Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Product Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

CPRIT approves nine product-development awards, authorizes advanced payments and a competitive cost-adjustment RFA

2112350 · January 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The oversight committee approved nine product development awards after full review and due diligence, delegated contracting authority, authorized advanced payments consistent with the General Appropriations Act, and approved a proposed competitive cost-adjustment RFA to reallocate leftover funds to high-performing existing grantees.

The CPRIT oversight committee approved nine product development research awards after a competitive multi-stage review and delegated contract negotiation authority to the CEO and staff.

Chief product development officer Dr. Ken Smith reported that the program received a record 90 preliminary applications for the cycle; panels advanced 22 full applications to review, and the Program Integration Committee recommended nine awards after interviews and due diligence. The nine companies recommended covered a range of therapeutic and diagnostic efforts, including blood-based early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (Curve Biosciences), a prior grantee’s T-cell therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MyTeller Therapeutics/My Marker Therapeutics), a telomere-lengthening platform to extend CAR-T activity (Telos Biotech), a personal cancer vaccine program for head and neck cancer (Membrex/MediClips), a colorectal cancer-targeted small molecule (Barricade), a bispecific T-cell engager for CT83-expressing solid tumors (Ypsilon), an oral inhibitor for adrenocortical carcinoma (Orphanogen), a PARP/ALC1-targeting agent for HR-deficient tumors (Eisbach Bio/“EyesBack Bio” in transcript), and a single-cell functional assay for immune resistance in NSCLC to guide checkpoint therapy (Arison). Several applicants indicated plans to relocate headquarters to Texas as part of their proposals; CPRIT funding does not reimburse relocation expenses.

After due diligence and negotiated reductions (Smith said final budgets were generally ~10% lower than initial recommendations), staff presented a recommended slate that the oversight committee approved by voice vote. Dr. Rosenfeld identified and recused himself from one application (DP250159) and did not participate in that vote; the committee voted separately on that application and on the remaining eight.

Advanced payments and competitive cost-adjustment RFA

The committee authorized CPRIT, pursuant to General Appropriations Act article 9, section 4.02(a), to disperse grant funds via advanced payments upon execution of the award contract and completion of required tranches for the companies approved. In the meeting transcript staff described authorizing advanced payments for the six companies approved for advanced payments that day (the transcript used the phrase "6 companies" in reference to advanced payment authority), and the oversight committee approved that motion by voice vote.

Staff also proposed a competitive cost-adjustment RFA to allocate about $9.4 million of remaining funding to successful, previously funded product-development grantees that have met milestones and need additional capital to complete manufacturing, clinical cohorts, or other goals. The motion to approve the competitive cost-adjustment RFA passed by voice vote.

Why it matters

The product-development awards fund late-stage translational work—manufacturing, clinical trials, biomarker assay development—that can move technologies closer to patients. CPRIT’s product-development portfolio is designed to both attract companies to Texas and to accelerate trials and technology translation. Committee members praised the depth of review and asked that review critiques be available to applicants for future funding opportunities.

Process notes

Dr. Smith described a logistically complex review process: eight initial review panels that yielded the top three per panel, 22 full-application review panels, three-hour company interviews, and long written critiques. The nine funded companies underwent due diligence and subsequent budget negotiations before award approvals.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to approve DP250159 (conflict recusal for Dr. Rosenfeld): approved by voice vote; Dr. Rosenfeld recused and did not vote on that item. - Motion to approve the remaining eight product development awards and delegate contracting authority: approved by voice vote (motion carried). - Motion to authorize advanced payments pursuant to the General Appropriations Act (described in the meeting as authorization to disperse advanced payments to six companies upon contract execution and tranche completion): approved by voice vote (motion carried). - Motion to approve the competitive cost-adjustment RFA (to deploy ~$9.4M to deserving existing grantees): approved by voice vote (motion carried).

Attributions: Dr. Ken Smith (Chief Product Development Officer), Miss Doyle (CEO)

Ending note

Staff will finalize contract negotiations and manage disbursement of advanced payments consistent with contract terms and statutory authority; the competitive cost-adjustment RFA will be published to solicit applications from eligible previous grantees and will include peer review and tranching.