Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

Immunomedics, Inc. (NASDAQ:IMMU)

F2Q13 Earnings Call

February 8, 2013 10:00 AM ET

Executives

Gerard Gorman – SVP, Finance and CFO

Cynthia Sullivan – President and CEO

David Goldenberg – Chairman, Chief Scientific Officer and Chief Medical Officer

Analysts

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Dan Burns [ph] – Brean Capital

Dan Burns – Brean Capital

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Operator

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to Immunomedics, Inc. Second Quarter Fiscal 2013 Financial Results Call. As a reminder, this call is being recorded. Today it’s Friday 8, February, 2013. With us on the call this morning are Dr. David Goldenberg, Chairman, Chief Scientific Officer and Chief Medical Officer; Cynthia Sullivan, President and CEO; Gerard Gorman, Senior VP, Finance and CFO.

I would now like to turn the conference over to Gerard Gorman, Chief Financial Officer of Immunomedics. Please go ahead.

Gerard Gorman

Thank you. Good morning and welcome to our earnings call. Thanks for participating in today’s call. I’ll begin with a summary of our current financial condition. Cynthia Sullivan, our President and CEO, will follow with the progress we’ve made during the past quarter in both our business development activities and in our clinical programs. And finally, Dr. Goldenberg will discuss additional pre-clinical and clinical developments before we open up the call for questions and answers.

Before we begin, I’d like to remind everyone that during this call, we’ll be making forward-looking statements made pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements may involve significant risks and uncertainties, and actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied on the call. For factors that could cause such differences, please refer to our regulatory filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission; most recently, our annual report for the year-ended June 30, 2012.

Now let me start with the financials. I hope everyone has had a chance to review the financial results we released yesterday afternoon. The earnings report is available on our company website at www.immunomedics.com.

Total revenues for the second quarter of fiscal year 2013, which ended December 31, 2012, were $0.8 million, as compared to total revenues of $29.7 million for the same quarter last fiscal year. The decrease of $28.9 million this quarter was primarily the result of $28.4 million of non-recurring license fee revenue from an amendment to the licensing agreement with UCB during the second quarter of the fiscal year 2012. The amendment provided UCB the flexibility to sublicense epratuzumab, upon our consent, to a third party for non-cancer indications in certain territories. There was no licensing fee revenue recorded for this quarter.

A net loss attributable to our stockholders for this quarter was $5.4 million, or $0.07 per basic share. This compares to net income attributable to stockholders of $20.7 million, or $0.27 per basic share, for the same quarter in fiscal 2012. The $26.1 million decrease in net income this quarter resulted from the non-recurring license fee revenues from the UCB licensing amendment in 2011, which is partially offset by the $2.5 million of insurance proceeds from business interruption claims received during the fiscal 2013 quarter.

For the first half of fiscal year 2013, total revenues were $1.9 million and a net loss attributable to our stockholders was $12.8 million, or $0.17 per basic share. This compares to total revenues of $30.8 million and net income attributable to our stockholders of $15.6 million, or $0.21 per basic share, for the same period last year. The $28.9 million decrease in revenues this period, as well as the $28.4 million decrease in net income, was primarily due to the non-recurring license fee revenue from the UCB sublicensing arrangement.

The company has no long-term debt and as of December 31, 2012, we had $21.4 million in cash and cash equivalents. We believe we have sufficient funds to continue our operations and the research and development programs for at least the next 12 months, after taking into consideration a reduction or delay of certain planned discretionary spending, if necessary.

In addition to monitoring our operations closely however, we plan to continue our viewing sources of financing which may include potential payments from partners, licensing arrangements or other financing alternatives in order to support our future Phase III programs of clivatuzumab in pancreatic cancer.

This summarizes our financial results for the second quarter of fiscal year 2013. I’ll now turn the floor over to Cindy.

Cynthia Sullivan

Thank you, Gerry, and good morning, everyone. As always I’m pleased to have this opportunity to share with you the progress we’ve made during the past quarter in both our business developments activities and in our clinical programs.

On the business development side, UCB continues to review opportunities with regards to sublicensing epratuzumab in certain territories. And at this time we cannot communicate details of this progress. We’re pleased that soon after the oncology rights for epratuzumab have been returned to us, we are able to complete a collaboration agreement with Algeta for the development of epratuzumab for targeted delivery of their proprietary thorium-227 alpha-pharmaceutical payload.

We believe this agreement is a win-win since it broadens the oncology application of epratuzumab without encumbering further developments of the products other oncology formulations namely unlabelled and non-alpha-emitter-conjugated epratuzumab. Algeta is a leader in alpha-pharmaceutical therapies and we look forward to collaborating with them to explore the potential of thorium-227 conjugated epratuzumab.

As noted in our last earnings call, we continue to make progress with licensing opportunities for our diverse pipeline of product candidates and platform technologies with multiple companies. And we look forward to recording these events as they occur. These business development activities are very important to us. Payments from new and current partners are a key source of revenue to support our R&D and clinical programs including the Phase III program for clivatuzumab in pancreatic cancer, that Gerry just mentioned.

To that end, I am particularly pleased to note that our antibody drug conjugate programs and our DOCK-AND-LOCK platform technology have received considerable attention by potential partners. We’ve held a number of meetings with pharmaceutical and biotech companies focused on these two opportunities. Of course in addition to these licensing efforts and the potential of sublicensing of epratuzumab by UCB, we will be opportunistic in pursuing other financing alternatives.

David will talk more about our three antibody drug conjugate programs currently in the clinics and our advances with our DNL technology in a few minutes. I’ll now briefly discuss our clinical developments.

We’re pleased that the Phase Ib trial of the yttrium-90-labeled clivatuzumab continues to enroll pancreatic cancer patients with two or more prior therapies ahead of schedule. At the end of January, 50 patients were enrolled into the trial with 45 patients receiving therapy. We plan to complete enrollment in the next few weeks. In addition, we also plan to submit an abstract from this study for presentations at medical conferences this spring.

The faster than expected enrollments confirms the significant unmet needs for therapy for pancreatic cancer patients who have received two or more prior therapies, as well as the confidence their treating oncologists have in the safety and activity of our radio-labeled clivatuzumab. This is validated that this is feasible and it also validates our strategy to position clivatuzumab as the potential therapy for these patients.

As disclosed in previous conference calls in preparation of a registration trial for clivatuzumab, protocol designed in well under way and a clinical research organization has been identified. The Phase III clinical trials will enroll the same patient populations as the Phase Ib and is expected to begin in the second half of the calendar year pending a positive outcome from deferred trials and available funding.

Patient enrollment for the two Phase III EMBODY trials of epratuzumab or CD22 antibody in patients with lupus is ongoing. To recap, the EMBODY studies are randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, global trials to confirm the clinical efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe SLE. Each study is expected to enroll about 800 patients with approximately 276 sites currently enrolling patients for both studies.

Our partner UCB has indicated that top line results from these studies are expected in the first half of calendar year 2014. In addition, results from an open-label extension study in which patients with moderate-to-severe lupus who had previously enrolled in the ALLEVIATE trials were presented at the 2012 American College of Rheumatology Annual Scientific Meeting. Results from the single-arm extension study shows that continuous cycles of epratuzumab therapy maintained improvements or further improved the lupus disease activity of patients over a timeframe of approximately four years.

Also there was a decrease in corticosteroid dosing and the tolerable safety profile with no new safety concerns identified. Patients also reported clinically meaningful improvements in health related quality of life, that were sustained over approximately four years of treatment and we’re gratified with these results and for these SLE patients.

Moving on to veltuzumab, we reported updated results from the Phase I/II study in relapsed immune thrombocytopenic for ITT in an oral presentation at the 2012 ASH Meeting. The overall objective response rate was 50% among 42 valuable patients with 12 patients or 29% having a complete response, which means that their platelet counts rose to or above 100,000 per microliter.

With regard to veltuzumab in oncology indications, a multi-center open-label Phase I study of single agent veltuzumab therapy is ongoing to evaluate two different subcutaneous dosing schedules in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The overall disease control rates which includes partial response and stable disease presented at the December ASH conference from 18 assessable patients was 83% with 17% reporting a partial response as their best response.

This is important when one considers that CLL is not conventionally treated with any single agent, but always with combination therapies. Hence the activity of veltuzumab by itself is very encouraging and suggests that it now needs to be combined with other standard drugs for CLL.

David will now discuss additional pre-clinical and clinical developments.

David Goldenberg

Good morning. As Cindy mentioned, we have made considerable progress in our clivatuzumab trial in late stage pancreatic cancer patients. The difficulty in treating such patients went relapsed after at least two prior therapies is best appreciated with the recent results announced that the ASCO GI Conference that nab-paclitaxel or ABRAXANE in combination with gemcitabine improved survival over gemcitabine alone by 1.8 months in the frontline setting, with the patients that not received any prior therapy.

We are pleased that new agents for treating this disease are showing a survival advantage. And hopefully this will increase the pool of patients surviving and eating additional therapy options. But obviously whether there are sufficient patients reaching a third line status and can then tolerate another therapy is the challenge we face.

Our current trial has been very informative. First, if you are indeed following such therapies as ABRAXANE and FOLFIRINOX, more patients now available for third line therapy. Second, we have noted that the majority tolerate our therapy quite well. And in fact, we are seeing some capable – these patients being capable of getting repeated clivatuzumab therapies, even including four therapy cycles.

Obviously the more cycles we can give, the longer the survival. So we are optimistic that regiments containing our products will have a survival benefit. But it is still too early to analyze this or if the arm of gemcitabine combined with clivatuzumab is more effective with clivatuzumab given alone. We have gratified that the trial enrolled so fast and will be completed in February with safety and survival analogies completed two to three months thereafter.

With planning as Cindy mentioned to provide the results of this private future medical meetings and we are quite convinced now that there is a need for product like ours once patients have exhausted the usual cytotoxic therapy, and eventually also earlier we hope in the management of patients with this ominous cancer.

Our efforts in the last quarter, also we have focused on advancing our antibody drug conjugates or ADCs. We have three such products in clinical trials and all are making progress. What differentiates us from other companies with ADC? Almost exclusively the others rely on super toxic drugs conjugated to tumor targeting being antibodies which results usually in three to four drug molecules attached to the antibody. We have opted to use less toxic drugs attached to our antibodies in a higher ratio such as six to seven drug molecules on a single antibody.

We believe we can charge more drug to tumor with the less toxicity to the patient with this approach. So far, in our experience with Milatuzumab, our anti-CA antibody conjugated with the active metabolite of irinotecan, SN-38, we had been able to give very high doses of the ADC with minimal toxicity. And we have in fact the first evidence of activity in metastatic colonic cancer after the first few patients having given several doses.

The trial is still on our way and we have not reached the maximum tolerated dose, so we much expand our experience. This will be done also by opening another trial with the same ADCs in similarly advanced colorectal cancer patients. But giving more intensive and higher dosing schedule. This new trial will begin shortly. Our second ADC involves the same drug SN-38 attached to our anti-Trop-2 antibody, RS7, which is an internalizing antibody that fights to many different cancers including colorectal, pancreas, stomach, esophageal, breast, lung, prostate, bladder or various – and kidney cancers.

The first patient is undergoing therapy so it’s too early to assess efficacy. But the patient has received several doses as shown no more than transient Grade 1 gastrointestinal toxicity plus tolerating this ADC well at the initial results. This patient has pancreatic cancer and is in fact a survivor of prior therapy with our clivatuzumab product. We believe that our first investigational agent clivatuzumab enable the patient to perceive to participate in a trial with our second therapeutic. In this case an ADC, that also targets pancreatic cancers over the different antibody.

This kind of combination therapy is in fact covered and in fact we are prosecuting and which we are confident will issue [ph]. Our third ADC is intended for therapy of hematopoietic tumors such as multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Patients with myeloma have been enrolled and we are just beginning to enroll in the other two indications.

Here the ADC consists of our anti-CD74 antibody Milatuzumab conjugated to a well known drug doxorubicin. Because Milatuzumab internalizes so rapidly into the tumor cells, we believe that an effective drug like doxorubicin is an good choice for these hematopoietic tumors. We are assuming those escalations in this trial. While mentioning Milatuzumab as part of an ADC product, I would like to take a few moments to share my beliefs that this anti-CD74 antibody, which we are the first to take into clinical trials has shown potential activity as a naked antibody in two other areas.

We showed in an animal model that this antibody can prevent acute graft-versus-host disease which is a major and sometimes lethal complications of allogeneic hematopoietic stem transplantation which is a life saving procedure in many lymphoma and leukemia patients. So as few therapeutic options are available to the treatment of graft-versus-host disease, we are advancing this into clinical trials in this difficult indication by sharing costs with the major academic institution, hoping to begin a clinical trial in the next months.

Treating graft-versus-host disease is not very different than treating a normal autoimmune disease. So we have been studying Milatuzumab’s prospects in this area also especially since we have experience in autoimmune disease therapy with epratuzumab and veltuzumab. As discussed trials conducted by Immunomedics, but of course many of our other products are under clinical investigation by independent clinical investigators and study groups, which helps us learn their safety and efficacy in different indications in trial studies.

Indeed epratuzumab is still of interest in oncology since the Southwestern Oncology of Group or SWOG of the National Cancer Institute reported at the American Society of Hematology’s 2012 Meetings that the complete response rate when epratuzumab is combined with chemotherapy in adults with relapse acute lymphoblastic leukemia or ALL improved from 17% for the drugs alone, studies in the prior trial by then to 50% when epratuzumab was added to the drugs. Also there was a survival increase from a medium of thee months for the drugs found in a previous study to medium of four months with the addition of epratuzumab.

The prognosis for adult ALL patients relapsing after prior therapies is very dismal. So here again we are encouraged with a potential improvement when epratuzumab is added to chemotherapy in adults with relapsed/refractory ALL. At ASH 2012, we also disclosed for the first time that our DOCK-AND-LOCK platform technology to make second generation, bispecific antibodies targeting T-cells tumors which is now being researched by many other companies as a promising new immunotherapy of cancer.

In our presentation, we showed that we can make such bispecific antibody modules very quickly and that we may be able to improve their half life in the blood. Perhaps of the aiding the need to administer these agents by continuous infusion via into catheters [ph] over four weeks as this is being practiced now. Our initial studies in animal models involve non-Hodgkin lymphoma but we are studying this technology for the immune therapy of solid tumors.

In summary, we are focusing our efforts on clinical trials with clivatuzumab in pancreatic cancer and our three ADCs in solid tumors and hematopoietic cancers. The pre-clinical work focuses on the immunotherapy to exploit that the opportunities present to us by our proprietary DNL technology, giving us a next generation of bispecific antibodies for both the therapy of cancer and autoimmune diseases.

We thank you for joining us today and we will now take your questions. Conference operator, please begin the Q&A session.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Boris Peaker from Oppenheimer. Your line is open.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Good morning and thank you for taking my questions. My initial question, I just wanted to focus on some financial issues. In your recent filings, you’ve noted that a decision in your auction rate security, a litigation against Bank of America is anticipated in March of 2013. Can you comment on what the potential outcomes of that are and specifically against the most interested investors, how much money could this potentially add to your balance sheet if you win?

Gerard Gorman

Sure. Well you are correct to say we did update it in the 10-Q. The arbitration hearing began in September of 2008 and it is scheduled to resume in early this year, this calendar year. All arguments are scheduled to occur this month in February and the final panel decision is in March 2013.

We are seeking relief for $2.9 million difference between the par value of our auction rate securities and the amount we received when we sold the auction rate securities on the secondary market. We also requested consequential damages, punitive damages and other relief. As with any legal proceeding, there can be no assurance that we will prevail in this matter. And at this point, we can’t say exactly how the panel will decide, so I can’t comment on our balance sheet treatment at the time that the decision was made.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Okay. So but that’s helpful, just gives us just a kind of the sense of the size of this outcome. I was just curious I mean there is – truly there is a lot of similar lawsuits ongoing right now, given the financial scenario few years ago, just curious if you could – if you know what the more common outcomes maybe are, not necessarily speculating on your own outcome?

Gerard Gorman

Yes, I really hesitate to try to talk about other people’s outcomes. There have been a number that has been publicly disclosed, particularly with the states of New Jersey and New York. However I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to – for Immunomedics comments on other people’s settlements or outcomes.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Okay. Now certainly another question on the financial perspective is on UCB sublicensing. Are there any updates there in terms of timing or just in general progress of discussions?

Gerard Gorman

Yes. You see, we have of course we have discussed the fact that we are in discussions with UCB, but we – all we can say right now is that we will be entitled to an additional payment or payments when a sublicensing deal is consummated.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Okay. And you’ve mentioned also in your opening remarks that there are some discretionary spending and that there is a possibility to trend that spending if necessary. Could you comment on what is the kind of the magnitude of this discretionary spending, and if such cuts are needed to be implemented on what programs would it effect?

Gerard Gorman

Well as we’ve mentioned our intention is to secure financing for our business plans preferably through potential payments from partners, licensing arrangements or other financing alternatives. However there is no assurance that this will happen, and as a contingency plan we’re prepared to reduce our discretionary spending. We don’t discuss the cost of specific programs right – so right now we’re not prepared to discuss any potential reductions in those programs.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Okay, but I am just curious in terms of just the overall magnitude of – I am sure if you have worked out some kind of a lower burn rate budget, I am curious are we talking about 10% cut in operating expenses, talking 15%, 20% like what is some possibilities?

Gerard Gorman

Well our goal as we’ve stated in the past is so at least to be able to have one year’s worth of cash on the book at all times. Right now our forward-looking burn rate as we’ve mentioned in our 10-Q is $22 million to $24 million. So in that burn rate anticipate any cuts. And as we’ve said that we do intend to continue to look at opportunities for financing from our partners, from licensing arrangements and other financing alternatives.

If none of those were to occur, we would have to as part of our contingency plan cut expenses, but there is no immediate intent right now to cut any particular expenses. Right now we’re in good shape.

Boris Peaker – Oppenheimer

Okay, thanks. Gerry thanks for clarification and thank you very much for taking my questions.

Gerard Gorman

Okay.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from Gene Mack from Brean Capital. Your line is open.

Dan Burns [ph] – Brean Capital

This is actually Dan Burns in for Gene. I have one question with the thorium-labeled epratuzumab, when would be getting those trials started?

Cynthia Sullivan

The development is actually the responsibility of Algeta. They were planning to have a clinical program sometime during the year of 2014. So right its pre-clinical work on that agent.

Dan Burns – Brean Capital

Okay, thanks. That’s all I have.

Cynthia Sullivan

Okay.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from Ryan Martins from Lazard Capital. Your line is open.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Thanks for taking the questions. First one relating to clivatuzumab, the ongoing trial, when I look at the inclusion exclusion criteria it requires patient to – who is endorsed to be estimated to have a survival of at least three months. Do you expect this to be necessary condition going into your pivotal trials? And secondly, is this – I mean what proportion of third line patients would you say that they would expect to have an overall survival of at least three months?

David Goldenberg

Let me address that. This is a sort of a standard inclusion criteria for many of our trials. And at the time the answer would disease, general condition is such that the investigator believes they could fill that criteria. We have seen over the years now in studying pancreas cancer that even though with patients present where they are in generally good at health, they could deteriorate in a question of weeks. And so it is very hard in this population to be stay with any kind of competence like you would in many other diseases that they have a three month life expectancy.

So I think that sort of a generality from many trials and in order to answer, they should not – they should be ambulant, they should have other criteria of functions, functional status and in that way they consider that they have at least the three months survival. As a point of fact, I am trying to get information on what the median survival is for patients of that setting. And it’s very difficult even for the opinion leaders to think that more than two months is a possibility. So if they are surviving more than two months in that setting it seems like they are doing very well. So I have to give a caveat that although we have that entry criteria, that’s carried over for many other tumors and trials and based upon the function of the patients, the investigator – but when you said that patient can survive long enough along to go through our therapies.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Okay. And then Dr. Goldenberg, how do you expect that to change with addition of the use of ABRAXANE upfront assuming epratuzumab [ph]?

David Goldenberg

With ABRAXANE?

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Yes, with ABRAXANE.

David Goldenberg

That’s ABRAXANE. So I said in my remarks, I hope that the pool of patients will increase that means I hope they have better survival because the more patients that survive. Well we know now they are cured so and it was a modest increase with ABRAXANE, but we have seen I mean the first challenge we had and we’ve discussed this with our investigators is there – will patients be able to tolerate another therapy if there is fourth line. And will it be able to accrue and will be patients be able to treated more than once?

And to everyone’s surprise the answer is yes. Not only is it yes, it’s a resounding yes because in the history of this company I have never seen a trial approved as this trial did which was totally contrary to the expectations of every investigator. We felt we would have to go searching for patients that would be third or fourth line coming into this trial. And we are so overwhelmed that we have to disappoint the investigators very soon and stop the trial because it’s fluctuating enrollment. So thanks to the improvements being made in the management of pancreatic cancer, we’re seeing more patients living more and coming into this advanced state after multiple therapies.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Okay. And in terms of the sub-Q veltuzumab on the oncology side, in CLL specifically, I know you’ve indicated, you know this would probably be used in combination with another drug in CLL and (inaudible) does a couple of key process of drugs here in development right now, so if we can take another drugs and PKA [ph] Kinase, I mean do you see sub-Q veltuzumab been to logistic with one on the other or maybe – it doesn’t matter for relief [ph]?.

David Goldenberg

Well if we look at the experience with rituximab, the answer is yes and although these new agents are extremely exciting and it’s obviously interest of Wall Street as well as clinicians, my impression is, is they still need a combination with rituximab to get the best results. So since we think we’re offering a better option to rituximab, we think there would be certainly be a role for veltuzumab with these newer agents but more importantly also with those that are established in the management of CLL.

We were worried about two things. we were worried that it would to be difficult to improve when you put patients on single agents like a new investigative agents as a substitute so to speak for rituximab because rituximab by itself is not a therapy for CLL. So we were worried about that and we worried whether or not the subcutaneous and lower doses we were giving compared to rituximab and veltuzumab would really show activities. And we were grateful that the results as presented in ASH show that our concern was not necessary. It actually is active. It’s active at a much lower dose than rituximab and veltuzumab, it’s active in a subcutaneous formulation.

It’s active by itself but it clearly needs to be combined with other standard therapy to give the best benefits to the patients.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Okay. And then I know you spoke about the bispecific antibodies, what are your gaining steps in order to make it a combination of these can be developed subcutaneously and not necessarily do a continuous verification?

David Goldenberg

Well this is very interesting that you bring it up, but I mentioned it we did show it at the ASH that we can get the subcutaneous formulation and show that it works in our animal model as good as the intravenous application. We are still, I mean we showed that the structure with DNL and our ASH presentation as we that we think is second generation. We’re still reengineering it somewhat and we might even have it more improved construct to give it a longer half life that we presented at ASH.

That will won’t be completed I felt in the next month and that would give us a final molecule in this bispecific antibody retargeting of T-cells that we can start manufacturing to take forward into the clinics. But as I said in my remarks, our proof of principles in the immunologic area, because we’ve seen the results from other companies like Micromet that was acquired by Amgen, so we have a stand in to compare it to and that leaves us then how to make this more effective for a solid tumors, where I really think the challenge is.

We have a number of agents both in Immunomedics as well as many other companies that are very interesting for hematopoietic tools including leukemia and I just talked about ALL with just something very simple like epratuzumab added to drugs. Our drug conjugated epratuzumab, the SN-38 which I didn’t discuss but which we published on that probably is also very active in ALL. And even our regular label epratuzumab, there is already clinical data that was mentioned at ASH or will be mentioned in the future where we’re seeing very nice activity in this ALL.

So CD22 is a very good target in ALL and so there are lot of agents other than this bispecific antibody approach for hematopoietic disease. The real challenge that no one yet has shown a successful of is in solid tumors by redirecting T-cells, and we hope we will make some progress and we will come up into the forefront in that field and that’s my open expectation, and certainly something that we’re working very hard on but that is not yet into clinic. Our focus is really – and someone asked with the first question, where is your focus in terms of your financial resources. The answer is very simple. We have enough money to continue to finishing the clivatuzumab trial which we now evaluated organized Phase III and take forward those three drug conjugates which I am very excited about.

And the only question about financing that concerns me is how do we put it altogether, so when we get good results in clivatuzumab, we’ve been organizing and implemented Phase III and if you get good results in this trial, I am confident we will be able to do that.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

And maybe just couple of final ones. On clivatuzumab just close the loop, when we see the data at medical meeting, is that going to be either from all patients in both cohorts or either is going to be a number of patients out of the total?

David Goldenberg

It’s going to be the total 50 patients as in minimum and it’s going to compare the two arms, one with and without gemcitabine. And it’s going to show us survival data at given periods after which we are already looking at such data. We have already been in the process of filing abstracts. We have a good idea on how its performing but it’s too early to meet and make a pronouncement because we don’t have all the patients analyzed and if they continue to show off we’ve seen up till now, I’d be very happy person and I think pancreatic cancer patients will also.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Okay. And maybe one final one just to Gerry. Gerry, you talked about financing options, one of them you mentioned was payments from partners. Can you talk about what kind of payments you are expecting at least this year from partners that are expected?

Gerard Gorman

Okay. One of the payments from partners could be the payment for sublicensing that we’ve talked about, that we would get when UCB finds a sublicensing partner. We’ve not talked about timing of that or the magnitude of that payment but that is a payment that we would hopefully get as soon as they sublicense.

As regarding any other milestone payments from partners, we do not disclose those payments at any time because of confidentiality with those partners in the agreements that we’ve signed with them. So unfortunately we don’t have a lot to talk about what milestones might occur or how much they are, when they occur, what they are tied to or anything.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

And the ones with UCB sublicensing, is that certain proportion of the economic that you get or how is that sit on it?

Gerard Gorman

Well certain portion of the economics, you mean of a new sublicensing deal?

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

(inaudible) deal, what – does it manage to get a some proportion of that or…?

Gerard Gorman

Well we haven’t disclosed what we would get when and if they sign a sublicensing deal. What we’ve said is that we do have our percentage required for them to sign up a partner and we do expect to get an additional payment at that time. That to be payment or payments, we have not disclosed what that might be.

Ryan Martins – Lazard Capital

Okay, thanks for taking the questions.

Operator

Thank you. At this time, I would like to hand the conference back to Cynthia Sullivan for her closing remarks.

Cynthia Sullivan

Thank you and we thank all of you very much for joining us this morning. On behalf of the entire management team, I’d also like to thank you for your continued support and your interest in Immunomedics.

Operator

Thank you and that does conclude today’s conference call. You may now disconnect. Thank you and have a great day.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: Immunomedics' CEO Discusses F2Q13 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
This Transcript
All Transcripts