Rx License-Rx

TAB-4017

Dual Specific Anti-CD22 Anti-CD19 Bicistronic Chimeric Antigen Receptors (CARs)

Treatment of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and lymphoma using chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) targeting B-cell surface protein CD19 has demonstrated impressive clinical results in children and young adults. Despite the promising results from CD19 CAR therapy, up to 40% of patients, who initially achieve remission, eventually relapse. Relapse or non-response to CD19-directed CAR therapy may be due to low or diminished CD19 expression. Such patients would be predicted to benefit from CAR therapies targeting other B-cell surface proteins, such as CD22. Scientists at the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Pediatric Oncology Branch have developed a novel, bicistronic CAR construct targeting both CD19 and CD22 simultaneously. Specifically, the construct encodes both CD19 and CD22 on the same vector, ensuring comparable levels of targeting activity against both proteins. CAR-T cells produced with this construct eradicated...

Intelligence Memo

Owner: National Institutes of Health

Core category: Therapeutics

Therapeutic area: Oncology

Indication: Oncology

Modality: Cell/Gene Therapy

Focus tags: Oncology, Immunology

Technology tags: Cell/Gene Therapy, Biologic, Drug Delivery, Biomanufacturing

Mechanism:

Development stage: Clinical

Patent status: Abandoned; Expired; Issued; Pending

Availability: Available for license

Plain-English Licensing Breakdown

This is a license opportunity for a therapeutic asset or drug-enabling technology in Oncology. In plain English, the buyer would be licensing science that could become a treatment program, usually after more validation. The current package appears to be clinical and is associated with National Institutes of Health. The practical first use case is Oncology. Public description: Treatment of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and lymphoma using chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) targeting B-cell surface protein CD19 has demonstrated impressive clinical results in children and young adults. Despite the.

What is exciting

More mature than a typical academic invention: Prior human, regulatory, or deployment evidence can shorten diligence and make strategic buyers more comfortable.

Oncology remains highly partnerable: Pharma buyers still pay attention when an asset can be tied to biomarkers, combinations, resistance biology, or a defined tumor segment.

Delivery can refresh known biology: A better route, depot, local exposure profile, or targeted formulation can create new IP and reduce systemic risk around existing mechanisms.

Hot modality with strategic appetite: Cell and gene therapy buyers care when there is a crisp antigen, genetic subgroup, potency assay, or manufacturing shortcut.

Negatives / diligence concerns

Clinical context matters: A clinical-stage label is only useful if the trial design, population, endpoints, safety signal, and follow-on plan are strong.

Manufacturing can dominate the budget: Potency assays, vector or cell process reproducibility, release testing, and COGS can become bigger risks than the biology.

Exposure advantage must be real: Delivery stories fail when biodistribution, local tolerability, stability, or payload compatibility does not beat simpler alternatives.

Competitive field may be crowded: Oncology buyers will ask why this is better than existing modalities, combinations, and biomarker strategies already in the clinic.

Risk Flags

  • Human validation and clinical path require diligence.
  • Patent scope and remaining exclusivity need review with counsel.
  • Inventor readiness and licensing terms are not yet verified.

Strategic Pharma Attractiveness

Large pharma would care if this becomes more than an interesting university-originated technology: it needs a crisp Oncology wedge, a measurable value inflection, and a diligence package that makes the first deal feel like an option on upside rather than a blind research bet.

Most logical pharma targets BMS / 2seventy — Cell therapy portfolio logic; needs differentiated antigen strategy. Gilead / Kite — Manufacturing and oncology BD infrastructure already exists. Regeneron — Deep oncology biologics and T-cell engager adjacency.

Development Strategy to Increase PoS

First indication: Oncology

Study design: Biomarker-selected translational efficacy model followed by a small signal-seeking Phase 1b/2a design.

Key experiments Validate the AI-optimized pivot: Start as an orphan, HLA-defined oncology asset with manufacturing outsourced from day zero Run independent replication of the core claim with pre-specified success criteria Generate a partner-facing risk register that separates solved, testable, and unresolved risks

Final Recommendation

Proceed with repositioning: Worth a short exclusive option if diligence confirms IP scope and inventor data quality. The most investable version is: Start as an orphan, HLA-defined oncology asset with manufacturing outsourced from day zero

Best next experiment: Run the smallest independent study that validates: Use a centralized CDMO, lock the release assay early, and design the first trial around tumor-antigen evidence rather than broad basket ambition.

Best licensing timing: Begin BD conversations after the next validation package; pursue a license, option, or asset sale once the first value inflection is visible.