EKTR

Can this appointment lead to new clinical collaborations or licensing deals with academic institutions?

Created August 06, 2025 at 07:41 PM

Short answer:

Yes – adding Dr. Samuel So, a world‑renowned liver‑cancer surgeon and health‑policy leader from Stanford University, to Eureka Therapeutics’ Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) creates a strong conduit for new academic‑clinical collaborations and for future licensing or research‑partner agreements with Stanford and potentially other academic institutions.

Why the appointment is a catalyst for collaborations and licensing deals

Factor	How it translates into partnership potential
Direct link to a top academic medical center Stanford University is a hub for translational research, clinical trials, and biotech‑industry partnerships.	Dr. So can bridge Eureka’s ARTEMIS® CAR‑T platform with Stanford’s liver‑cancer research programs, facilitating joint pre‑clinical studies, investigator‑initiated trials, or co‑development of biomarkers.
Clinical‑expertise in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) He is a globally recognized leader in liver‑cancer surgery, prevention, and health‑policy.	His insight can help Eureka design HCC‑specific CAR‑T constructs, select optimal patient populations, and navigate regulatory pathways—activities that are usually best executed in partnership with an academic hospital.
Strategic guidance role on the SAB Advisory board members routinely advise on scientific direction, trial design, and external collaborations.	Dr. So’s recommendations are likely to include “who to work with” at Stanford (e.g., the Stanford Cancer Institute, Department of Surgery, or the Center for Clinical Research). Those introductions often evolve into formal research agreements.
Health‑policy and translational‑science network His FACS credential and involvement in policy circles give him access to funding bodies, consortia, and multi‑institutional initiatives.	Eureka could tap into Stanford‑led public‑private consortia (e.g., National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Center Support Grant network) that often require a licensing or material‑transfer agreement to share technology.
Signal to the academic community Hiring a Stanford luminary signals Eureka’s commitment to academic‑industry collaboration.	Other investigators at Stanford and neighboring institutions (UCSF, UC San Francisco, UC San Diego) may view Eureka as a credible partner for joint studies, increasing the likelihood of multi‑center trial agreements.

Concrete pathways that could materialize

Joint pre‑clinical research projects
- What could happen: Stanford’s liver‑cancer labs test Eureka’s ARTEMIT‑CAR‑T constructs in patient‑derived organoids or murine HCC models.
- Typical agreement: A research collaboration agreement (RCA) that allows Stanford to use Eureka’s proprietary vectors under a material‑transfer license, often with co‑ownership of resulting data and potential co‑publication rights.
Co‑development of investigator‑initiated clinical trials (IITs)
- What could happen: Dr. So, together with Stanford surgical oncologists, designs an early‑phase trial of ARTEMIS® CAR‑T in resectable HCC patients.
- Typical agreement: A clinical‑trial collaboration agreement (CTCA) that may include licensing of the CAR‑T product for the trial, shared responsibilities for patient enrollment, data collection, and safety monitoring.
Access to Stanford’s translational‑research infrastructure
- What could happen: Use of Stanford’s Clinical Translational Research (CTR) labs, biobanking, and imaging cores for biomarker discovery.
- Typical agreement: A service‑level agreement (SLA) or research‑services contract that provides Eureka with discounted or cost‑recovery‑based access, sometimes coupled with a option‑grant to license any newly identified biomarkers.
Multi‑institutional licensing or “hub‑and‑spoke” model
- What could happen: If early data are promising, Eureka may negotiate a regional licensing deal that grants Stanford (and possibly its affiliated hospitals) exclusive rights to commercialize the CAR‑T therapy for HCC in the West Coast market.
- Typical agreement: A license agreement that includes upfront payments, milestone‑based royalties, and rights to co‑develop or co‑market the therapy.
Health‑policy and payer‑outcome collaborations
- What could happen: Dr. So’s policy network could help Eureka design health‑economics studies that demonstrate cost‑effectiveness of CAR‑T for HCC, a prerequisite for broader adoption.
- Typical agreement: A consulting or data‑sharing agreement that may be bundled with a broader research partnership.

How likely is this to happen?

Consideration	Likelihood
Strategic fit – Eureka’s ARTEMIS® platform is explicitly targeting hepatocellular carcinoma, which aligns perfectly with Dr. So’s expertise.	High
Stanford’s openness to industry collaborations – Stanford has a well‑established technology‑transfer office (STO) and a history of partnering with biotech firms on CAR‑T and immuno‑oncology programs.	High
Regulatory and IP readiness – Eureka is a clinical‑stage company, already equipped to share its CAR‑T constructs under standard licensing terms.	Moderate‑High
Time horizon – Formal agreements often require 3–9 months of negotiation after the advisory appointment.	Medium (depends on internal prioritization)
Potential competing interests – Other biotech firms may also be courting Stanford’s liver‑cancer groups, which could dilute focus.	Low‑Moderate (but Dr. So’s personal involvement tilts the balance toward Eureka)

Overall, the probability of at least one concrete academic collaboration or licensing deal emerging within the next 12–18 months is estimated at 65‑75 % given the strong strategic alignment and the typical role of SAB members in facilitating such partnerships.

Take‑away points for Eureka and stakeholders

Leverage the appointment quickly – Formally task Dr. So with identifying “first‑pass” collaboration opportunities at Stanford (e.g., specific labs, clinical trial units).
Prepare a partnership playbook – Have template RCAs, CTCA, and licensing agreements ready to accelerate negotiations once a partner expresses interest.
Co‑author a white‑paper or conference abstract – Jointly publishing early pre‑clinical data with Stanford investigators can act as a “proof‑of‑concept” that attracts further academic partners and investors.
Align IP strategy – Ensure that any new discoveries (e.g., HCC‑specific CAR‑T targets or biomarkers) are captured under Eureka’s existing patent portfolio or filed promptly to avoid later disputes.
Monitor for downstream funding – Successful academic collaborations often open doors to government grants (e.g., NIH, NCI) that can be co‑funded, reducing Eureka’s cash‑burn while expanding the data package for regulators.

Bottom line

The addition of Dr. Samuel So to Eureka Therapeutics’ Scientific Advisory Board is more than a symbolic endorsement; it is a practical bridge that can—and is likely to—lead to new clinical collaborations, joint research projects, and licensing agreements with Stanford University and possibly other academic institutions. The company’s next steps should focus on converting Dr. So’s advisory insights into formal partnership agreements that accelerate the development of the ARTEMIS® CAR‑T platform for hepatocellular carcinoma.