Sharon Malka
Analyst · Cowen
Thank you Monique. Good morning to our listeners in the U.S. and good afternoon to those joining us from Israel. Welcome to our first quarter 2022 conference call to discuss our financial and recent operational highlights. We are very pleased to ask two esteemed key opinion leaders with us on the call today. Well first of all Lior Rosenberg, Chief Medical Officer of MediWound and Dr. Cya Dove, the principal investigator in our EscharEx Phase 2 studies and pharmacology study from the Advanced Wound and Ankle Center in Las Vegas. They will share their insights on our EscharEx trial and data and also provide some perspective on the overall wound care practices. After that discussion we will hear a quick review of the financials from Boaz before opening the call for Q&A. First, let me provide a quick review of our quarter and recent updates before taking a deeper dive with our KOL into the clinical data for EscharEx. Starting with EscharEx, we were excited to report positive data from the U.S. Phase 2 clinical study of EscharEx for the debridement of venous leg ulcers. The study met its primary and key secondary endpoints with statistically significant it response compared to the control arm. Study demonstrated significant improvement over the current standard of care. And no observed deleterious effect on wound closure and no safety issues were observed. We highlighted some of these results at the SAWC Spring 2022 Symposium in April and received a very warm welcome and high interest by the top wound care specialists from around the globe. The interest was very encouraging and we were very pleased to have received recognition for our poster which was selected as one of the top 10 posters out of 235 posters at the conference. In our next NexoBrid program we continue to partner with BARDA and Vericel for the approval of NexoBrid and look forward to bringing these innovative products to the U.S. market. We remain on track for a midyear resubmission of the NexoBrid BLA and we anticipate a six-month review process which would position NexoBrid for a potential approval by year-end and a commercial launch in the U.S. in the first half of 2023. To that end, BARDA expanded its contract, providing us with supplemental funding of $9 million to support the NexoBrid BLA submission and the ongoing expanded access protocol, which will run through approval. Lastly on NexoBrid, we are proud to have started the project with the U.S. Department of Defense for the development of NexoBrid for the U.S. Army as the nonsurgical solution for field care burn treatment. This research project, if successful, could open the gate for armies all over the world as well as simplify our supply chain costs and administration. Let me now provide a quick review of EscharEx Phase 2 study designs and the key results before handing the call to our esteemed KOL. The study was a multicenter prospective randomized placebo-controlled adaptive design study, evaluating the safety and efficacy of EscharEx in debridement of VLUs compared to Gel Vehicle as a placebo control and compared to the nonsurgical standard of care of either enzymatic or autolytic debridement. The study enrolled 120 patients with 119 treated at approximately 20 clinical sites, primarily in the United States. Study participants were treated with either EscharEx 46 patients, gel vehicle 43 patients, or non-surgical standard-of-care another 30 patients, with a three-month follow-up. The single primary endpoint was incidence of complete debridement, clinically assessed, within up to eight treatment applications during an assessment period of 14 days, compared to the gel vehicle placebo control as agreed with the FDA. Secondary and exploratory endpoints assessed time to achieve complete debridement, reduction of pain, reduction of wound area, granulation tissue, and quality of life, enabling evaluation of clinical benefits compared to both gel vehicle and a standard of care. Incidence and time to achieve wound closure were assessed as safety measurements. Turning now to the study results. The study met its primary endpoint with high degree of statistical significance demonstrating that patients treated with EscharEx had a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle. More specifically, 63% of the patients treated with EscharEx, 93 [ph] patients out of 46 achieved complete debridement by the eighth treatment, and this compares with only 30% of the patients treated with hydrogel vehicle, which is about 13 patients out of 43 with a p-value of 0.004. EscharEx efficacy superiority remains statistically significant compared to the gel vehicle, also after adjusting for pre-specified covariates ascribed to patient baseline characteristics, wound site, wound age, and regions. The study also met its key secondary and exploratory endpoints that provides further insight on additional efficacy parameters and can establish clinical benefit. Starting with head-to-head comparison with the nonsurgical standard of care, including enzymatic debridement or autolytic debridement. 63 of the patients treated with EscharEx achieved complete debridement compared to only 13% of patients treated with standard of care, four patients out of 30 patients within the 14 days assessment period and the time to achieve complete debridement was significantly shorter. The estimated median time to complete debridement was nine days for patients treated with EscharEx compared to 59 days for patients treated with a nonsurgical standard of care with a p-value of 0.01. Moreover, on average, complete debridement was achieved after less than four applications with EscharEx compared to almost 13 applications with the nonsurgical standard of care. This significant improvement over the current standard of care is important when you consider that the non-sharp debridement agent and the metical adder [ph] currently available on the U.S. market require daily applications for several weeks to achieve complete debridement, yet still generate hundreds of millions of dollars every year. Patients treated with EscharEx demonstrated significantly higher incidence of at least 75% granulation tissue at the end of the treatment period compared to the Gel Vehicle with p-value lower than 0.001, which is required for wound healing. And finally, favorable trends were offset in wound area reduction and reduction of pain compared to Gel Vehicle. The above efficacy results achieved our key goals in this study; one, to demonstrate that EscharEx efficacy in debridement chronic wounds; two, to establish a clear improvement over the current standard of care; and three, to give us a clear guidance for future pivotal studies in the indication of our interest. In addition, the study showed that EscharEx was safe and well tolerated and the overall safety was comparable between all arms. Importantly, there were no observed deleterious effect on wound closure and no material differences in reported adverse events. Actually, the estimated time to complete wound closure was 64 days for patients treated with EscharEx compared to 78 days for patients treated with standard of care. With that, we achieved additional goals for this Phase 2 study, which was to assess the EscharEx safety and tolerability and show that it's well tolerated treatment for debridement of chronic wound. Let me now turn the call over to Professor Rosenberg, our Chief Medical Officer, to provide us with some color regarding the unmet need, the role of debridement in wound management, the robust clinical evidence generated to date, and how a product like EscharEx would fit the current treatment paradigm. Professor Rosenberg, please?