Background

A mid-sized oncology biotech regained several early-stage programs previously out-licensed to pharma and returned without technical failure. With limited internal resources, the company needed to determine whether these assets still held scientific and commercial potential and whether to reposition or discontinue them. Larka was engaged to rapidly assess three programs and guide resource allocation within a eight-week timeframe.

Our approach

Larka first created concise program briefs summarizing mechanism of action, development history, available evidence, and key gaps, using client documentation, scientific literature, clinical and regulatory databases, company disclosures, proprietary datasets, and targeted expert input.

The team then performed a rapid evaluation across five dimensions. Scientific viability was assessed through a high-level review of pharmacology and mechanistic coherence. Differentiation was evaluated using a snapshot of standard of care and pipeline activity from clinical registries and competitive benchmarks. Operational feasibility was examined directionally based on internal capabilities, cost considerations, and typical development timelines. Commercial attractiveness was estimated through order-of-magnitude patient sizing using epidemiology data and Larka’s sizing tools. Finally, biological rationale and indication remapping were explored by checking MoA–tumor fit and target expression using published datasets.

These findings were consolidated into clear go/no-go recommendations, each supported by a short rationale and next steps.

Outcome

Two assets were repositioned into indications with stronger biological and commercial logic, while one was deprioritized due to limited differentiation and a crowded competitive landscape. The portfolio committee endorsed the recommendations, enabling focused resource reallocation and maintaining optionality for future out-licensing.