MediWound Ltd. (MDWD) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good day, and welcome to the MediWound Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Gaia Shamis from LifeSci Advisors. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Chloe, and welcome, everyone. Earlier today, premarket opened, MediWound issued a press release announcing financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2026. You may access this press release on the company's website under the Investor tab. I would ask you to review the full text of our forward-looking statements within this morning's press release. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that statements made during this call, including the Q&A session relating to MediWound's expected future performance, future business prospects or future events or plans are forward-looking statements as defined under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements may involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations and are described more fully in our filings with the SEC. In addition, all forward-looking statements represent our views only as of today, and MediWound assumes no obligation to update or supplement any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. This conference call is property of MediWound and any recording or rebroadcast is expressly prohibited without the written consent of MediWound. With us today are Ofer Gonen, Chief Executive Officer of MediWound; Hani Luxenburg, Chief Financial Officer; and Barry Wolfenson, Executive Vice President of Strategy and Corporate Development. Following our prepared remarks, we will open the call for Q&A. Now I would like to turn the call over to Ofer Gonen, Chief Executive Officer of MediWound. Ofer?

Thank you, Gaia, and good morning, everyone. During the second quarter, we made meaningful progress against our strategic priorities, advancing EscharEx and [Technical Difficulty] Do you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you. Please stand by while we reconnect our speaker connected our speaker. [Audio Gap] Pardon everyone we reconnected our speaker. Please proceed.

Okay. Sorry about that. So, thank you, Gaia, and good morning, everyone. During the second quarter, we made meaningful progress against our strategic priorities, advancing EscharEx and expanding the commercial and the development opportunities for NexoBrid. Specifically, the EscharEx global Phase III VLU trial is actively enrolling patients as our assessment of its addressable market continue to grow. For NexoBrid, Vericel reported its strongest quarter since launch, and we entered into a new master service agreement with Vericel following its BARDA contract. Now let's start with an update on EscharEx. The VALU study remains our top priority and our key long-term value driver. Our focus is on execution with enrollment ongoing, targeting the 216 patients across approximately 40 sites in the United States, Europe and Israel. As the study progresses, we are approaching two key milestones: first, the prespecified interim sample size reassessment and the second, completion of enrollment, both expected by the end of the first quarter of 2027. At the same time, we continue to build the broader commercial opportunity for EscharEx -- during this quarter, an independent global consulting firm completed an updated U.S. market assessment. Following the expansion of the analysis to include pressure ulcer, this updated assessment now estimates the U.S. annual peak sales at $1.05 billion. This analysis further strengthened our view that EscharEx across multiple chronic wound indications has the potential to address a substantial market opportunity. An investigator-initiated study evaluating EscharEx in pressure ulcers is expected to begin in the fourth quarter of 2026. Our collaboration network across the program now spans essentially all the major relevant advanced wound care companies, including Coloplast, ConvaTec, SD, Molnlycke, Solventum, B. Brown and MIMEDX. Together with the continued progress of the value and the expanding clinical and commercial opportunity, this positions EscharEx as a nonsurgical optimally effective debridement therapy for chronic wounds. Turning to NexoBrid. The U.S. commercial trajectory continues to strengthen. Vericel reported NexoBrid's strongest quarter since launch with record quarterly revenue, hospital unit sales and ordering centers. Approximately 80 burn centers have ordered NexoBrid since launch, reflecting continued adoption and increasing utilization across the U.S. burn care market. Following Vericel's 10-year contract with BARDA valued at up to $197 million, we entered into a master service agreement with Vericel covering NexoBrid and next-generation product development activities. Under the MSA, we expect to begin recognizing revenue in the second half of 2026 through participation in development initiatives, including a next-generation program launched to support the potential expansion of NexoBrid for use in blast and friction-related injuries, leveraging real-world evidence. We continue to advance a room temperature stable formulation of NexoBrid as a nonsurgical debridement solution for battlefield burn care, supported by nondilutive funding from the Department of War with a total program budget of $18.3 million. Together, these programs further expand NexoBrid growth, I'm here -- Together, this program further expands. Together, these programs further expand NexoBrid's role in burn care, national preparedness, military medicine and mass casualty response. To support current and future demand, we continue to advance our expanded NexoBrid manufacturing facility. We are implementing the modification requested by the EMA following the pre-audit and expect to complete this work during the fourth quarter of 2026. Commercial supply from the expanded facility remains subject to regulatory approval and is expected in the second half of 2027. With that, I will turn the call over to Hani.

Thank you, Ofer, and good morning, everyone. Turning to our financial results for the second quarter of 2026. Revenue for the quarter was $3.1 million compared with $5.7 million in the second quarter of 2025. The decrease primarily reflected the timing of BARDA funded development revenue. Gross profit was $0.3 million, representing a gross margin of 10.9% compared with gross profit of $1.3 million or 23.5% in the prior year period. The lower margin primarily reflected a onetime impact related to the facility scale-up. Research and development expenses were $5.9 million compared with $3.5 million in the second quarter of 2025, primarily reflecting increased investment in the EscharEx value Phase III trial. SG&A expenses totaled $3.9 million compared with $3.6 million in the same period last year. Operating loss was $9.5 million compared with $5.7 million in the second quarter of 2025. Net loss was $7.4 million or $0.57 per share compared with a net loss of $13.3 million or $1.23 per share in the prior year period. The year-over-year change primarily reflected noncash financial income. Adjusted EBITDA loss was $8.3 million compared with a loss of $4.5 million in the second quarter of 2025. Turning to our first half results. Revenue for the first half of 2026 was $4.6 million compared with $9.7 million in the first half of 2025, primarily reflecting the timing of BARDA funded development revenue. Gross profit was $0.7 million, representing a gross margin of 14.4% compared with gross profit of $2.1 million or 21.5% in the prior year period. Research and development expenses were $11.1 million compared with $6.4 million in the first half of 2025, primarily reflecting increased investment in the EscharEx value Phase III trial. SG&A expenses totaled $7.5 million compared with $6.6 million in the same period last year. primarily reflecting higher professional services costs and exchange rate effects. Operating loss was $17.4 million compared with $10.9 million in the first half of 2025. Net loss was $10.3 million or $0.80 per share compared with a net loss of $14 million or $1.30 per share in the prior year period. The change primarily reflected noncash warrant revaluation income of $7.7 million in 2026 compared with a noncash warrant revaluation expense of $2.4 million in 2025. Adjusted EBITDA loss was $15.3 million compared with a loss of $8.5 million in the first half of 2025. Now turning to our balance sheet. As of June 2026, we had approximately $36 million in cash, cash equivalents and deposits compared with $54 million at year-end 2025. Cash burn during the first half of 2026 totaled $20 million. Warrants and option exercises generated $0.8 million during the first half, and we received an additional $1.1 million after quarter end. This concludes my review of our financial results. Ofer, back to you.

Thank you, Hani. The second quarter strengthened both our core growth platform. The value Phase III program of EscharEx continues to advance toward important milestones, while the updated market assessment and planned diabetic foot ulcer and pressure ulcer studies broaden its long-term clinical and commercial opportunity. NexoBrid continues to gain commercial traction in the United States. At the same time, the MSA with Vericel, the broader BARDA framework, the DOW funding, all that creates meaningful government-backed product supply and development opportunities. Our revenue profile remained weighted toward the second half of 2026, reflecting the expected timing of contributions from the MSA and other government-funded programs. Based on these expectation contributions, we are reaffirming our full year 2026 revenue guidance of $24 million to $26 million. Our priorities for the remainder of the year are clear: continue executing the VLU trial, begin recognizing revenue under the Vericel MSA, advance our next-generation NexoBrid programs and complete the EMA requested modification at our expanded manufacturing facility. We remain focused on disciplined execution across our strategic priorities and on building durable long-term value across our pipeline. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] Our first question today comes from RK Ramakanth with H.C. Wainwright.

This is RK from H.C. Wainwright. Lots of stuff going on here. So, let's start off on the VLU study itself. On the study, do you still plan to get the study enrollment completed and get the interim also done during the early 2027? That's my first question. The second one within that is very recently, Smith & Nephew on their call, they were talking about potentially working on a second-generation SANTYL. Not sure you folks are aware of it. And what do you think -- what's your business intelligence on that molecule? And how does that impact EscharEx development from here onwards?

Excellent. So RK, thank you for joining. The first question is a short answer. Yes, our target of meeting the interim assessment and the enrollment completion is still in the first quarter of 2027. As for the second question regarding Smith & Nephew approach to potential competition from EscharEx, maybe, Barry, do you want to take this one?

Sure. Absolutely. RK. We heard those comments, and we found them interesting. I think the thing that's most notable about the comments were the context where he was talking a little bit about -- someone asked him about the competition. He was talking a little bit about his thoughts around EscharEx. But then he said that they noted that sample is not a fast debridement option that it is slow. And because of this, that's what's driving their desire to make this second-generation product. It's actually being developed by a company that they've invested in called Certa Therapeutics. The molecule is SN or the drug, I should say, is SN-514. Based on all the publicly available information we've been able to see, we're not aware of this drug having entered into any clinical development in chronic wound patients. We see some activity around burns, but not chronic wounds. And so, while we take any potential competition seriously, EscharEx, as you know, is already in Phase III in chronic wounds, and that gives us what we believe to be a substantial clinical lead.

So now based on those comments, does that mean that the market is bigger than what it is because SANTYL is obviously not the molecule of choice if it is not really doing what it is expected to do? And then the second part of that is on the -- your team has added treasure ulcers into the pool now. So how is that study being conducted in the sense, what is your responsibility within that IIT and would that data be available by the time you're ready to file your own application with the agencies, both in the U.S. and in the -- with the EMA?

So Barry, maybe you will answer the first part of the question regarding Smith & Nephew and the market of pressure ulcer, and I'll speak about the study, okay?

Yes. Well, I think even more broadly, what I think I heard you ask, RK, is does that mean that since SANTYL is not particularly effective and that Smith & Nephew is motivated to create a new drug, this must -- the inference is that the market is even bigger than what SANTYL is currently supplying. And we believe the answer to that is resoundingly yes. That's why as we -- even before including pressure ulcers, we showed our peak sales in the $800 million range. And with including pressure ulcers, it tops $1 billion. We believe that a drug for debridement that can reach complete debridement, certainly within four to five days changes the entire expectation with regard to enzymatic debridement. It fits better into the workflows of wound clinics and podiatry offices and it takes away because of that share -- utilization share, not just from sharp debridement, but across all different modalities. So, we do believe that it greatly expands the market.

So, if we speak about the pressure ulcer study, so it's important to mention that the Phase III VLU study in VLU -- this is the primary focus of EscharEx development program. It's, of course, the company's key value driver. The pressure ulcer study is an investigator initiated. So, it's not run directly by us. It's a small study, open-label trial, 10, 15 patients, and the initiation is expected in the fourth quarter of 2026. It enrolls, of course, pressure ulcer patients. All of them are treated with EscharEx across a week or 2. And we are assessing as usually debridement, granulation and wound closure. Following this -- the value readout, we plan to approach with the FDA and determine what would be required to pursue approvals also for DFU and pressure ulcers.

One last question. This is on NexoBrid. So, it's a two part question. The first one, what is EMA requesting you to do in terms of the new plant? And at least at the outset, it looks like time lines are moving back. So, is that true in your sense of the world? And also, if things get pushed to fourth quarter of '27, does that mean the real product for the market actually gets pushed into 2028? And the third part of the questions are on the CPT code, where do we stand? And is January 2027 still an effective and realistic date?

So I will address the manufacturing facility question. I think there was a confusion. As I said in the call, we completed the EMA pre-audit and the pre-audit process, and they recommended some operational changes that we are about to complete in the fourth quarter of this year, not the fourth quarter of 2027. So, we'll complete all the implementation this year. The feedback that we got was operational in nature, not related to product quality, safety or comparability concerns, which is very important. Once this work is complete, we will begin the manufacturing of NexoBrid in the new facility. And then following submission, review and inspection, we can get approval as early as in the second half of 2027. So, we have a delay. We reported this last quarter, but we are currently on track. As for your second question, the CPT code, Barry, do you want to address it?

To my knowledge, there is no publicly available information regarding any update on a -- to a Category 1 CPT code.

The next question comes from Josh Jennings with TD Cowen.

And Barry. I wanted to just touch on the updated MSA with Vericel. Can you just -- any additional details you can share just on the changes to revenue recognition? Is the major update that you'll be -- the recognizing of revenue for the development program that's been expanded for blast and friction injuries and potentially extending the shelf life of NexoBrid. And then the second question is just on the -- any updates to the path for the DFU indication in the clinical development program there.

Josh, good to speak to you. So let me speak about the BARDA economics and its strategic importance. So as mentioned, in April, Vericel was awarded a 10-year BARDA contract that is valued at up to $197 million. It is covering NexoBrid procurement, vendor-managed inventory, U.S.-based manufacturing readiness, next-generation formulation development and the potential blast and trauma expansion. It's a large. It's a multiyear framework agreement with several components. So, I understand the appetite for more precision. We are currently not in a position to share additional detail. It reflects confidentiality obligations to Vericel as well as the fact that several elements of the program remain subject to further FDA feedback, which could affect the scope of development and work required. What is concrete today is that the MSA is signed. The first development program, the blast injury, pain friction injuries is underway, and Vericel expects about $6 million of BARDA procurement revenue in the second half. Additional elements, including the room temperature stable formulation, the U.S.-based manufacturing readiness, -- these are areas that we are now in discussions with Vericel and BARDA regarding the scope, timing, technical requirements and potential implementation pathway. So, this is the maximum we can share right now. And as I said, we are about to begin recognizing revenue from that program in the second half of 2026. If this is good enough, I'm moving to the DFU? Okay. So, regarding the DFU, we have constructive discussions with the FDA and EMA. We got feedback. We are aligned on a DFU protocol. You can see the highlight of the protocol. It is attached to our corporate deck. And we plan to initiate the study in the fourth quarter of 2026. This Phase II DFU study is expected to enroll 50 patients. It's a randomized trial, 1:1 design, EscharEx versus placebo. And the primary endpoint is something that EscharEx is very good at time to complete debridement -- so we see it as a trial, which is not that complicated. As I said to the previous question that I asked by RK, we plan to approach the FDA after the value readout and then to determine what would be required to pursue approval for that indication as well.

The next question comes from Jeff Jones with Oppenheimer.

One point of clarification on the BARDA contract with Vericel. You noted that Vericel planning to receive $6 million in BARDA revenue in 2H. How then does that align with the $14 million to $15 million in BARDA revenue that you guys are projecting for 2026? Is that dependent on some of these other pieces that are on negotiation? And then in regards to NexoBrid, looking ahead into '26 and '27, how do we think about revenue given the facility now doesn't look to be coming online until 2H '27?

Okay. Jeff, good to have you on. So as for the first question, you gave there a number that I'm not familiar with, which is the 14. The 14 is not exclusively by BARDA. We have additional government-related agreements, one of them you are familiar with, which is the Department of War. So, expect some news there as well. The agreement with -- the MSA agreement with BARDA includes a few components. As I said, I cannot give you at this stage, used to confidentiality obligations, I cannot give you all the components. Having said that, the first program, which is development of blast and friction burn indication is on its way. Additional components are currently discussed and negotiated. As for the procurement, -- we -- MediWound expects to benefit from the procurement that BARDA is -- has with Vericel. It's not one-to-one. We have the transfer prices with Vericel. Nothing really is disclosed at this stage. But when you speak about the amount of development services, BARDA agreement, it contains a few components and not only one.

Great.

This is the first sentence -- first question. As for the second question, Hani, do you want to address the manufacturing facility delay?