Oric Pharmaceuticals Inc at Guggenheim Healthcare Talks Biotechnology Conference Transcript

The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Welcome, guys. Thanks for joining us. So Dominic, just a high-level question to start out with. You guys have three clinical stage oncology programs now in the pipeline and each of them pursuing different targets and pathways. Can you just remind us of your general pipeline strategy and how you select your programs?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Sounds good. Thanks, Dominic. So yes, let's maybe start out with talking about ORIC-114, as you mentioned, your EGFR/HER2 exon 20 inhibitor. We saw some initial Phase 1 data at ESMO recently, last year. Just remind us of the key takeaways, and how is the molecule position in each of our exon 20 landscape based on that? REFINITIV STREETEVENTS | www.refinitiv.com | Contact Us consent of Refinitiv. 'Refinitiv' and the Refinitiv logo are registered trademarks of Refinitiv and its affiliated companies. FEBRUARY 07, 2024 / 3:00PM, ORIC.OQ - Oric Pharmaceuticals Inc at Guggenheim Healthcare Talks Biotechnology Conference

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Great. And you mentioned the Blueprint program. So the exon 20 category is a little bit shifting right now. And we saw the J&J papillon trial readout positively, which will probably move amivantamab into first-line patients, treatment of first line exon 20 patients. You mentioned Blueprint. So maybe talk a bit more about where you see the greatest unmet medical need right now and the opportunity for the drug in the landscape.

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Yeah, good segue to the next question. So how close are you to identifying a recommended Phase 2 dose? And talk about your expansion cohort plans and what are you looking at there.

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : And these expansion cohorts, are they talk a bit more about the patient makeup? Are they pretreated? Are the less pretreated? And what is the bar in each of these three cohorts in your opinion in terms of efficacy?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : And is it the same for the atypicals and the HER2 space, or is it different there?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Just sort of the efficacy bar in the atypical mutations offset in the HER2.

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Okay. Great. Perfect. Right, so let's -- excuse me, let's switch gears to ORIC-944, which is your PRC2 inhibitor, as you mentioned. So this is PRC2. First of all, it has two subunits I understand, EZH2 and EED.. First of all, perhaps remind us of the mechanism of action. And what is the mechanistic rationale for pursuing prostate cancer, specifically with ORIC-944?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Great. And then you did, I believe, early this year disclose some very early clinical data from the program. Just remind us of the learnings from that and how that's been progressing?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Great. And as you mentioned, there's a few other programs that are going into prostate cancer, I think the Pfizer programs with the most the best-known peer in a way. First of all, remind us what we know about the Pfizer program and how it reads through to you guys specifically?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Okay, sounds good. So that's where they randomized Phase 2.

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Okay. So that should provide some clear proof-of-concept or additional proof of concept. And then, yeah, perhaps talk about your plans for the Phase 1 combo study. I think you talked about it briefly just now. Is there -- any one of the two or three approved AR inhibitors that is preferred for the combination with 944?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Right. And then remind us what additional clinical data you're planning to share this year and how we should interpret the outcome from that?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Right. And maybe if we -- going back to the Pfizer, the [power supplies] update on the randomized Phase 2, so you did mention they had shown 17 months PFS in Phase 1 single-arm study much higher than the bar. We'll see what they produce in Phase 2. But is there a particular hazard ratio or a PFS differential that you think might be more or less compelling as we look at that Pfizer data and how it translates to your program?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Great. All right. Then maybe in the last few minutes, touching on ORIC-533 and the rest of the pipeline. So just real quick on ORIC-533. You had some data at ASH, just remind us of that program and how you think about it in terms of next steps?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Okay. And then lastly, you also have a preclinical program targeting PLK4. Just remind us what the potential is for that program and how close to a 90 you are?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Right. So it sounds like, in the near term, we'll stay focused on 944 the Pfizer data and in your own update on midyear?

Question: Michael Schmidt - Guggenheim - Analyst : Great. Well, with that, I think we can wrap up. Thank you so much, Dominic and Matt.