Inc. (licensed from Genfleet Therapeutics), InventisBio, Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Sharpe & Dohme LLC, Roche, Shanghai Junshi Biosciences Co., Ltd., Shanghai YingLi Pharmaceutical, Shouyao Holdings (Beijing) Co. Ltd. and Suzhou Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals., BridgeBio Pharma, Inc. and Frontier Medicines each have a dual KRAS(ON/OFF) G12C program in the clinic. There are also several clinical programs directed at KRAS G12D, including those being conducted by Allist Pharmaceuticals, Arvinas, Astellas Pharma Inc., AstraZeneca, Chengdu Hyperway, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Genfleet Therapeutics, Incyte Corporation, Jiangsu Hansoh, Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals Company Ltd, J,iangxi Kerui, Kumquat Biosciences, PAQ Therapeutics, Qilu Pharmaceutical, Quanta Therapeutics, Ranok Therapeutics, Tyligand Bioscience and Verastem Oncology. Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals. In addition, there are a few clinical programs directed at KRAS G12V, including those being conducted by Affini-T Therapeutics, Anocca, ImmuXell, Neowise Biotechnology, and Yingkai Saiwei (Beijing) Biotechnology. Other clinical programs directed at mutant RAS, including pan-RAS or pan-KRAS inhibitors and Plk1 inhibitors, are being conducted, including those by Alaunos Therapeutics, Inc., Alterome, BeOne Medicines (previously known as BeiGene), Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Cardiff Oncology, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Eli Lilly, Elicio Therapeutics, Erasca, GenFleet Therapeutics, Gritstone bio, Inc., Jacobio, Moderna, Inc., Pfizer, Inc., Quanta Therapeutics, RasCal Therapeutics, Shanghai YingLi Pharmaceutical, Silenseed Ltd., Silexion Therapeutics, Treeline Biosciences, and Circio Holding (previously known as Targovax ASA). There are several programs in clinical development targeting SHP2, including those being conducted by Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Etern BioPharma (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., Genhouse Bio Co. Ltd., Hutchmed Ltd., HUYA Bioscience, InnoCare Pharma Ltd., Jacobio Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd., Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., Nanjing Sanhome Pharmaceutical, Navire Pharma, Inc., a BridgeBio company (licensed to Bristol Myers Squibb Company), Novartis AG, Relay Therapeutics, Inc. (licensed to Roche), Shanghai Gopherwood Biotech Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Ringene Biopharma Co., Ltd. The above list includes corporate competitors that we are currently aware of and that are currently conducting clinical trials or marketing in geographies where we currently anticipate conducting clinical trials for our product candidates. However, companies operating in other geographies, smaller companies and companies with earlier stage programs may also prove to be significant competitors. In addition, academic research departments and public and private research institutions may be conducting research on compounds that could prove to be competitive.
Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe effects, are more convenient, have a broader label, are marketed more effectively, are reimbursed or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other marketing approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Even if our product candidates achieve marketing approval, they may be priced at a significant premium over competitive products if any have been approved by then, resulting in reduced competitiveness.
Third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapid technological change. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change, we may be unable to compete effectively. Technological advances or products developed by our competitors may render our product candidates obsolete, less competitive or not economical.
Some of our programs focus on the discovery and development of “Beyond Rule of 5” small molecules. Such molecules can be associated with longer development timelines and greater costs compared to traditional small molecule drugs. Our “Beyond Rule of 5” product candidates may take longer to develop and/or manufacture relative to traditional small molecules, and we may not be able to formulate “Beyond Rule of 5” candidates for certain routes of administration.
We enlist various technologies and capabilities that give us chemical access to challenging sites on target proteins that generally are not accessible using conventional small molecule drug discovery approaches. For each target, we consider the specific structural, physico-chemical, functional and dynamic properties of the target and deploy the approach or approaches that appear most likely to yield viable development candidates. The “Rule of 5” is a set of criteria used in pharmaceutical drug development to determine whether chemical compounds have certain physico-chemical properties that make them likely to be orally active drugs in humans. In some instances, the compounds we discover and develop are traditional small molecules (i.e., less than 500 daltons) with properties that generally satisfy conventional pharmaceutical “Rule of 5” criteria, while in other cases, they are larger (i.e., more than 500 daltons) “Beyond Rule of 5” (BRo5) compounds that do not satisfy these criteria. For example, our mTORC1 program and our RAS(ON) inhibitors each include pursuit of BRo5 compounds.
BRo5 compounds have been successfully pursued by many pharmaceutical companies. Examples of BRo5 compounds include natural products and semi-synthetic derivatives, peptidomimetics, macrocycles and degraders. However, larger molecular weight small molecules often cannot be formulated into orally absorbed drugs and also often face solubility, potency, bioavailability and stability challenges, among others. In addition, many of the commonly used predictive and other drug development tools are designed specifically for traditional “Rule of 5” small molecule drugs rather than BRo5 molecules, contributing to the difficulty and uncertainty of development of BRo5 compounds.