SynsoryBio

What do they actually do

SynsoryBio is an early-stage R&D biotech building a platform to engineer “if‑then” behavior into protein therapeutics: the drug remains off during delivery and switches on only when it senses a disease-specific signal at the target tissue. They do not have a commercial drug; their work today is focused on designing and testing conditional protein switches in the lab YC profile/launch post.

Day to day, they design proteins that combine a sensing element with an effector so activity is unmasked only in diseased tissue, then express/purify these constructs and measure conditional activity in cell assays (and, next, animal models). Their approach builds on the founders’ prior research on conditional control of protein activity eLife paper, and they are actively seeking collaborations with immunologists and oncologists to validate the platform YC launch post.

The company completed YC (Winter 2024) and received a U.S. NSF SBIR Phase I award to fund near‑term R&D on protein switches that activate immunotherapies in response to disease signals YC profile NSF SBIR via GovTribe.

Who are their target customer(s)

• R&D teams at large pharmas and established biotechs developing protein immunotherapies: Potent assets are limited by systemic toxicity that constrains dosing and indications; they need a way to keep activity off systemically and turn it on only at the disease site YC launch post.
• Small or clinical‑stage biotechs with validated protein assets that failed or stalled due to safety issues: They want a practical route to rescue or re‑position existing molecules by adding conditional control to reduce off‑target effects without restarting discovery YC launch post.
• Academic immunologists and oncologists running preclinical studies: They need conditional versions of therapeutics to test whether targeted activation improves tumor‑specific activity and safety; SynsoryBio is seeking these collaborations YC launch post.
• Contract research organizations (CROs) and translational labs supporting drug developers: Clients are demanding candidates with better safety profiles; CROs need scalable, modular engineering approaches to produce and test conditional proteins in standard assays.
• Pharma business‑development and licensing teams: They face portfolio limits from safety liabilities and look for platform partners that can extend indications or patient reach by controlling where and when a protein drug is active YC profile NSF SBIR via GovTribe.

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

• First 10: Run free or low‑cost pilot collaborations with nearby academic immunology/oncology labs and a few small biotechs to build conditional versions of toxic-but-validated assets, leveraging founders’ technical credibility and YC/NSF signaling to secure introductions YC launch post eLife paper.
• First 50: Convert successful pilots into paid translational projects with case studies and conference posters; use SBIR-funded results and early in vivo data to help CROs and biotechs commit to statements of work or LOIs NSF SBIR via GovTribe YC launch post.
• First 100: Approach mid‑to‑large pharmas with milestone‑based pilots (co‑development or option‑to‑license) backed by aggregated safety‑improvement data; add a BD lead and outsource scale‑up/GLP work to CROs to present a clear path to regulatory readiness YC profile NSF SBIR via GovTribe.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

Global protein therapeutics represent a mid‑hundreds‑of‑billions market; one estimate places the 2024 market around $367B, which is the theoretical ceiling if conditional activation applies broadly IMARC.

Bottom-up calculation:

For SynsoryBio’s initial focus, cancer biologics are about $109B in 2024 Precedence Research. If 10–30% of these are toxicity‑limited and suitable for conditional switching, the immediate candidate pool is roughly $11–33B; eventual revenue capture would depend on specific licensing/royalty terms.

Assumptions:

• 10–30% of cancer biologics are constrained by systemic toxicity and are good technical fits for conditional activation (illustrative fraction).
• Deal structures are primarily licensing with low single‑digit royalties or equivalent economics.
• Over time, the platform can extend beyond oncology to other protein therapeutic classes.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• CytomX Therapeutics: Clinical‑stage developer of masked “Probody” antibodies that are inactivated in healthy tissue and activated by tumor proteases, with multiple partnerships and data showing reduced systemic toxicity company review paper.
• Amunix (Sanofi): Originator of XTEN‑based masked proteins (XPAT/XPAC) that are protease‑released in tumors; acquired by Sanofi to advance tumor‑selective biologics acquisition PR XPAT preclinical.
• Xilio Therapeutics: Engineers cytokines and fusion proteins (e.g., IL‑12, IL‑2) that are inert systemically and activated in the tumor microenvironment to widen the therapeutic window pipeline data.
• ALX Oncology / ScalmiBio (SHIELD): ALX acquired ScalmiBio’s SHIELD masking tech to enable tumor‑restricted antibody binding and reduce activity in normal tissue—targeting the same safety problem space announcement.
• NBE Therapeutics: Develops next‑gen ADCs with cleavable linkers that preferentially release payloads in tumors; different mechanism but aimed at improving the therapeutic index of potent biologics company linker review.