steps that the...

Well, no, I think that's right. And I think we, as a Board, took it on board. We were shocked. And I suppose one of the things that we're very keen to do is to make sure that our management team, our key management team are incentivized, but maybe we have to look at how we do that. And it was very clear to me and the other directors that James' options were not going to get approved. And as far as I'm concerned, it's a bit of a tick in the teeth to him, but I'd rather not put it through a formal resolution and say it were voted down. It was withdrawn by the Board. And yes, we noticed there's a huge abstention vote in terms of remuneration. So that means we have to sit down and look at how we operate. And I think as part of our cost-cutting, which we are looking at, obviously, we saved a lot because we're not having to pay into GBM AGILE anymore. I think we're going to look at how we incentivize the team. But we have, during the year, taken on 2 absolutely excellent executives in the United States. And we need to keep them because managing this is not easy with only 8 people. And so you know I overreact because I'm actually very hacked off that we are all talking about remuneration, and we should be talking about 7 out of 8.

I may be shareholders. We would all like to see an announcement come out that one of the big farmers has tipped in $20 million and take [ it off ]. That's what we're all looking for.

And that's what we're all trying to do.

So the second year, it's not that [ thoracal ] bad about what's occurred over the last 3 months. It's catastrophic. If we were all in this room in November, October 2021 and said, let's do a storewide what do we think the share price will be in 12 months? It was sitting around about $1.40. I don't think anyone is too with no [ directly as detention, ] but you would be matched to the door as… If we're all on the same -- so I don't...

But I think you'll find that -- the point you've made about us investing I'm a [ Scotchman ]. I got to miss an offer of $10. Of course, I'm not because actually I believe in the company. So that's where I would actually put my focus. And we've already discussed, will it be seen as a negative or a positive invest? People -- if you don't invest as a director, you always fail. You never invest enough. Even if you invest 50,000, some people say it should have been 100,000. But I think you'll find that we'll be investing, which I think is a better way of demonstrating our commitment...

And that's the same thing I guess question. Just on the investing to. Can you buy shares on the market, they're just getting recycled. Would you consider some share issuing plan or something like that because that's bringing new capital because from an outsider's point of view as a shareholder, biggest risk to me is the company doesn't have the cash to be done.

Yes, you're absolutely right, Mike.

It doesn't matter if you've got the best widget in the world. If you can't get it on the back...

So I think the answer to that is we're a public company, and we're looking at every way of funding this company. And obviously, we can't say any more than that. But I can say categorically, if anything happens in the next 12 months, and we brought in big money when we raised money, we would be including the shareholders in that as well, the opportunity. And we did that before.

Can you elaborate more on where you think a 5% to 50% savings. It's not cutting the [ EBITDA at 1 ]?

Yes. Well, I think we literally last week, went through a line by line. We're looking at a number of things. The advisers are all squeezing a bit. Now you can see them in a bit of rejected. Yes. We have to cut our cloth -- and James [ Bay ] kindly said in Kazia, we've been through this in 2018 to '20. I can assure you, when I joined the company in 2015 or actually the second time in 2015, we were in the same place. So we will have to make cuts. We will all have to take a bit of a hit personally. But I think I would rather not be specific at the moment. But as I think James has alluded to, we intend to keep our programs going. That is the priority. So there are other things that we do in terms of maybe PR, IR, media, things that we pay out routinely, but we would just actually have to ask some of our advisers to take a hit. So yes. But remember, a portion of that 50% has to be seen that we're no longer investing in GB AGILE. We're not going to give you any more than that because we haven't agreed it yet half way.

Just talk on a positive note about government. We're running trials in Australia now, for example, where does that place us to government grants or a little bit more focused on R&D credits and just grant money in general.

Do you want to comment?

Sure. I can speak to that point a little bit. And again, those online, the question was around access to R&D incentives here in Australia grants and R&D rebates, things like that. So the good news is we are now running paxalisib clinical work in Australia. It's actually the first time we've done clinical trials here in Australia with that drug, and we've got 2 sites right now recruiting to the DIPG study. The another bad news for the counterpoint facts we're not actually paying any money for that study. It's entirely externally funded. -- it's funded through a combination of the organizations running at Pacific pediatric neuro-oncology consuming based at UCSF in California and a number of grants and so on. And so we just don't have a lot of expenditure to claim the R&D rebate against. Now we probably can -- we probably can realize some rebates next year on things like our internal expenses, shipping costs, things like that. I don't think it's going to be a huge amount of money. But if there's one center, my colleague, Gabrielle Heaton sitting in the front Rose's very, very good at squeezing money out of people. And if there's a dollar to be had, she'll find it. So we'll be looking at that for next year. There are other sources of [ gronfunding ] here in Australia, the medical research future fund things like that. And we continue to look at those I'll be very honest and say that it's quite difficult to access them as a private company. It's Australia's grant funding regime is -- if I can put it this way, it's where the United States was 30 or 40 years. So very, very much focused on academia and really ignores the role of private enterprise in commercializing work. And that can make it tough for a company like us is polyester. We've generally found better success in the United States. Even there, all the ground funding that we benefit from has been collaborative. It's been through other parties. And we'll continue to keep trying in both jurisdictions.

But I think the last thing I would say, Steve, is that certainly since I've been down here for the last 2 weeks, I've visited a lot of institutions and generally just making contact with people, but Kazia featured in every single discussion because nobody can believe our undervalue. So it's about closing of the people. So I'm actually after the last 2 or 3 weeks, very confident that's a great story. James, you want to make any comments here?

No.

Can I ask one final one? James, you mentioned that in the presentation [indiscernible].

Yes. Thanks, Paul. So again, the question was around Matt Dun presentation at the Society of your Oncology Annual Meeting, which tankage later this week. And just for background, if everybody is not familiar, Matt has been working for some years now on Paxos in DIPG, strike TMG this rare childhood brain cancer. He's shown great evidence that our drug works by itself showing incredible evidence for a combination of paceseband ONC201, a drug manufacturer by company in the U.S. And that's going to be the thrust of his presentation at snow. Now I'll say right up front, I don't know exactly the full detail of what you're presenting. I do anticipate that this will be somewhat incremental data is. So we'll be building on a story that he's been telling throughout the year. He presented some of this at our conference call [ Isno ] back in June, and we actually had a webinar with him which I'd recommend people look up on the website. So I think this will just continue to build that story and flesh out the detail. It is quite signs heavy research because this is lab research. But -- so I think it's going to be perhaps of more interest to the researchers and the clinicians that investors have at this stage. But I think as this story builds, it gives us another really powerful piece of ammunition to put in front of professional investors over the course of 2023. I'd just say briefly, there's -- people say, “Gosh, brain cancers tough enough, pediatric brain cancer, are you guys really going to hang your house on this." Company in the U.S., day 1 [ biopharmacals ], they are really just a pediatric brain cancer story, and that company is valued, let's set a significant multiple to Kazia. So I think there is room for this data to really resonate with investors. But it's going to be a relatively technical story to tell.

[indiscernible].

[indiscernible].