Hello, welcome to the Life Sciences Investor Forum. On behalf of OTC Markets and our co-host, Zacks Small Cap Research, we are very pleased you have joined us. The next presentation of the day is from Coiled Therapeutics PLC. Please note, you may submit questions for the presenter at any time. You can also view a company's availability for a one-on-one meeting by clicking "Book a Meeting." At this point, I'm very pleased to welcome Sotirios Stergiopoulos, Executive Chairman, and Sridhar Vempati, Chief Executive Officer of Coiled Therapeutics PLC, which trades on the OTCQB Venture Market under the symbol COTXF, and on the AIM under the symbol COIL. Welcome, Sotirios and Sridhar. Thank you, Greg, for having us. Wonderful. First of all, thank you everyone for the opportunity to be able to tell you a little bit about Coiled Therapeutics. I would like to first introduce a little bit about both myself and Sridhar, and Coiled Therapeutics. Myself, I'm Sotirios Stergiopoulos. I'm Executive Chairman of Coiled Therapeutics, physician by background, industry experience of over 20 years. I'll like to actually have Sridhar say a little bit about himself. Nice to meet you all. I'm Sridhar Vempati, CEO of Coiled Therapeutics. Background is PhD in oncology, I have over 20 years of experience in drug discovery, finance, business development, and now full-time as an R&D person, and also as a CEO for Coiled. Nice to meet you all. Thank you, Sridhar. Just a quick background. The company went public in the AIM market on the London Stock Exchange as of March 27, 2026. We have a very strong board, as well, with Jean Duvall, Stephen West, Andrew Dean, and current addition, also Craig Tooman. We have a very strong management as well as board to help us move forward. Let's first discuss a little bit about Coiled. I'll give you more of a general view about the company and our CEO, Sridhar Vempati, will give you much more specifics about it. When you look at the potential for investment in Coiled, you'd actually wonder to yourself, why Coiled? What is it about Coiled that would be interesting for most investors? One of the things that's really important here is obviously this is a novel target, a target that is not really worked on by other companies. We know that there is a first and pretty much only at this time, with a significant amount of years ahead of experience for many others to be able to join at some point. We clearly have a significant advantage. I think the thing that really speaks for itself is what is the target doing and what does it mean? Right now, we are already in the clinic. We are in a dose I escalation, a phase I dose escalation, looking to go into a phase I-B expansion, quite soon. Sridhar will give you some info about that. Already in the clinic, we're seeing, based on exposure levels, we've already started seeing some real effect, on top of the fact that extremely good safety data so far. We are at a cohort that we had found 80% clinical benefit rate. Really what we're seeing here is significant data in already not yet fully matured dose. For us, this is already encouraging. Right now, TAC3, we really just have an advantage and being in the clinic really sets us apart from everyone else. This is a biologically validated oncology targeted pathway. It's interesting because DepMap had actually looked at this from the Broad Institute, and already we're seeing that the independent DepMap analysis does really confirm that TAC3 is a selective tumor dependency. We're seeing quite a uniqueness to the target, and we're really ahead of almost everyone else. One of the most important aspects of this is that there is brain penetration. What does that actually mean? Based on what we've seen so far, we do have the ability of crossing the blood-brain barrier, and an exposure rate of visceral of the body below the neck and to the neck of close to one-to-one, which obviously is quite an advantage, especially as we're looking to go into brain metastases. We've already seen pre-clinically some strong data, but we also believe that will translate into the clinic. This is a small molecule, which obviously means that CMC is quite simple compared to many of the other modalities out there. We are really looking at its ability to do multiple things, and where the mode of action will be explained by Sridhar a little bit more. I think some of the highlights here is its ability to really have an effect on the immune system and allow the ability of the immune system to play a role in the control of the tumor, if not also the shrinking of tumor. We are looking at a monotherapy as well as a combination strategy We believe that based on the data that we have already, and the safety data, it'll be a very strong, I would say, partner for a combination, and that's something that we're looking to do. So far, we've done this before in our previous company prior to going in to this private public vehicle. Really, for us, we've done this before with an MLL-menin inhibitor program, creating a company called BioNia Fusion, which went to NASDAQ, and exceeded a $1 billion market capitalization. We've already been able to show that the model that we have works, not only that, but as management, we've been able to put GBP 1 million between myself and Sridhar into this program, and this is how much we believe in it ourselves. We have a strategic engagement program that we strongly believe in, and we think that based on already contacts that we have with big pharma, we've had multiple discussions, close to seven to eight at this point, with 5 CDAs currently. We believe that this is an approach that we significantly are going after at this time. We believe based on the clinical program itself and the ability to gather the data that we will, that we will have a very strong data package to be able to present. I think, as we look at what the company is doing, you could see a pipeline in front of you right now, main indications that we've been looking at, really it's ovarian and prostate. To be totally honest, as of October 2025, we went beyond the initial IND, which was triple negative ovarian and endometrial, to all solid tumors. For us, it's really an indication of the preclinical data was so strong, and we believe based on the science that we could be going into some very specific solid programs. As you could see here, we've indicated brain mets, triple negative breast cancer, endometrial. Gastric was a very strong preclinical program, we believe pancreatic can also be a very strong program for us as well. There is another program within the company, but it's a smaller program. It's a secondary program that hasn't been given as much. It's a legacy program that came in from the RTO that we had actually completed, and it was a STAT-6 program, an siRNA program. The approach that we're taking is we're really going after immuno versus oncology. Our phase I trial currently right now, as you could see, we have had some already initial data, as I mentioned before, in a dose of the cohort 4B, what we called 4B before, which was at 80 mg BID. We had 80% clinical benefit rate. Really for us, this is quite unique because the exposure level that we saw was really at a much lower dose than we had seen in the preclinical that we saw that there's still significant room really for improvement there. One of the most important aspects from the patients that we've gotten is that these are patients that have gotten significant amount of therapies prior. They're very heavily pretreated, especially in the indications that we're in. The fact that we were able to show this sort of clinical benefit rate is quite something. Specifically, if you'd seen, there are two indications, especially endometrial, we had seen about 30-something percent regressions already in a patient. It's quite something to see, to be totally honest, in patients that have been given so many therapies already. These are patients that have gone through a lot of treatment and really are just, I would say, worn down. To be able to still, in such lines of therapy, show responses, it's quite something. In fact, in one of our patients, we actually had a PR with the ovarian patient. Honestly, we saw a patient where they'd gone to eight months of therapy. Quite unique, and honestly, we really feel that this is something that has given us significant courage and I would say encouragement to keep going forward. I think one of the most important things, and obviously an endpoint that is most important when you're looking at the phase I, we had no serious adverse events. Honestly, for us, we feel that this is quite a unique opportunity to show already in lower exposures the fact that you can have that kind of response but then absolutely safe. We have a very good, I would say, toxicity profile at this time and truly believe that this is going to differentiate us from many others out there. I'm going to now pass this over to Sridhar who'll get into much more of the nitty-gritty, I would say, and the data that is really key for our program and where we believe we'll have success. Sridhar, do you want to take over? Sure. We are focusing on multiple indications, but our initial discussions with big pharma, we are focusing on a couple of indications that would give us better validation based on our current data. In ovarian cancer, as Sotirios mentioned earlier, we did see good efficacy with tumor reductions across multiple patients. There was one endometrial patient, which also showed 33% reduction in the tumor, which is basically considered a partial response. We are seeing this at an exposure which is still not Where we have seen the maximal exposure or maximal efficacy where we have seen in preclinical. Given that we have not seen any blood tox or liver tox, which basically derails many of these programs, or even the current approved therapies that are out there. They have a lot of heme tox, and that leads to discontinuation of the therapy or interruptions. So far with our drug, we have not seen any of these tox that derails or doesn't allow the patient to be on the drug for a long time. Ovarian cancer is definitely we are focusing because we have already seen efficacy. Prostate is one indication based on our discussions with big pharma and also our preclinical. We have one of the best preclinical data out there for prostate, so we are focusing on that. These are two, we are not going to discontinue on other indications. We will be enrolling few patients into other indications also, we will see where we can get signal because those will be also of interest for us. Sorry. What is the patient population that we can go after with this current target? One of the things that I wanted to mention, I'll go a little bit later slides to explain why we think it can be applicable to multiple different indications. One of the things that we have seen with this drug is that it not only works to cause a lot of DNA damage in the cancer cells, but once it causes the DNA damage, it activates the immune system, which is not seen with a lot of drugs out there. Right now, the only drug out there that activates the immune system is an antibody. It has not been shown with small molecules. We are seeing that not only in the preclinical setting, but now we have started to see this in our clinical setting that where we are showing the activation of our immune system with this drug. This basically also what we have seen in preclinical is that some of the cold tumors, cold tumors here mean tumors that are not currently being targeted by immunotherapy because these tumors don't respond to it. But when we use our drug, these tumors become hot and now immunotherapy can come and do synergize. We have seen that in our preclinical models where we are seeing synergy with immunotherapy, antibody drug conjugates. We think that we have not only potential as monotherapy, but also a combination therapy across with multiple different targets. Based on our preclinical data across different indications, we see that we have 350,000 patients that we can target across both U.S. and Europe, and this doesn't include the brain metastasis patients because that is not included. Those will be on top of these patients. Especially for brain metastasis patients, there is no drug out there. These patients are also excluded from clinical trials because a lot of drugs, they work anything below the neck, but when it comes to brain, they don't work because small molecules just can't enter the brain or doesn't have the enough exposure in the brain. So these, the brain metastases don't work. But in our case, we have seen both our exposure is equal in the lower body and also in the brain. So we think that we have a very good chance of showing efficacy across these indications, which may be making us one of the drug that can get approved in this indication and provide respite to a lot of patients who cannot be on any other drug. In the current market across, we don't think it's just $20 billion. We are only picking few targets that few drugs like CDK4/6, PARP, or AR inhibitors that are across three or four indications. That in the current to the market, they are like $20 billion. But if we include our immune part, then we think that this market would be even higher than $20 billion, close to $50 billion or $60 billion. Recently, a lot of these transactions that have happened for novel modalities or new type of drugs, it's that with 50, 60 patient data, because Big Pharma is losing a lot of their active drugs in few years, so they are looking for more new type of drugs. We think that these transaction is around $3 billion currently, and if we develop around 50, 60 patient data, I think that is where our benchmark is. We will have a lot of catalysts coming in, especially in the second half of this year. We will have a lot of data from the dose escalation and expansion, which we think that we will have around 30 patient data. We are also bringing in a new formulation, which will be happening mid of this year. We think that that will be the formulation that we will be using, and that formulation could also go into registrational trials. We think that all the data that we will be generating going forward would be with the new formulation. We may not have all the mature data by the end of the year, but in a year time, we will be enrolling around 50 patients, and we will have more data. We will have some patients enrolled in the combination trial by the end of the year, but that data most probably will be coming in the next 12 months. We have a lot of catalysts coming across a second half of this year and the first half of next year, which we think will help us pursue a lot of partnership opportunities and investment opportunities. We have also brought in a good medical advisory board and scientific advisory board that are helping us design our trials in a way that If we see good signal in indications where there are unmet need, that will help us go into direct registrational trials in those unmet needs because there is nothing out there. One of those unmet needs could be the BRAF brain met population. These are some of the transactions that have happened in recent times. The most latest one we have seen, especially which is more relevant to us, is maybe how the J&J, it was a 30-patient data, but the efficacy data was around 22 patients, but their safety was clean, and that was acquired by $3.05 billion by J&J. Scorpion is another indication. It's an established target where there are already approved drugs. Even in that, if you are best in class, that transaction was also close to $2.5 billion with $1.5 billion upfront payment. We see very, very strong rationale that with 50, 60 patient data, in our case, if we see a very, very strong efficacy across multiple indications, we think we will be in a very similar range. Why we think that this call is a good investment opportunity, as we mentioned, we have already started to see efficacy across a cohort where we have not reached the target exposure, and we think in the next couple cohorts, we may reach the target exposure. We think that we will see even better efficacy than what we have seen, which could include response rates and longer duration of therapy leading to longer progression-free survival. We will have expansion cohort, next generation formulation, and combination initiation by the end of the year, and we will have at least some preliminary data from our 20-30 patient data, which would lead us to start talking to our big pharma partners because they have been looking, they have been waiting for our data in those indication and our also new formulation. Our valuation currently is not anchored to projections, we think that our market, if we are successful in multiple different indications, would be way higher than what the transactions are anchored. Transactions are anchored based on around 50-60 patient data that we are trying to acquire right now based on our discussions with Big Pharma. I would like to thank all the audience. If there are any questions around mechanism of action or our preclinical data or any other questions, we would be happy to take them. Thank you, Sridhar. Thank you, Sotirios. We have had a number of questions come in during the presentation. Now we'll enter the Q&A session. The first question is, where does your STAT-6 siRNA program sit in the broader pipeline strategy, and could that become a second value driver alongside AO-252 over the next couple of years? Sridhar, why don't you take that one? That's a very good question. Yes, it definitely could become a very good value driver because STAT-6 is a currently hot target and has shown some good efficacy across a couple of companies working on it, especially one of them was working on a degrader, the other one I really don't remember, both of them have shown strong efficacy in immunology, that's what we are focusing. Given that we will be a different modality than a small molecule, we think that it'll have a good value, especially you don't require frequent dosing with this, unlike small molecule, which you have to take every day. That's why we think. It's very, very early. We are looking at the feasibility of it, at the same time, we are not going to take it to clinic, given that for immunology, you would need a lot of money to take it. What we are trying to do is that see how far we can take it, generate our IND package data, and then talk for partnership discussions for this program. The next question is, "Coiled recently established a Medical Advisory Board and added new non-executive directors. How do these appointments strengthen your ability to design registrationally aligned trials and engage with big pharma? Yeah, I'll take that if you don't mind, Sridhar. We're very fortunate to have new NEDs come in, specifically two that have come in recently. Dr. Andrew Dean, who is a world-known oncologist, really between GI and GU tumors. He's been very influential in helping us, both in the strategy of the actual protocol, but then also looking at the combination potential there as well. That's a great benefit to have because he also has a very global view of how trials and which drugs are approved where and looking at where the strengths may be. The second, which is more of a recent, I think it was announced yesterday, is Mr. Craig Tooman, someone who was the CEO of Silence Therapeutics, has been in the world of M&A & BD and financing, has helped raise companies close to about $9 billion in time. Bringing someone like that obviously also brings with them the ability to reach out to former investors and people that have been working with him, they know what sort of companies he belongs to and what he believes would be important also. That kind of visibility to the company was very important for us, and we believe by adding these new NEDs, we've been able to do that. On top of the fact, as mentioned before, about the medical advisory board, both Dr. Alex Spira and Guru Sonpavde, very well known, especially when it comes to being able to help with clinical designs, but also setting the stage for what clinical therapies are out there and what's approved, what the landscape looks like. Very, very important for us as well. We believe we've brought in some very strong people to help us give visibility to the company, also, I would say, being able to help us in the big scheme of things, including funding and guiding us in the next stages, which could be co-listing in NASDAQ, also looking at strategic partnerships. I think there's a question, Matt. Kevin Mattingly? Yes. This is the next question. It was highlighted, no serious adverse events and month to date, not yet reached. How much headroom do you believe you still have on dose, and what does that imply for further efficacy upside? That's a very good question. Maybe I can just go to a slide that I think it's missing. We are currently around 1/3 of the dose of MTD, we think that we have a lot of room to go higher, and especially given that we have not seen any significant AEs, we think that we have a good room to go up. Especially given our exposure data, we think the next couple doses might be where we might see an improved efficacy over the current data we have and with minimal AEs. Next question. How are you thinking about leveraging your IP estate around TAC003 to build a broader franchise rather than just a single asset story? That's a very good question. Internally, we have thinking around that, building next generation AO-252. Not only that, we are also thinking around developing new modalities around our TAC003 franchise. With time, we will disclose it as we get more data on it. Next question. How are you using biomarkers or genomic profiling to enrich for patients most likely to benefit, and could that support a more efficient path through development? Yeah, that's a very good question. We are currently only enrolling P53 patient except for in prostate. In prostate, we are enrolling both P53 mutated or wild type. The reason is that in prostate, we are getting close to 90% of the patients have very high genomic issue we call fraction genome altered, and those are being used. That's why we have not selected P53. P53 is just a proxy for us because in P53 patient, there is a high chromosomal centromere amplification or genomic alteration. Those are the patients we think where TAC003 would be very useful. We are also generating a kit right now that will be looking at P53 wild type also. In P53 wild type, only around 40%-45% of the patients have genomic alterations, even though P53 is wild type. We need to select those patients. Initially, right now, our trial is open only for P53 except for in prostate. Our last question is, from a commercial perspective, which tumor types do you believe could offer the fastest path to market for AO-252 if the emerging data continue along the current trajectory? Right now, these are the two indications that we have been told to focus, but we think that the other indications where we think we could get fastest route is, one is gastric, the other one is pancreatic. These definitely are some huge unmet need, and the other one, as I said, is patients with brain mets where it's tumor agnostic, but patients with brain met P53 mutations. These are some of the indications we think are the fastest way to get into the market. That concludes our Q&A session. Thank you, Sridhar and Sotirios, and thank you all for attending the Coiled Therapeutics presentation. Matt, can I just add one thing? First of all, thank you to all that have joined to be able to listen to us, the investors, and also to the group that set this up. If you have any questions, and you want more answers, we're more than glad to. You can reach out to the company through emails and more than glad to answer any questions. We're very open to having dialogues and discussions about this. Thank you, guys.