Kymera · conference-presentation
Kymera | Investor Day Presentation Deck | 105 slides
105 pages · 4 arc beats · 2 loops
Kymera | Investor Day Presentation Deck | 105 slides
Kymera · 2021-12 arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 2 LOOPS
15101520253035404550556065707580859095100105
Deck intelligence map
4 coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON
Narrative range 27 total
Metadata
Components
Metrics
Tools
Frameworks
Beats
Loops
Attention 3 slides 100% 3/3 slides 100% 3/3 slides · 10 hits — 0/3 slides
66.7% 2/3 slides — 0/3 slides
100% 3/3 slides — 0/3 slides
Interest 7 slides 100% 7/7 slides 100% 7/7 slides · 24 hits — 0/7 slides
14.3% 1/7 slides 71.4% 5/7 slides 100% 7/7 slides 71.4% 5/7 slides Desire 10 slides 100% 10/10 slides 100% 10/10 slides · 49 hits — 0/10 slides
40% 4/10 slides 50% 5/10 slides 100% 10/10 slides 100% 10/10 slides Action 7 slides 100% 7/7 slides 100% 7/7 slides · 22 hits — 0/7 slides
28.6% 2/7 slides 28.6% 2/7 slides 100% 7/7 slides — 0/7 slides
Slide inventory
105 every slide · same image gating as the playbook
04
Uses a contrast-pairs framework to position the Proteome as a more dynamic and treatable target than the Genome.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Interest
05
The slide uses a 3-step process diagram to illustrate the biological mechanism of protein degradation.present_solution
Open slide detailBeat · Interest
06
Uses a visual metaphor of a pie chart/wedge to represent the 'druggable' vs 'undrugged' proteome.frame_problem
07
Uses a timeline-style visual to contrast established modalities with the emerging TPD field.summarize
08
Includes a mix of internal Kymera leadership and one external partner (Sanofi).introduce_nominees
10
The slide features a stylized '5' logo, likely commemorating the company's 5th anniversary (est. 2016).establish_context
11
The slide uses a bulleted list to highlight key company attributes, including their focus on Targeted Protein Degradation (TPD).summarize
12
The slide uses a Gantt-chart style layout to show the progression of various drug programs from discovery through clinical phases.plan_implementation
13
The slide uses a five-column layout to categorize the company's strategic approach.summarize
15
The slide uses a split-timeline approach with drug development milestones above the line and corporate/financing events below.summarize
19
Presented by Jared Gollob, M.D., Chief Medical Officer at Kymera R&D Day.front_matter
20
The slide uses a biological pathway diagram to illustrate the Myddosome complex and the specific advantage of a degrader over an inhibitor.present_solution
21
Includes a mechanism of action diagram, a market data table, and a summary of limitations of current therapies.size_opportunity
22
Data shows significant upregulation of IRAK4 in lesional skin compared to healthy controls across multiple cell types and measurement methods.analyze_data
23
Data source: Alavi et al., Society for Investigative Dermatology Annual Meeting, 2021.analyze_data
24
The left chart is a volcano plot showing selectivity; the right chart is a dose-response curve comparing the degrader to a kinase inhibitor.analyze_data
25
Includes bar charts for degradation and physiological markers, plus a line chart for EAE clinical scores.analyze_data
26
The slide outlines a clinical trial methodology involving healthy volunteers (HV) and patients across SAD and MAD cohorts.present_framework
28
The chart displays mean (± SE) percent IRAK4 change from baseline. P-values are relative to placebo.analyze_data
29
The slide uses a process flow diagram to explain the experimental procedure.present_framework
30
Data shows mean percentage change from baseline for various cytokines (IFNy, IL1b, IL6, IL8, IL10, IL12, IL17, TNFa).analyze_data
31
The table uses checkmarks to indicate inhibition activity across different targets and stimuli.compare_peers
32
SAD = Single Ascending Dose; AE = Adverse Event; SAE = Serious Adverse Event.summarize
33
The slide compares Day 1 and Day 14 PK profiles, highlighting the accumulation and steady-state achievement.analyze_data
35
Data shows high efficacy at lower doses with a plateau effect observed at 100mg.analyze_data
36
The slide compares IRAK4 reduction percentages across two cell types (lymphocytes and monocytes) at Day 7 and Day 14 for various dosage groups.analyze_data
37
Data shows significantly higher accumulation in skin tissue compared to plasma at trough levels.analyze_data
38
Data presented at Kymera R&D Day 2021. LLOQ = Lower Limit of Quantitation.analyze_data
39
IRAK4 is stained red, DAPI is blue, and panCK (pan cytokeratin) is green.illustrate_case
40
Data shows dose-dependent reduction in cytokine levels compared to placebo, correlated with IRAK4 degradation percentages.analyze_data
41
The table details specific adverse events (Headache, Palpitations, Nausea) with subject counts, severity, and cohort distribution.analyze_data
42
SAD = Single Ascending Dose; MAD = Multiple Ascending Dose; LLOQ = Lower Limit of Quantitation; HS = Hidradenitis Suppurativa; AD = Atopic Dermatitis.summarize
45
The slide uses a hierarchical structure where three core pillars feed into an 'Expanding capabilities' foundation.present_framework
46
The slide uses a grid layout to map drug assets against therapeutic areas (Dermatology, Respiratory, GI, Rheumatology, Hematology, Neurology, Oncology) and coloother
47
The slide uses a process flow diagram to map biological signaling pathways from upstream initiation to downstream clinical manifestations.present_framework
48
Includes a biological pathway diagram and three charts demonstrating efficacy in inhibiting pNFkB, cytokines, and IRAK4 degradation.present_solution
50
The slide illustrates a biological pathway diagram showing how IRAKiMiDs degrade both IRAK4 and IMiD substrates to inhibit proliferation and survival in cancer present_solution
51
The slide uses a structured layout to contrast patient numbers with clinical disease characteristics.size_opportunity
52
Includes potency metrics (DC50, EC50) and dose-response curves for multiple cell lines.analyze_data
54
The slide demonstrates synergistic efficacy of KT-413 across three different combination therapies.analyze_data
55
The diagram illustrates a multi-arm clinical trial design with dose escalation (DL1, DL2, DLx) leading to MTD/RP2D expansion cohorts for various indications, inpresent_framework
56
The diagram maps clinical trial inputs (left) to regulatory outcomes (right).plan_implementation
59
The slide uses a biological pathway diagram to explain the mechanism of action for a therapeutic target.present_framework
60
The slide uses a central column to highlight patient numbers (US and ROW) for four specific disease indications, with clinical rationale on the right.size_opportunity
61
The chart is a volcano plot, a common visualization in proteomics to show statistical significance vs. fold change.analyze_data
62
The slide displays two line charts showing tumor volume over time for different dosing regimens.analyze_data
63
Includes box plots for gene expression and tumor volume growth curves, plus a Kaplan-Meier survival curve.summarize
64
The slide uses a process flow diagram to show the progression from initial dose levels (DL1, DL2, DLx) to expansion cohorts for various cancer types and combinapresent_framework
65
The slide uses a process-flow diagram to map clinical trial phases to regulatory approval outcomes.plan_implementation
68
The diagram illustrates a complex signaling loop involving STAT3, cytokines, and various cell types (leukocytes, endothelial, stromal) leading to disease statesestablish_context
69
The slide uses a structured table-like layout to map diseases to patient impact metrics and scientific evidence.size_opportunity
70
The slide displays bar charts for fibrosis and bone growth, and line charts for clinical scores in arthritis and EAE models, alongside a summary table for the Eanalyze_data
73
The slide uses a three-column structure to define the selection process: Philosophy, Target Types, and Therapeutic Profile.present_framework
74
The slide uses a timeline-based grid to map specific assets (KT-474, KT-413, KT-253, KT-333) and future target pipelines against years 2021-2026.plan_implementation
76
The chart is a waterfall plot showing dependency scores across various cell lines, illustrating that p53-wildtype cells are highly dependent on MDM2.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
77
The slide uses a biological pathway diagram to contrast two therapeutic modalities (inhibitor vs. degrader) in the context of p53 regulation.present_solution
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
78
The slide uses a three-part process flow (degradation -> stabilization -> killing) supported by dose-response curves and a summary table.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
79
The slide uses a biological mechanism diagram to explain the experimental results shown in the Western blots.illustrate_case
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
80
Shows that KT-253 (degrader) induces apoptosis even after short exposure, whereas DS-3032 (SMI) does not.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
81
The slide compares tumor volume over time against biomarker expression levels (p53, p21, PUMA) following KT-253 administration.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
82
The left chart is a waterfall plot showing CRISPR sensitivity scores; the right chart is a dose-response curve comparing KT-253 and DS-3032.analyze_data
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
83
Uses a Venn diagram to segment potential patient populations for MDM2 degradation therapy.present_framework
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
86
The slide uses a visual metaphor of a 'wedge' expanding the druggable portion of the human proteome.compare_peers
87
Uses a three-column structure to categorize target classes and corresponding TPD solutions (Heterobifunctional Degraders, Molecular Glues).present_solution
88
The slide uses a list-based structure to detail technical capabilities, with a sidebar legend explaining target types.present_framework
89
The chart uses dot size to represent abundance and color to represent different ligases/targets across tissue types.analyze_data
90
The slide uses a dot plot to show expression profiles and molecular modeling to show ternary complex formation.present_solution
91
Shows Western blot data for E3 ligase expression and dose-response curves for POI degradation in cancer vs blood cells, plus in vivo viability comparison.present_solution
92
The slide uses a horizontal process-like layout to categorize different scientific screening techniques.present_framework
93
The slide uses a process flow diagram for the fragment-based optimization and a heatmap for the covalent ligand screening.analyze_data
94
The table demonstrates a clear progression in optimization from Degrader 1 to Degrader 4, particularly in oral bioavailability (F%) across species.analyze_data
95
The slide uses a process flow: MoA description -> Preclinical data (dog) -> Human prediction model.present_framework
96
The slide uses a visual comparison between 'Heterobifunctional Degraders' and 'Molecular Glues' to frame the technical approach.present_solution
100
The slide uses a color-coded system to distinguish between Oncology (dark blue) and Immunology-Inflammation (orange) programs.plan_implementation
Open slide detailBeat · Action
103
The slide uses a Gantt-style chart to show the progression of various drug candidates (KT-474, KT-413, KT-333, KT-253) through clinical phases.plan_implementation
Open slide detailBeat · Action