Kopra Bio

What do they actually do

Kopra Bio is a preclinical biotech developing engineered, tumor‑selective viral therapies intended to make a patient’s own immune system attack solid tumors. Today they design and build viral vectors in the lab, test them on cancer cells, and evaluate efficacy and safety in mouse models. Their lead program (KB‑516) targets glioblastoma, and the company refers to its approach as a vectorized immunotherapy platform (InViTE) Kopra Bio homepage BIO exhibitor page.

They have reported strong preclinical results in mouse glioblastoma models, including a survival benefit of roughly 90% versus near‑zero in controls in the reported model, and are working with incubators and academic partners to advance toward IND‑enabling studies and early clinical testing Y Combinator QB3 award announcement. They are a small team operating through incubator programs and collaborations to build the preclinical package and prepare manufacturing for first‑in‑human trials in recurrent glioblastoma Y Combinator KFSHRC MoU press.

Who are their target customer(s)

• Neuro‑oncologists and clinical trial investigators at academic centers: They need therapies with convincing preclinical activity, a clear IND path, and GMP‑manufacturing readiness to ethically enroll patients and run trials in recurrent GBM.
• Patients with recurrent glioblastoma and caregivers: They have few effective options and want access to safe, timely, and geographically accessible trials aligned with standard regulatory steps.
• Academic labs and translational researchers: They require robust viral vectors, reproducible data, and operational support to run animal and immune‑response studies that can translate toward IND.
• CDMOs and advanced therapy manufacturing partners: They look for programs with defined regulatory requirements, scalable production processes, and credible preclinical data before committing capacity.
• Early‑stage biotech investors, foundations, and grant makers: They need clear de‑risking milestones (repeatable in vivo efficacy, GLP tox, manufacturability) and a realistic path to first‑in‑human data before funding.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Target 8–10 lead neuro‑oncology PIs at major GBM centers with a concise preclinical data packet (survival and immune readouts) and offer funded pilots or IIT support to de‑risk first use, leveraging incubator and award credibility QB3 award YC listing.
• First 50: Expand to regional academic centers via a multi‑site investigator meeting, provide an IND‑ready dossier, and offer MOUs for supply or shared‑cost Phase 1 setup; in parallel, secure LOIs from 1–2 CDMOs to address manufacturability concerns.
• First 100: Stand up a small clinical ops/CRO function with centralized IRB, training, and logistics to add sites quickly, and partner with advocacy groups/registries to route eligible recurrent‑GBM patients; use early human safety/PK/efficacy signals and regulatory milestones to accelerate site sign‑ups and finalize CDMO contracts.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

GBM incidence is about 3.2 per 100,000 in the U.S./Europe, translating to tens of thousands of new cases annually across major markets; one analysis estimated ~29,440 incident GBM patients across the U.S., EU5, and Japan (7MM) in 2020 AANS DelveInsight. Oncolytic/gene therapies vary widely in price; a precedent oncolytic virus (Imlygic) was guided at ~$65,000 per course, while the median annual price for gene/oncolytic virus therapies across oncology has been reported at ~$448,000 Amgen press release JAMA Network Open.

Bottom-up calculation:

If ~29,000 incident GBM patients exist annually in 7MM and ~60% receive treatment at recurrence, that’s ~17,000 candidates per year. Using Imlygic’s ~$65,000 per‑course benchmark for an intratumoral oncolytic therapy implies an initial annual TAM of roughly $1.1B for recurrent GBM in 7MM (17,000 × $65,000) Amgen press release DelveInsight.

Assumptions:

• TAM focuses on recurrent GBM in 7MM; most GBM ultimately recurs, but only a subset is treated at recurrence (modeled here at ~60%).
• Pricing uses Imlygic’s ~$65,000 average course as a conservative benchmark for intratumoral oncolytic therapy; actual CNS delivery pricing could differ.
• Expansion to other solid tumors is excluded from this initial TAM; it would increase TAM meaningfully if programs translate beyond GBM.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• Replimune: Developer of HSV‑1–based oncolytic immunotherapies (e.g., RP1) tested across tumor types and in PD‑1 combinations; an active multi‑center clinical footprint in intratumoral oncolytic immunotherapy Replimune clinical trials data summary.
• DNX‑2401 (DNAtrix): Oncolytic adenovirus engineered for glioma selectivity; produced durable responses in early glioblastoma studies and has been combined with checkpoint blockade—most directly comparable to a GBM‑focused viral approach Nature Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov.
• Imlygic (T‑VEC) / Amgen: First FDA‑approved oncolytic virus (HSV‑1 expressing GM‑CSF) for injectable melanoma lesions; sets precedent for safety, administration, and pricing (~$65k average course) in oncolytic virotherapy Amgen FDA approval.
• CAVATAK / Viralytics (Merck/MSD V937): Coxsackievirus A21 program evaluated IV and intratumorally and in PD‑1 combinations; Merck’s acquisition and combo trials underscore big‑pharma interest in systemically deliverable oncolytic approaches Merck acquisition ClinicalTrials.gov.
• Oncolytics Biotech: Developer of pelareorep (reovirus) delivered IV and positioned as an immune‑priming oncolytic agent; advancing combination regimens across solid tumors, relevant to platform‑level viral immunotherapy strategies Company science ASCO updates.