Big Pharma Insights For Building Biotech Startups With Uniquity Bio's Brian Lortie

We love to hear from our listeners. Send us a message.

On today's episode I'm speaking with Brian Lortie, President and CEO of Uniquity Bio, about his "no jerk" policy and how his experience building teams at GSK, Endo Pharmaceuticals, and Onspira Therapeutics informs his leadership at Uniquity, a clinical-stage immunology startup backed by Blackstone Life Sciences. Lortie also walks through the formation and launch of Uniquity and provides detail on the company's business model and strategy.  

Access this and hundreds of episodes of the Business of Biotech videocast under the Business of Biotech tab at lifescienceleader.com.

Subscribe to our monthly Business of Biotech newsletter.

Get in touch with guest and topic suggestions: [e-mail]

Find Ben Comer on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bencomer/

Episode Transcript

Ben Comer (00:04):
Welcome back to the Business of Biotech.
I'm your host, ben Comer, chiefEditor at Life Science Leader,
and I'm pleased to speak todaywith Brian Lortie, president and
CEO of Uniquity Bio, a startupfocused on immunology and
inflammation that emerged fromstealth in May of 2024.
I'm excited to talk to Brianfor a few reasons.

(00:25):
One is his experience buildingteams and driving growth at
companies large and small,including 14 years in various
roles at GSK, seven years atEndo Pharmaceuticals, where he
rose to president of brandedpharmaceuticals, in addition to
company formation work and teambuilding at Ons pira

(00:45):
Therapeutics, which was acquiredin 2019.
Now Brian is back to lead andbuild Uniquity, a clinical-
stage company backed byBlackstone Life Sciences, which
is currently developingsolrikitug, a monoclonal
antibody, in-licensed from Merck.
Thank you for being here, Brian.
Great to be here with you, Ben.

(01:06):
Thank you, I'm glad to have you.
I wanted to start with thisidea of building and managing
teams, large and small, and I'mcurious you know what you've
perhaps learned from yourexperience about what makes
people, and thus businesses,successful.

Brian Lortie (01:26):
It's a great question and it's one I reflect
on because, as you pointed out,and even listening to you there,
it's like, oh yeah, I rememberthose things because we tend to
get focused on the target rightin front of us.
But we're all a product of ourexperiences right, good and bad
and I can say that I've gotscars from mistakes made along
the way, but we learn from allof those.
I think for me, the commontheme, whether it's a huge team

(01:51):
or a small team, is the qualityof the people on that team that
I always refer to as our varsityteam on the field, because your
podcast is titled the Businessof Biotech and, as you and your
listeners know, it is not abusiness for the weak of heart.

(02:12):
But one way you can try andsway the odds in your favor, I
guess, is by putting the verybest team around you, and that's
what we've done here.
And just to speak a little bitmore about the current day in
this company, which is clinicalstage, very well capitalized by
our very good partners atBlackstone, we're in three

(02:33):
clinical trials right now, withreadouts later this year and
early next year.
Those are all hard jobs.
We've staffed a team that justabout universally, began their
careers in large, or at leastlarge mid-sized pharma companies
.
Right, but everyone has thewiring or the internal DNA to

(02:56):
find what we do in a moreentrepreneurial, nimble company
environment very attractive.
And it's that combination ofthose two things that I think is
so important for us, for tworeasons.
One is coming.
You know, having grown upmyself and many of my colleagues
grown up in a large farmenvironment, we get used to the
levels of rigor and thescientific practice that's so

(03:18):
important to get things right.
We don't like to cut corners.
We've seen the landscapelittered with the uh, the
wreckage of companies that tryand do things too fast or uh, or
on the fly, or on the cheap, oroutsmart the regulatory
realities, and it just doesn'twork.
We like to put together aprogram that a you know,
ultimately a large farmeracquirer, for example, will find

(03:41):
to be, um, impressive andattractive.
And we know what that lookslike, cause we've all sat on
that side of the table.
I mean, I've bought companiessitting in a big pharma
environment and I've soldcompanies sitting in a small
company environment and Iunderstand what works in that
and that is universal.
So you know, I guess, longanswer to your question, which

(04:02):
is whether it's a large team ora small team, and almost
regardless of what they're doing, it's the quality of the people
and the alignment to themission at hand that really, I
think, separates the successfulcompanies from the ones that
aren't as successful.

Ben Comer (04:16):
I think it's interesting that you mentioned
you know your staff at Uniquity,having experience at mid and
larger companies.
Are there different teamdynamics in a large team versus
a small team or, if not,dynamics, different things that
can be learned may be easier, orthat you just will have

(04:38):
experience in with a large teamthat maybe you wouldn't in a
small team.

Brian Lortie (04:43):
Yeah, there certainly are, and first of all,
we never stop learning right.
So, you know, I learned thingstoday that I didn't know
yesterday and hopefully thatprocess will continue.
What people often find whenthey join a small team from,
like, a large pharma team isthat there are very few places
to hide, and I mean thatliterally, or the result sort of

(05:04):
your work product.
Everything is out in the lightbecause we don't have layers and
layers of management andbureaucracy, and that's, by
design, right.
But it also means thateverybody's work and everybody's
efforts and the way we worktogether is right out there for
everyone to see and experience.
So people have to becomfortable with that.
The other dynamic is kind of anobvious one, but even though I

(05:28):
consider us, you know, verynicely staffed I mean, we've got
about 30 full-time people nowon the team at our just about
our third year anniversary andthat's probably about right for
us with one program to manage.
But that means everybody on theteam, from the leadership on
down, has to be comfortablewearing a number of different

(05:49):
hats, has to have the ability tosort of look around corners and
see where things need to bedone, and if there's nobody
doing it, we do it right, andthat starts with me and goes
throughout all of the company.
That's something noteverybody's comfortable with.
They might say that they are,but it's actually learning.
That is often an experience forthem, but it's good and I will

(06:09):
say that.
You know, I'm very, very happyand very pleased that we've got
a team of people that roll uptheir sleeves every morning and
get figure out a way to get thejob done.

Ben Comer (06:19):
You are president and CEO at Uniquity and I'm curious
about what you see as the kindof key talents that you bring to
the organization, and I'm alsocurious about what you enjoy
doing the most professionally.

Brian Lortie (06:35):
Yeah, so maybe I'll take that in reverse order.
What I enjoy, what keeps mecoming to work every morning, is
, you know again, it sounds alittle bit corny, but it's the
people I work with.
My people will tell you that Ihave a no-jerk policy and we
really try and adhere to that.
What does that mean?
It means that in many cases,we're spending as much time with
the people we work with as withour families.

(06:56):
In some cases, I hate to say,it could be even more right.
Some periods of time just getso crazy.
So you better be working withpeople that share your value set
, that share, you know, aviewpoint on the world.
And then certainly the, youknow, the interpersonal skills
are so important.
This is a place where, you know, we don't tolerate disrespect

(07:16):
and we insist on quality of workand we insist that everybody
work hard but work together, andwe try and make sure we're
enjoying that and having fun too.
And there's a lot of differentthings we do there.
So that's that's kind of thesecond question.
What, what do I bring?
I am not the scientist, right?
My background is is companybuilding, team building,

(07:36):
commercial.
You know, I ran big commercialbusinesses, at GSK and at Endo.
I did run a global biologicsdevelopment organization for a
few years at GSK.
That was part of my careerdevelopment.
It was super valuable and Idraw on that experience every
day.
Here, where the team and I areso focused on clinical
development and not oncommercialization, my job and I

(08:00):
see my job is providingresources and opportunities for
the team, making sure we've gotthe right team on the field and
then to some extent getting outof their way and let them do
good work.
But that doesn't mean I can't beinvolved or shouldn't be
involved at the minute detail.
So what I learn along the wayfrom the team is the ability to

(08:20):
ask the right questions.
I may not have the answers Infact, in most cases I will not
have the right answers but Ihope I bring to the team an
ability to catalyze arriving atthose answers and then I'll lead
the team in executing on thoseplans but also lead us to be
aware when those plans mightneed adjustment.
Right Mid-course adjustmentsare part of the game here.

(08:41):
So it's that kind of managingand governing the company.
As I said resources, workingclosely with the board, working
closely with our investmentpartners and strategics that's a
big part of what I do, but Ihope to leave my fingerprints on
all aspects of the business too, by at very least bringing on

(09:03):
and leading the right peoplebusiness too, by at very least
bringing on and leading theright people.

Ben Comer (09:12):
Are there things that you learned working in
commercial functions that and Iknow this is not your first
rodeo working on, you know,clinical development in a
smaller company, but I'm justcurious about that experience at
GSK, at End, endo and morecommercially focused functions.
Are there things that youlearned from that that can
translate into leading a companythat is, you know, very much

(09:34):
focused exclusively, I would say, at this point, on R&D?

Brian Lortie (09:39):
Yeah, this is a development operation full stop.
But the answer is yes, and I'llstep back and say you know, at
the end of all of theseactivities, all these processes,
whether it's early discovery,whether it's preclinical
clinical development, all theway to commercialization, we're
trying to satisfy something thatends up with a patient right At

(10:00):
the end of all of this work, asa patient and everybody
involved in that value chainlarge company, small company,
commercial, pre-commercialdevelopment we're trying to
improve somebody's life at theend of it.
It really is what draws us all,I think, to life science as part
of this business and that wedon't lose sight of that,

(10:26):
because you know you can gettarget fixation in any one of
these jobs and forget that atthe end of this clinical trial
or at the end of thismanufacturing process that you
know, ultimately we're trying tobring important differentiated
medicines that will improve thelives of patients.
This past year I will say thatwe did an exercise which was fun
and, I think, very rewarding tothe team, in that we brought in
patients and physicians to cometalk to us as part of our team

(10:49):
week.
We do a team week every yearwhere we bring all the company
together for a week and westrategize together, but we also
have some fun together and wemake sure we're all on the same
track and aligned behindobjectives and mission, and in
this case, we really centeredthat on the patients that we
serve.
And listening to a patient, inthis case, who suffers from COPD

(11:10):
and lung disease, and thephysician that treats them was
really very valuable for us.
So at the end of the day,whether it's commercial or
development, we are here tosolve that problem and it's good
to just continue to keep thatin mind.

Ben Comer (11:26):
I mentioned that Onspira was acquired in 2019.
Uniquity emerged from stealthlast year, but I think you were
a part of the original companyformation a couple of years
before that and I'm curious whatyou would say about your
approach to just helping get thecompany off the ground,

(11:46):
thinking through the businessmodel.
You know how you sort of, Iguess, eventually made the case
to Blackstone.

Brian Lortie (11:55):
It is a very interesting story.
It's one that we're proud of,and part of the reason is
because it all worked out well.
Yeah, we sold Onspira at thevery, very end of 2019, you know
, literally the closing dinner,I think, was just as COVID-19
was popping up on everybody'snews feed and we were very

(12:15):
nervous coming out of thatbecause we had been in a packed
restaurant in New York City.
And then, of course, whathappened?
We all shut down for a longperiod of time.
But my you know my founding,original founding partners and
myself, you know Steve Tullman,who is our executive chairman,
Kelly Copeland, who runs ourcorp dev and product strategy
team.
We had all been together atOnspira and in other places and

(12:36):
we said, okay, well, let's dothis again, but let's figure out
how we want to do it, learningfrom each process.
And I will say, you know, onbehalf of Steve and Kelly, they
had done this several times morethan I had, so they had a lot
of experience in the companyformation piece.
But, you know, hopefully I hadsomething, some dimension to the
thinking, and we decided thatit would make great sense to
solve the capital part first, ifwe could right.

(12:59):
In other words, we know thatthere are interesting programs
out there, but getting thecapital first really allowed us
the freedom to operate and findthe kind of quality program that
would be worthy of building abig company or building a
company around.
And so you know we had had,we'd had relationships and
connections into the Blackstoneteam and other large private

(13:21):
equity groups.
We we worked those connections.
We very, very rapidly foundthat we and the Blackstone Life
Sciences team in this case NickSimon and Kiran Reddy shared our
view as to what we could dotogether.
Right.
So Blackstone has deployablecapital at scale to invest with
life science companies.
We have operationalcapabilities and company

(13:44):
building track record and it wasjust a very obvious combination
.
So we set out together you knowin that you know 2019 period of
time to say, okay, we're goingto build a company, should be an
I&I company, because that wasthe you know the depth of the
experience on our team and it'san area of the scale of
opportunity that makes sense fora Blackstone.

(14:06):
And we set out to find aprogram to build a company
around.
We did that very thoughtfullyand, again.
We did that together, beingable to leverage the you know,
extraordinary scientificcapabilities of the Blackstone
team and our own people.
Came upon TSLP as a veryattractive target the classic
pipeline in a product.
We were able to license aprogram that Merck had had and

(14:34):
advanced it to a certain pointand then paused its development
for strategic reasons.
It's a good program, hadexcellent patient data, but they
paused it for strategic reasonsat that time, made a deal,
founded the company in early2022 and off to the races.
We went and building along theway.
But you know, I can'toveremphasize the value of
having the capital partner withus along that journey right from

(14:55):
the start as excuse me, as afounder in the company and
having that it just opened doorsfor us, not the least of which
was the ability to get such ahigh quality program in our
hands and take it forward.
So that's that's kind of theorigin story here and you know,
three years plus in, it's been agreat experience and I'm super
proud of the of the work thatthe team has achieved along the

(15:18):
way.

Ben Comer (15:33):
It strikes me as a kind of chicken and egg problem
in terms of getting capitalsupport starting, you know, a
development program orparticularly with it, within
licensing a program.
And correct me if I'm wrongabout this, but it it seems like
over the last few years it'sbeen more difficult for
companies to get money withouthaving, you know, announced an
initial candidate fordevelopment.
Maybe I'm wrong about that, buthow do you, I guess, how do you
manage that?
And you know you mentionedrelationships at Blackstone.

(15:55):
You have, you and your, yourco-founders, had a record of
success which I assume reallyhelps grease the wheels in those
kinds of conversations.
But I guess, thinking about,you know, aspiring biotech
builders who you know maybe havea great idea, maybe haven't
landed on an asset yet needmoney to get started, whether

(16:16):
it's an internal developmentdiscovery program.
Or, you know, in licensing adrug in for development, you
know, in licensing a drug in fordevelopment, Is there anything
you know you would say aboutkind of how to think about that
and how to manage it?

Brian Lortie (16:30):
you know, at those early stages, yeah, there's
several elements in yourquestion, so let's unpack that a
little bit.
First of all, I'll just sayanybody venturing into this
needs to realize that it's verydifficult and in many ways, the
cards are stacked against us all.
Right.
Now we came in focusing on latestage development.
It's an area of expertise forour team.

(16:51):
We knew how to build a teamaround that, having done that
before and look, what you saidis very, very practical.
Capital partners, whether it'sa large private equity group
like Blackstone, or whether anyof the numbers of large and
small venture capital funds aregoing to be most comfortable
with a team that's done itbefore.
Right, that is huge.

(17:14):
But everybody starts somewhere,and oftentimes you end up
starting with, you know, anearlier stage program that
doesn't require as much money.
It's still the same process,though, of getting some level of
capital behind you andalongside you, and I just want
to underscore the point that youknow.
Money is not, uh, just cash, uh, your, your source of capital

(17:38):
in the best case, brings alongexpertise, brings along science,
brings along their own sets ofconnections, and and brings
along, um, the the sort ofintellectual tension to make
sure that, at each step alongthe way, we're making the right
decisions right.
So you know, one of the greatthings is you.
You know, let's put it this wayBlackstone didn't just sign a

(17:59):
$300 million dollar check andsay to us, send us a postcard
when you're done Right.
I mean, of course, the moneygets tranched out appropriately
on a milestone basis, but alongthe way we work so closely with
them to to help solve thescientific and other problems
and challenges that come up.
But we've got that hugecapability you know capability

(18:19):
behind us, not just the abilityto dip into the checking account
, and so that's super important.
You can.
But you know, many entrepreneursand biotech company builders,
you know, have to start outsmall and start out with earlier
programs that might require alittle bit less capital and
build that way.
That's often the story thatultimately leads you to be able

(18:40):
to do something larger.
There are also, you know, a lotof people who are on the
bleeding edge of discovery andit's fantastic.
It's certainly a good thing forhuman health that that's
happening.
That just isn't where we'refocused and that's not where,
you know, blackstone's focusedeither.
We we tend to want to back umprograms with a lot of inpatient

(19:01):
clinical data where a lot ofthe clinical risk has been
discharged and then you'regetting down to just smart
development strategy andoperational excellence along the
way to to get the program to,to where it needs to be.
So, um, but it's, you know it'shard work and it takes uh, it
takes a lot of grit and that youknow that DNA to be comfortable
in uncertainty, but it's sorewarding when you can make it

(19:24):
happen.

Ben Comer (19:25):
Walk me through how you landed on on that specific
model for Uniquity and maybe youcan just give us a sense of.
You know at what stage or whatstage that you are looking for
candidates to end license andthen you know what your exit
looks like and how you.
You know how you decided onthat particular model.

Brian Lortie (19:46):
Sure.
So we, you know, we built themodel in a way that really works
for us.
We're not the only ones whohave done it this way.
But you know, at the moment theway we're structured is that
the management team, all of thepeople sort of the intellectual
capital and the operationalcapability sits in a C-Corp and
the asset at the moment we havea single program or a single

(20:10):
program with a couple ofspinoffs they all sit in their
own capital and intellectualproperty containing C Corp.
That's separate.
And then we have a very strongiron linkage between the two
because the management teamexists for the sole purpose of
developing the program but thecapital goes into that asset

(20:30):
containing C Corp.
The board is mirrored, thecompany officers and the
management team are mirrored.
But that gives us someflexibility so that we could, in
the appropriate situation, ofcourse you could transact an
individual program withouttransacting the team along with
it.
Right now, I know I get everysituation is going to have its
own requirements and we're alsoflexible along the way.

(20:53):
But that's the way westructured it and that's been
working really, really well.
But it's important to say thatyou know whether it's one
program or two or three programs.
You have to make sure you'vebuilt a team that is so highly
focused and dedicated and giveseach one of those programs all
of the effort that it requires.
We can't, you know.

(21:14):
I talked before about notcutting corners or trying to
outsmart the laws of developmentphysics.
You have to make sure you'reputting the right focus and the
right team behind each program.
So that's the way we built that.
We built it to give us someflexibility.
That's what's working now.
Whether that works foreverwe'll have to see, but that's
what's working for us currentlyand it's been a good model
currently and it's been a goodmodel.

Ben Comer (21:35):
So it was model first and asset second, not selecting
an asset and building the modelaround that particular asset.
Is that right?

Brian Lortie (21:48):
Yeah, I mean, we were doing these.
You know we were walking andchewing gum at the same time.
So we were building thestructure, you know, working
through the structuralconsiderations again with
ourselves and with Blackstoneand our various advisors, while
we were seeking to find theright program to serve as the
core of the company, to buildthe company around.
So as that all came together,we enlist the product, we funded

(22:09):
the company and we wereunderway.
All sort of happenedsimultaneously.

Ben Comer (22:15):
What can you say about that program hunting
process?
You know how did you, how didyou go about doing that, what
were the kinds of things, Iguess that that you were looking
for?
You mentioned, you know,pipeline in a product that seems
like maybe it was a piece of it.
But what else could you say,just maybe, about the process of
of identifying, I guess, ashort list of candidates?

(22:39):
You know before making that,you know ultimately the decision
.

Brian Lortie (22:43):
Yeah, and it wasn't such a short list, I will
say, you know, we combed theworld quite a bit as we were in
the process of, you know, reallyfine tuning our approach.
And I said before we had webecame quite interested in the
TSLP target.
Back then there was only a few.
Right, there was tezepelumab,not even yet on the market, but
uh, and a few others to follow.

(23:03):
Now there are quite a fewdevelopment stage TSLP or even
pre-development stage TSLP hasbeen a lot that have come across
from from Chinese uh developersand, and you know, each one can
, can live or or not proceed ontheir own merits, but at that
time years ago there's reallyonly a few.
So we were fortunate to find,you know, this just outstanding

(23:23):
program that had been developedby, you know, a world-class
company, right, I mean, this hadall of the phase one,
preclinical work, some greatpatient data.
So that worked for us.
But you know, we took maybe 20programs through, you know,
fairly deep diligence and manyof them didn't meet our
threshold Threshold's prettyhigh.

(23:44):
The mesh of our decision filteris very tight because, again,
our capital comes from a companythat wants very solid clinical
proxy, wants patient data.
But also together we wantedprograms that were big enough to
put capital at scale to work,right.
So that naturally points youtowards big chronic conditions

(24:07):
high in met need, and that'swhere we landed.
So, you know, fast forward tonow we're in the clinic for, you
know, asthma, COPD, which ishuge in unmet needs, the third
leading cause of death aroundthe world eosinophilic
esophagitis, which I think willbe a real star for us it's
almost complete white space andthese are patients that really

(24:29):
really suffer, right?
This is a very terrible diseaseand there's really not much
that works for them.
But the promise of biologictherapy, like an anti-T slip
program, is huge and reallychanging their lives.
You know I spend a lot of timevisiting clinical trial sites
talking to investigators.
That is a condition that theinvestigators are really very,

(24:52):
very personally interested in,because they're treating these
patients and they don't havemuch that they could do for them
.
So I'm excited about COPD.
It's a huge opportunity we'regoing to, you know, I think,
change the world there as well.
But EoE, I think, is going tohave a very interesting personal
dimension to it.
So it's what makes thisbusiness interesting, right.

Ben Comer (25:11):
Yeah, and I have some questions.
I want to ask you about yourdevelopment candidate.
But before I get to that, I'mcurious about just how you got
to the you know, the list of 20.
Were you out there, just youknow, pounding the medical
journals, talking to physicians?
Did you, you know?
Were there other tools that youuse to help you evaluate?
You know the world of potentialcandidates out there.

(25:33):
What can you say about that?

Brian Lortie (25:35):
Yeah, it's more just hard work, as you said,
scoping through the journals.
We came upon the Merck programactually by doing some research
to see who had advanced TSLPinto clinical, and that was work
done with our Blackstonepartners.
It's also an area where thenetwork comes to play right.

(25:57):
So we've all been involved inthis for a long time.
We have connections and it'sreaching into the companies to
see what programs either theyneed help with or have
potentially stalled for thewrong reasons.
You know companies like ourswe're not the only one who does
this, but I think we do itpretty well and we hope to
continue to do it.
I think serves a very goodpurpose.

(26:18):
There's no pharma company outthere I don't care how big they
are that has resources to doeverything they should need to
do right.
And so companies like ours cancome along, pick up a program in
its mid-stage development, takeit through proof of concept,
take it through clinicalprograms and get either ready
for commercialization or readyfor phase three pivotals and

(26:42):
then, at the appropriate time,return it back, either return it
to the original home or move itto a more appropriate manager,
right?
So a company that's well-placedto do the 3,000 patient trials
or, even more importantly, tocommercialize globally.
Right, we need to be able totake a program all the way

(27:05):
through those points.
But it becomes logical that atcertain points the program is
best managed back by a largerplayer, and you're seeing some
really good examples of howthat's starting to become really
part of the model.
That makes a lot of sense,right?
Nobody no big pharma, I don'tcare how successful or
well-capitalized they are can doeverything they want to, but

(27:25):
many of them have promisingprograms that a company like
ours, a capability like ours,can help advance and then and
then, you know, potentially putit back in those hands.

Ben Comer (27:35):
Right, yeah, I'm curious.
Yeah, I wonder you know ifthere are investors that you run
into, who you know, who kind ofhave this, maybe a knee jerk
response to well, if Merckdidn't develop it, you know it
couldn't be that valuable.
I think most of us whocertainly who cover the industry
and work in it know that thereare any number of reasons why

(27:58):
you know a company will decidenot to develop a given asset,
for all sorts of reasons thathave nothing to do with the
science.
But do you run into that peoplequestioning whether you know a
drug could be a meaningful newproduct after you know Merck, in
this example, decided not topursue it?

Brian Lortie (28:19):
We get that question a little bit.
We don't get it as often as youmight think, but again, we're
talking with prettysophisticated investors and
partners.
They kind of understand itright and they're seeing the
model of how this works.
And remember, companies changetheir focus too.
Strategic focus is a dynamicthing and companies come in and

(28:41):
out of various areas of interestand focus and that's perfectly
understandable because itcreates great opportunity for
companies like ours.
But yeah, I mean, and theanswer is, you know I'll use our
program as an example you knowMerck had spent a great resource
and great time advancing it toa certain point, paused that for

(29:03):
very good strategic reasons.
You know they didn't pause itbecause it had safety issues.
It didn't pause it because itdidn't, you know, didn't work.
They paused it because they hadother areas of strategic focus.
And companies make portfolioreprioritization all the time.
I mean there are truly seasonsto that activity, right.
But then for a program to thenfind its way into the hands of a

(29:29):
company like ours, we candevelop it, we can take the
development risk through thatnext stage using someone else's
capital.
If we do our job well and weincrease the value well, then a
potential acquirer has thechance to come in and take the
program, either take it back oracquire the basis of the work

(29:51):
that we've done.
So there's no loser in that.
Really, the loser is if theshelves get filled with programs
that gather dust and neveradvance, and that's when it's a
real shame, right?
So you know, our goal is tofind promising programs that
have stalled and do our verybest to bring them ultimately to
, you know, to serve the needsof patients.

Ben Comer (30:12):
Following up on you know what you've said previously
and just now about developingit up to a certain point and
then finding a partner that cantake it to the next level,
conduct large trials, exercisetheir network strength in
various ways and even into thecommercial realm.
Do you anticipate that beingkind of inbound inquiries people

(30:35):
watching the program externally, kind of inbound inquiries,
people watching the programexternally, you know, seeing it
perform, getting in touch withyou, making offers, or is there
kind of?
Is there an outbound componentwhere you know you're evaluating
the companies out there whereit might be a fit and you're
kind of proactively reaching out?

Brian Lortie (30:52):
Or maybe it's both , it absolutely is both.
And I just want to clarify onepoint, because you know, we have
to make sure that we can take aprogram as far in our hands as
we need to right, becauseexternal market, the you know
the mindset of potentialacquirers, their capital

(31:13):
abilities.
You know we're never guaranteedthat when we meet a milestone
that we're going to be able totransact a program and in some
cases we won't want to right.
I mean, there are many caseswhere somebody could say, look,
we think we'd like to take thisprogram and we say, well,
actually we're still in thevalue creating part of this and
we're going to hold onto it andcontinue to do that.

(31:34):
And it's where having, you know, just this high quality capital
and access to that really makesa difference.
So you know we fully have plansto take this program as far as
we need to, all the way throughphase two, all the way through
phase three, right up to and ifwe had to, we would work to
solve commercialization.
But it's also logical along theway that there's a very nice

(31:59):
fit to be had with anothercompany.
So, in answer to your question,it is both.
We get increasingly now, nowthat we emerged from stealth in
the middle of last year.
We get lots of inbounds.
I can say we came out ofstealth mode last May, not quite
a year from now, but we'repretty well known out there and

(32:20):
we're well known by anypotential acquirer and we have
informal, ranging to formal,conversations with multiples of
those.
They're smart enough to want tostay on top of what we're doing
.
We're smart enough to ask fortheir views on what we're doing.
Ask for their views on whatwe're doing and you know, at the
end of it there may or may be adeal to be made, but you know

(32:41):
we're.
We're faithful to the programand making sure we're exercising
what we do as best we possiblycan and then confident that the
right thing will happen.

Ben Comer (32:48):
Right, solrikitug, I believe, is a bispecific
antibody.
Is that correct?

Brian Lortie (32:54):
No.
So just to clarify.
So solrikitug is a monoanti-TSLP inhibitor.
We also in our pipeline havetwo bispecific antibodies that
use solrikitug as the backboneright.

(33:15):
So in other words, TSLP pluscytokine A plus cytokine B.
We've kept the selectionconfidential right now but we're
advancing it pretty, veryquickly and we expect candidate
selection by the end of thisyear, very excited about those
programs.
Because what that does is ifyou step back and you look at
what we have as a pipeline now,you have the mono agent,
solrikitug, which you know wefully expect has the very strong

(33:35):
potential to be second tomarket in the MOA behind
tezepelumab and will serve ahuge market and we think will
perform very well as adifferentiated molecule and then
as a lifecycle follow-oncapability.
We have these two programs thattake solrikitug, add additional

(33:57):
cytokine blockers to it andhave the potential to either
expand into differentindications or to access and
fulfill the needs of differentpatient phenotypes.
So bispecifics are becomingreally quite exciting now, but
they're quite a bit earlier.
We like to think we've got thebest of both worlds and they're
all based on what we think isbest in class or at the top of

(34:19):
the class for the, for thebackbone.
So that's how it.

Ben Comer (34:22):
That's how it works now, if sol rikitug is picked up
by a partner, uh, for for latestage development,
commercialization or, you know,bringing it across the, the
finish line, does that uhjeopardize at all the, the
earlier stage um bi specificprograms?
Or do or is that just workedout as part of the contract
where you know you would outlicense it to a provider or you

(34:46):
know another company to, to getregulatory approval,
commercialize it and then, Iguess what you know, pay a
certain amount of as part of theyou know your next stage, your
bispecific programs.
How does that work?

Brian Lortie (35:03):
Well, ben, if I had the answer to all of those
questions, I would have it allmapped out, wouldn't I?
No, I think, like always, anyof the above right, and we'll
always be faithful to valuecreation, to what's best for the
medicines that we're bringingforward, and you know there are
ways to solve all of thoseopportunities.
I'll say right.

(35:23):
So you know, right now we don'thave a.
You know this is the one sizefits all, or this is the only
way to approach, that we'refocusing on developing, as I
said, selecting the candidatesand keeping those, moving on the
two bispecific programs andgenerating high quality,
outstanding, differentiatingdata on the core program, and

(35:43):
that is our best path togenerating value across the
whole portfolio.

Ben Comer (35:47):
There is some, some general excitement around bi
specific, multi specificantibodies.
I'm curious if that has anymeaningful business impact for
for Uniquity, one way or theother.
Does it, I don't know?
Does it give you you know, giveyou a lift?
Does it make it more difficultto kind of raise your programs

(36:09):
above the noise?
What would you say about that?

Brian Lortie (36:13):
It doesn't make it .
Let me just say we're nothaving any problem getting
engagement on our story right.
Okay, and part of that, I'msure it can be attributed to the
fact that we do have theseinteresting bispecifics coming
along, but they're much, muchearlier.
We're finding that, you know,the true engagement and the
near-term value is in this, themono agent that you know will be

(36:35):
on the market, in these big,significant indications, in this
sort of 2029 time point, whichnot incidentally or not
coincidentally is exactly whenmany big pharma partners will
need to be replacing hugeamounts of revenue that they're
losing for LOE reasons.

(36:56):
So yeah holes in the pipeline.
Right, absolutely.
So we'll have this.
I mean, this is a multi-billiondollar revenue program, many
multiples of that, that will beready for market in that kind of
timing.
So that alone is generating alot of inbound interest.
But we're not rushing to thatright.
Again, the job here is to getthe product developed and
developed.

(37:17):
Well, let the data tell thestory and then we'll make the
strategic decisions that makesense then.
But I think I think we've gotreally good opportunities.
Uh, and you know the bispecifics are part of that.
We, we do get inbound interestbecause somebody hears we have a
bi specific and then when weshow them the whole picture,
they say, okay, well, that'spretty compelling and we take

(37:37):
that conversation forward.

Ben Comer (37:39):
It's not going to rush the development, but
Uniquity is set up to be a veryefficient mid to late stage drug
developer.
You know we we spoke brieflyjust in a pre introductory call
about time you know as a, as ascarce resource and what that
means for business leaders andI'm curious about.

(38:00):
You know how you set prioritiesfor your teams, how you hold
them accountable, how you makesure that you know that you're
flexing that model of efficiencyto get the development done.
You know not too fast but nottoo slow either.

Brian Lortie (38:15):
It's a very important point.
You know, if you talk to myteam, they'll tell you I
probably say too many times thatyou know I can probably raise
more capital tomorrow, but I cannever raise more time.
Right, yesterday is gone, we'renot going to get that one back.
And in a competitiveenvironment like we talked
before, there's, you know, I andI is an attractive place and

(38:38):
there's a lot of TSLIP and a lotof competing products becoming,
you know, working their waythrough various stages of
development.
So we can't just sit back andsay, well, we don't pay
attention to the timelines.
So getting that balance rightis very important.
It's one of the reasons why wethink we've got kind of like the

(38:59):
Goldilocks approach here, wherewe're big enough to do this
work really, really well, with ahigh degree of rigor, doing it,
as I said before, in a way thata partner, an investor, will be
impressed and will not say, oh,these guys cut corners right.
At the same time, we can be veryefficient in our decision
making and we can, in fact, insome cases, pivot and make
changes in real time.

(39:19):
And I'll give you an example ofthat.
Over the last 12 months,there's been outstanding
efficacy data in COPD fromtezepelumab , the on-market TSLP
.
We were at the ATS meeting inSan Diego when that was
happening.
As we listened to andparticipated in the

(39:41):
conversations around the releaseof that data, we pulled our
decision makers into aconference room five minutes
from the conference center orfrom the convention center,
rapidly interpreted what weheard, made some decisions about
how that would impact ourthinking for our development
program, made those changes andimplemented them in days and

(40:03):
weeks, not months and yearsright.
So, again, having come fromlarger organizations, it just
takes longer for that to happen.
And if we can turn around smartdecisions and these aren't
knee-jerk reactions, these arestill thoughtful decisions with
a lot of a lot of rigor and andagain, you know ourselves and
using our external resources aswell but if we can do that with

(40:26):
speed and efficiency, we cantake slack out of the system.
And we can take slack and we'reresponding in real time to
opportunity.
So that's that's an example ofwhat we try and do here every
day In terms of tracking andkeeping everybody aligned.
You know it's hard becausewe're not a.
Let me say the other part of myargument.

(40:47):
We don't have extra people andwe don't have extra time and we
all have a lot to do.
So we just have to be rigorousand smart about what we bite off
, about focusing and, you know,aligning our efforts towards the
highest priority things.
Be willing to step aside fromthe lower priority ones, the
highest priority things, bewilling to step aside from the
lower priority ones.
Understand that not everybodyneeds to attend every meeting,

(41:10):
not everybody needs to be partof every single decision, but
work together as a teamefficiently and effectively to
advance the ball.
And that's been working greatand we think about that every
single day as a team here.

Ben Comer (41:21):
I want to ask you a little bit more about you know
good people, life science leader.
You know, historically and tothis day, you know we cover a
lot of leadership topics.
I speak to a lot of executivesabout the importance of culture
and company values and what Ifind is that you know, everybody

(41:41):
wants to have good people.
It's, but I think it's a factthat not everyone with a great

(42:06):
value statement has a greatculture.
And I'm curious, brian, whatyou might say about how you make
that real.
You know how you create areally good culture, not just a?
You know a list of values onthe wall.

Brian Lortie (42:21):
I'm really glad you brought that up, because
I've been a big believer in theimpact of culture for a long,
long time, and also how cultureis the net result of a bunch of
people spending time together,right, and I've had discussions
I must use the word argumentsbut I've had discussions with
people who didn't share that notin the company, luckily, but

(42:42):
you know other leaders.
We talk about these kinds ofthings and I once had somebody
say to me well, we're not bigenough to need to worry about
culture.
Or well, you know, ourorganizational structure isn't
kind of fit to think aboutculture, and so we really don't
have a culture.
And I said well, actually Idisagree.
You have a culture, you're justnot controlling it, you're not

(43:02):
informing it, you're notnurturing it.
And I think you know I think ofculture as being and this is
okay, I'm going to give you aplatitude so guilty as charged
before I say it but it's like agarden right, you can plant a
beautiful garden, but if you'renot nourishing it, you're not
making sure it gets sun andwater and protecting it from
harm, eventually it's just goingto wither and die and get
diseased.
And culture is the same thingand I we just did a lot of work

(43:26):
on culture with this last summer, because that kind of two and a
half years, I figured, okay,this is the time not to just let
it roll on its own.
But let's, let's.
Let's first of all decide as agroup what we want it to be,
what do we aspire to be, are weadhering to that, and how do we

(43:46):
mold that and form it and andmaintain it?
So we spend a lot of work onthat, which you know a lot of
small companies might not spendtime on, but boy it was.
It was time well spent and andI think it in, in a way, just
doing that informs the cultureright, it's part of our culture
to do that work and and it was,and it was very worthwhile.
And we started with hearing fromthe people like who are we,

(44:07):
what do we stand for, what doyou think about when you think
about this, this company?
Because at that point we hadsome people who'd been here for,
you know, over two years, andothers that had been fairly
recent.
So we did a cross section andthe words that came back were
just really great, with the onesyou would want to see, and it

(44:28):
was a combination of you knowhard work and intellectual
horsepower, but being nice andhaving fun and being respectful
and being open-minded and all ofthat.
And we put that up on ourwebsite, we put it up on our
walls, we remind ourselves, butwe also check in on that.
Now I do a town hall at leastevery quarter and in that town
hall I try and be faithful toasking the team how are we doing

(44:50):
on our culture?
Right, here's what we set outto do.
Here's what we said we werelast time we talked about this.
Are we still that?
And if we're not, why not?
And one of the core tenants ofour culture here is just an
openness of communication, likethere's nothing that's off
limits, whether it be the waywe're working or the way
somebody is being treated or adevelopment decision we're

(45:13):
making, and this view is sharedacross our leadership team.
If somebody has something thatthey don't feel is going right,
they need to tell us, tell me,tell my colleagues.
If there's something that'sgoing really well, please feel
free to share that too.
Right?
But it's this openness andtransparency and there's no
wrong answers to it.

(45:33):
But if we do that, it makeseverybody feel like they're part
of what we do and theirfingerprints are all over it,
because the job is big, the teamis small, so we can't have
people that just sit and kind oflet the work happen.
We all have to be activelydriving the work and driving the
culture.
So that's the way I kind ofthink about it.

(45:55):
It is something that I'velearned along the way is very
important.
I've, you know, I've made badchoices in terms of people on a
team before.
I learned from those choices.
Luckily it hasn't been everbeen too many.
For the most part I've beenvery, very fortunate there.
But you know I learned that oneor two bad people can really
mess up a company really fast.
So we pay a lot of attention tothat from day zero, all the way

(46:19):
through the life of the team.

Ben Comer (46:23):
And no jerks.
I like that as a core principle.

Brian Lortie (46:27):
And I, you know.
And then I say you know, look,if I'm, if I'm violating that in
some way, please let me know,cause you know feedback's
important right.
I mean, we all need to put amirror up once in a while, cause
you get going very quickly andit's easy to think that you know
you've got the answers to everyquestion and I certainly don't.
But I like to think that,collectively with a really
outstanding team, which I wouldhand on heart, I'd take this

(46:49):
team anywhere and put anychallenge in front of them.
I think we'll figure it out.

Ben Comer (46:55):
Obviously, technical expertise is extremely important
in a hire.
You want someone who's reallygood at what they do.
I'm curious, though, if there'sanything else that you look for
in a hire outside of that.
You know basic fitting a puzzlepiece into the right place in a
company.
You know they have the skills,you know they have the talent,

(47:17):
maybe they have the experience.
Are there any sort ofextraneous attributes, character
, that you look for in a hire?

Brian Lortie (47:27):
Absolutely, and in fact, you know, you just
outlined, you know, thetechnical skills super important
.
And again, we have some jobsthat are highly technical, where
the qualifications are veryclear and it's easy to say, okay
, here's the checklist, and theperson does or does not have
that in their education or theirexperience.
We also spend as much time, ifnot more so, on the soft skills

(47:52):
part as best we can.
And what do I mean by that?
Well, we use a behavioralinventory tool, behavioral
insights tool, for anyone that'sgetting pretty close to an
offer, right, sometimes we'll doit for two, even three
candidates as they're gettingcloser, depending on what the
job is, is, and that's a.
That's a tool that lets us andthe candidate understand, um,

(48:13):
how they approach challenges,how they approach team dynamics,
how they, you know, look at theworld right, and and I've been
through many of those types ofprograms I will say that this
one is really, really strong,and when I took it three years
ago or two and a half years ago,everybody in the company took
it founders, and we still use itto this day and it gives
insights that I didn't reallyappreciate about myself, right,

(48:36):
and part of that.
Then we can collect the outputsfrom that at a team level or at
a company level, and it givesus kind of a view of are we all
exactly alike?
The answer to that is no.
Are we complementary?
The answer to that is, for themost part, but also, are there
holes?
Are there areas where next timeyou hire gosh, it'd be great to

(48:57):
get somebody on the team with alittle more of this or a little
less of that, because we'reover-indexing.
So it's just one piece of it,but it really gives us insight
and what we've heard echoed backat us from candidates is they
say, well, I hope I get this job, but even if I don't, but that
was really cool, that was reallyvaluable.
I haven't been throughsomething like that before I get

(49:18):
a job and it's you know, it's asmall investment.
I mean, this isn't a lot ofmoney and time.
We have a really great teamsupporting our HR strategy and
we have external groups thatthey leverage to do that for us.
It really pays off, right, itreally pays off because we all
can learn all the time about howreferences to talk to people
and talk to people who knowthose people and ask them the

(49:39):
questions, because, at the endof the day making a hire.
We can't afford to make a badhire and then take 16 months to
work through that, realize it,manage the performance and then

(50:02):
find that actually we need topart ways.
That's a huge waste of time,it's heart-wrenching for
everybody involved and I reallydon't want to do it.
So we try and do the workbeforehand so that when somebody
joins they really feel likethis is a great place, I'm
enjoying it.
And then you know, I and therest of my colleagues on the

(50:22):
leadership team we check in withpeople a lot.
We try and spend a lot of timenot just talking about the
advancement of the program, buthow's it going and what can we
do differently?
How can I help you do your jobbetter?
What do you think we're missinghere as a team?
It's one of the benefits ofcoming out of COVID.
We talked a while ago, Ben,about how do we pull the company

(50:44):
together.
We founded this companycompletely virtually.
This was a Zoom-founded companyand we didn't meet.
We had known some of the folksbefore, but we didn't meet in
the context of this company,face-to-face with our board
members, until our first boardmeeting, which was well after
the company had been founded andwe had been working together
for, you know, way more than ayear.

(51:04):
So the good news is that partis behind us, because we're all
believers here in the value ofof being together as much as we
can.
We have, you know, a lot ofpeople based in the office here
outside of Philadelphia.
We have a half dozen folks in agreat office in San Diego,

(51:25):
folks in a great office in SanDiego, and then we do have
people in different places,because, even though I believe
in face-to-face interactions, Ialso I believe in the right fit
and the right talent more.
So we have erred on the side oftalent over geography.
But, that being said, we workhard to very frequently make
sure we're getting peopletogether and when we do, we get
to have those conversations.
And you know, I think everybodywould agree, Zoom is great, you

(51:46):
can get a lot done, but so isrunning into somebody's office
and say, hey, you have a minute,I need to run something by, or
I'd like to get your opinion, orhaven't seen you in a while and
we just finished that meetingon on chemistry but how's your,
how's your area kids doing?
Right, it's that kind of stuffthat that is really, I think,
super helpful.

Ben Comer (52:05):
Absolutely.
I'm curious about what's thename of that behavioral tool or
program.

Brian Lortie (52:16):
It's.
It's called the BehavioralInsight, that we call it the BI,
and I'm pretty sure it'sbehavioral insight and it's and
it's done by one of the externalgroups.
This is a validated tool.
It's used by large companiesall over the place.
I hadn't used it before.
I mean, you know, as you know,there's a whole catalog of
programs and they're all quiteuseful, but this is one that was
brought to us by our HR folksand I just love it and
everybody's really found that itgives a, you know, shines a

(52:37):
light on a different dimensionof them, rather than just the
MBTI and other things that we'veall done.

Ben Comer (52:43):
Excellent.
Well, in our final couple ofminutes here, Brian, I'd love to
hear what your top prioritiesare for 2025 and any key
upcoming milestones you'd liketo mention.

Brian Lortie (52:56):
Yeah for sure there are many, right, there's
no problem in listing those out.
Job number one here is todevelop the program and generate
, you know, high qualityoutstanding data in our three
clinical trials, right?
So asthma and COPD later thisyear and early next year, EoE
also early next year.
So those are going to be, youknow, really, that's what we are

(53:17):
here for is to generateimpressive, differentiated, high
quality data that will satisfyeither our own need and desire
to continue efficiently into thePhase 3 pivotals or to transact
that program.
So that's job number one,making sure that we've got the
capital to do that.
Right.
So we've got a number ofdifferent options.

(53:37):
We have Blackstone as a partner, but should we decide to go
further, we'll have additionalcapital needs.
So we're working through anumber of options there.
The good news is this is thefeedback we are getting as we
undertake that process is thisis a very high quality story and
it's one that really fits theneeds of a blue chip investor
base.

(53:57):
So we will be able to do thatand we've got optionality in
doing that.
So we're working that angle.
Continuing our strategicdiscussions, continuing to look
for new programs right, you know, we talked before about the
desire to have, you know, anability to evergreen the team to
some extent and to have aconveyor of opportunities so
that we can continue to leveragewhat we've built here beyond

(54:21):
any one program.
So you know, those are the majormilestones that we're looking
for.
But then I'm, you know, I'vebeen doing this long enough to
realize there are things thatare going to come up that I'm
going to have to prioritize anddeal with.
There are always going to becurveballs or surprises, either
internally or biologically orgeopolitically.
I mean, it's not like we're ina completely predictable world

(54:43):
out there, right?
So we have to keep an eye onall of that and we have to
understand how might that impactthe work that we're doing and
making sure we're stepping backand we're prepared and we have
sort of contingencies along theway.
But we've got the team, thepeople, the capital resources to
do that.
That gives me a lot of levers Ican pull right.
So, you know, I think we're inreally good shape, but now we

(55:07):
have to keep doing the job.

Ben Comer (55:10):
That is Brian Lortie, president and CEO at Uniquity
Bio.
I'm Ben Comer and you've justlistened to the Business of
Biotech.
Find us and subscribe anywhereyou listen to podcasts and be
sure to check out new weeklyvideo casts of these
conversations every Monday underthe Business of Biotech tab at
lifescienceleadercom.
We'll see you next week andthanks for listening.