We’re online with Daniela Marino, CEO and co-founder of one of the best companies in Europe for tissue therapeutics, CUTISS.

We discussed the story behind CUTISS and its current series C fundraising. We also discussed cell therapy in general and why kids are good at preventing burnout.

This episode is sponsored by CUTISS, the only TechBio company in the advanced clinical stage of developing skin tissue therapies. Learn how you can support CUTISS on its path to Series C success: https://bit.ly/flotbio-cutiss

⭐️ ABOUT THE SPEAKER

In 2023, Daniela Marino was named as one of the 30 Rising Leaders in the healthcare industry, thanks to the impact of CUTISS, the company she co-founded as a spin-off from the University of Zurich. Here, she and her team have made waves for people suffering from severe skin injuries and defects through regenerative medicine, tissue engineering, and skin pigmentation.

🔗 LINKS MENTIONED

• CUTISS Homepage (technology, about us): https://cutiss.swiss
• CUTISS Deck Series C: https://cutiss.swiss/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/CUTISS-AG-Teaser-Q1-2025_Series-C.pdf
• Thomas Ybert, DNA Script 🇫🇷 | DNA Printing & Synthesis | E27: https://flot.bio/episode/thomas-ybert-dna-script-dna-printing/
• Ingmar Hoerr, CureVac | Founding a €20B Biotech | E03: https://flot.bio/episode/ingmar-hoerr-curevac-founding-a-20b-biotech-and-almost-dying-as-ceo/
• Giammaria Giuliani profile https://www.forbes.com/profile/giammaria-giuliani/
• Hansjorg Wyss profile – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansjörg_Wyss

Transcript

[00:00:00] Intro

Daniela Marino: That’s the beauty of the product because of its intrinsic characteristic of being a real tissue and not, for example, a cell spray. We can also target PA patients which are doing an elective surgery. This is an incredible opportunity because it opens up a huge plethora of indications. It can be used in so many different applications that it’s also business wise extremely attractive.

And there is companies in the US which have done tissues and they have raised more than 700 million altogether. I like to consider K, it’s like the deep sea of tissue engineering. We have done everything with like 90 million last year. We started our round sea on the backhand of the readout of phase two, which was brilliant.

Philip Hemme: I saw you, you said, I would sure be burn if I didn’t have kids. Yes. Sometimes I hear about the opposite. I’m.

New episode. I’m your host, Philip, and on this show I’m interviewing the best European biotech to help you grow a new avenue for cell therapy. Is tissue therapeutics. One of the best company at this is Qs, which has a positive phase two data and raised over $90 million. So I caught up with its founder Daniella, while online, while she was in Zurich.

I didn’t know her personally, but I heard many good things about the company before. We talked about the story behind QTI and its current series C fundraising. We also talked about self therapy at large and why kids are good at preventing burnout. For transparency, this episode has been sponsored by qti.

So here’s my conversation with Daniel and please hit the like and follow button if you’re enjoying it. Alright, welcome to the show. 

Daniela Marino: Thank you. Thank you for having me guys. 

Philip Hemme: It’s cool. 

[00:01:41] Story of CUTISS

Philip Hemme: I want to, to start with the story behind QTI and what was before because you, the company started in 2017, but I think the ID started way before I think out of your, of your post research.

Could, so could you expand on how were the beginnings? 

Daniela Marino: Absolutely. So I am a bio technologist and I was always fascinated by regenerative medicine and stem cells. So that was my, my passion. And after my PhD at the ETH in, in stem cell biology I decided to go more. Applied. And my boss at the a TH was a dermatologist, so I was always talking about skin with him.

And I started actually getting fascinated by this organ because it’s a, it’s our largest organ. It has a strong regenerative potential. So every, every month your top skin is new. And I found that really, really interesting. So when I started my postdoc research at the University of Zurich, I decided to join the lab called Tissue Biology Research Unit, where there was a, a group of scientists working together but really in, in, in close connection with surgeons at the Children’s Hospital in Zurich to try and, and produce human skin for kids, which had a burn or need to remove a cancer.

And I was not. The invent inventor of the tech, of the technology, because when I joined the lab, it was 2009 and there was already some research going on, but I definitely saw the potential of the products where we did the first patient between 2014 and 2016. And that’s when my idea of the company started cooking because I was like, well, it works.

It seems to be working. I think it does work. And what do we do now? And and I just thought that, you know, I, I, that’s why people do research because they wanna do something meaningful for people that need innovation and needs new technologies. And, and I thought, well, if we got that far we, we have to now make sure that this product can go all the way, all the way up to the, to the market, because that’s where patients can actually access it.

Right. And the problem is that, I mean we were all academics, so professors, postdoc, PhDs, and I. Nobody else had a clue what to do. And and it was, it was a, a decision which came, you know, pretty quickly into my head to, to try and build a business plan. And I literally was Googling business plan template.

So I have no idea. But I am very lucky. I, I, you know, I am very good at talking and I, I’m not very afraid of asking questions and, and poking anybody so slowly I started getting help from different coaches and different people that had a couple of ideas. And the business plan finally, you know, came into life and in 2017, so, you know, really took years to, from the first idea to the, to the inception the phase one.

So the first clinical trial was completed, and we said, okay, let’s go. So in 2017, me and four other co-founders decided to, to create the company. It was March 17. Awesome. 

[00:04:47] Positive Phase 2 Data

Philip Hemme: Also, and, and now, I mean, you have. Had your phase two readouts, over 65 patients, you’ve raised over almost $90 million. You’re enrolling for phase three, you have commercial for another product.

I mean, it’s amazing. And we’ll talk about all of that. Maybe it’s, see, start with on the, on the product itself. I think it, it’s really, it’s quite unique. I’ve, I’ve not seen anything else like this. And so can, yeah. Can you talk, I mean, can you talk about the, the product itself? Mm-hmm. What you’re trying to achieve.

Daniela Marino: Sure. I mean, we are in a very new sector of advanced therapies producing tissue therapy, so everybody’s probably familiar to cell therapy, mostly in oncology and, and gene therapy in, you know, rare disease. And tissue therapy is the third pillar of the advanced therapy group. And you know, it’s maybe the most complex one because to build tissues one needs cells and metrics and 3D structures.

And it just took really decades to get to the points where today, indeed there is blood vessels which are approved by the, the FDA. There is corns, which are approved by the MMA, there is cartilage, there is muscle, you know, which is being developed. And it’s just the future. I mean, these. Tissues are gonna be replacing body parts and will be promoting regenerations.

And we started with skin for, I mean, historical reasons. That was the aim of the lab. And you know, skin is, is an amazing organ. And tissue therapy means literally that we have to create human skin on demand. So we are taking a tiny piece of skin of the patient as tiny as a, as a post stamp. It comes to our facilities in, in in Switzerland, and we isolate stem cells.

So it’s, again, cell therapy in, in that sense. But once the cells are out and they are multiplied, we need to. Reform skin. So we need to create a 3D structure. And that 3D structure, which actually is hold in, in a flask like that is then lifted up with with those tweezers as you see behind my back.

And that skin tissue is then applied directly on wounds. So it’s, it’s, it’s a very interesting way of doing regenerative medicine because we are providing patients with a real tissue which will integrate into their body, which is belonging to them. So it’s no rejection it grows with children and it doesn’t scar.

So it’s soft, it’s pliable, it’s smooth, and it really represents a breakthrough you know, for people in need of skin surgery. Nothing like this has been ever you know, produced and, and got that far in phase three. 

Philip Hemme: Yeah. And, and from, and from a, that’s, and from my understanding, compared to standoff of of care, which is I.

Taking a, a skin from the patient, but the bigger skin of the patient and putting it on the, on where it’s needed, on the burn on, on the sick, on the where, where it’s needed. The wound on the wound, but then it leaves a lot of scars, needs a lot of maintenance, and it’s just not ideal at all. Like. 

Daniela Marino: Yes, unfortunately, autographing, that’s a technology used to do, to do skin surgery means that you have a cheese like slicing machine to harvest healthy pieces of skin, and then you stretch it up and you put it on the wounds.

So you have two major issues with that technology. One is quantity. Very often if the wounds are very big, you don’t have enough healthy skin because you cannot take it from all body parts. I mean, and it’s a question of quality because the skin which is harvested with this machine is extremely thin.

But the wounds are very deep, and this gap is filled by scar tissue. So you have a question of donor site shortage, and additionally, a question of scarring and scars. I mean, everybody knows people with scar. I mean, we all probably have a scar, but you know, small scars are not an issue. But when you scar 20% of your body or 30% of your body, scars are contracting, they’re disfiguring.

They, you know, they take you to social isolation. They give you pain, they give you itching. They don’t allow you to move properly. So because they are contracted, and if you are a child, they don’t allow you to grow properly. So you always need to do corrective surgeries and a lot of maintenance, which goes from macro therapies like physiotherapy, rehabilitation, all the way to a very big micro environment, which means patients need to cream many times a day.

They need to put pressure garments at nights, they need to do lasering. You know, it’s a lot of work. And, and these, all this man maintenance actually is limiting your daily freedom ’cause you cannot live a regular life. So the quality of life of these big big scars big scar patients is pretty poor.

Philip Hemme: That’s, and I actually, I, I saw from your, from your deck here, the picture of the phase two trial where you’re really comparing Le Novo skin, which is the name of your technology versus standard of care. I mean, I will, I will show the picture. And it’s like, one is basically a regular skin that you grow and the other one is full of scars.

Like it’s really unca. 

Daniela Marino: The, the, yeah, the, the different, I can show 

Philip Hemme: about this one. So the 

Daniela Marino: Yes, yes. That’s the good one. You can see really clearly the difference. Yeah. 

Philip Hemme: Okay. And then, yeah, that’s, that’s I mean, that seems clear. And actually also reminds me, I, I was listening to another podcast about a, a surgeon a plastic surgeon who was working hospitals on, on burned burned patient in accidents and trying to remodel the skin.

And he was talking about this, this pain point as well, and talking that he was working on really severe patients. Some people have accidents or burn, like you can burn whatever, 50% of the body. And then it’s like extremely extreme challenging and, 

Daniela Marino: yeah, I mean burns is one of the things, and we historically, you know, started this old project because of burn patients.

But we have actually generated now clinical data with really long term follow up on safety and efficacy with sustainable care also beyond burns because the fact that the skin that we produce is really a tissue, it can be used in trauma patients, in patients that need to remove cancer. They need to do a plastic surgery, a constructive surgery, kids which are born with this giant Neva, you know, they need to be resected.

So that, that’s the beauty of the product because of its intrinsic characteristic of being a real tissue and not, for example, a cell spray. You know we can also target patients which are doing an elective surgery. Doesn’t have to be only bonds. And this is an incredible opportunity because it opens up a huge, you know oppor like plethora of indication.

So it can be used in, in so many different applications that it’s it’s also business-wise extremely attractive. 

Philip Hemme: That’s, that’s question I had, or like this, the only thing where I’m like, how, how, like, how big is the, the market size, I guess, I mean, the market is big, but the actual market size of estimated sales.

If you do your phase three, what’s, what are you like, what have you calculated? 

Daniela Marino: Yeah, so unfortunately, you know, I’m not working in oncology, so there is not a lot of reports one can piggyback from. So we had to do our own research on the ground. It took us months to you know, survey surgeons, talk to the payers, talk to the, to the buyers, and what we actually realized is that the market can be segmented into three verticals.

So you have burns and trauma, then you have reconstructions for medical reasons. I mean, cancers, scars, whatever. And then you’ve got the third portion, which is plastic for a status or for, yes. So we now concentrated on the first two pillars with the idea of course, that we can go into aesthetics. I mean, that’s a, a general, I mean a clear, clear route there.

And if you look into Europe, a us if you con concentrate on burns and, and, and reconstructions, you’ve got a million patients that do skin surgery per year. So it’s not a small number. And you know, if we can actually access 10% of that, we can generate something like 2 billion in revenues, you know, so it’s, it’s a market, which is extremely interesting because I’m not coming in with a product, which is a me too.

I’m not coming in with a product which is a bit better, a bit cheaper than something else. It’s a, it’s a, a product which will be needed because the alternative is only what’s available as autographing. And with all the, the disadvantages and, and because we don’t create a scar, there is a strong health economics, so you have to pay for the product.

And my product cannot be as cheap as a collagen sponge because I’m growing human skin on demand. But we can really save a lot of costs in, in me, the short and and long term because there is no need for maintaining the scar. So it’s, it’s a sweet spot. You know, it’s an interesting market. We are pretty much the only ones doing what we do.

There is a lot of need. And because of this health economic story there is a chance to actually enter the market relatively nicely in terms of you know, of of cars. I mean, wish, wish me good luck, but basically the, that’s basically the story. 

Philip Hemme: Yeah. And I can, I mean, commercialization is.

Always easier in theory than in, in factors as well, but 

Daniela Marino: Oh yeah, of course, of course. But you know what I mean, it’s 2025 and technology, that’s what I like about what we are doing. Technology is now really much more affordable than it used to be 20 years ago. You know, so now we really have those machines that can be producing at scale, that can produce in a decentralized fashion.

We can reduce the cogs massively. There is less operators. I mean, this was never I mean, it was science fiction 15 years ago, right? Mm-hmm. And now because of tech moving that fast, we have a chance to actually really make this product accessible. I mean, it’s, it’s just the, the planets are aligning.

I mean, I just came back from Rome. There was a cell engine meeting. People are using AI now. To, to actually you know, make the culture cell culture more efficient to select the best cells. And this is like, you know, it’s gonna make you save so much time and money. And 15 years ago, if you will say that you will use AI for, for cell cell culture monitor, we will say, think you’re crazy.

Right? So I think we have a chance. It’s never gonna be easy. If, if it will be easy, everybody would’ve done it already, but I think we are at the right time in history here to push something this way. Yeah, 

Philip Hemme: it’s amazing. Yeah, I think also from all the guests who found the show, which you, your guest number studies three, but no one, no one said biotech was easy.

Daniela Marino: Nah, no. I think you were never gonna hear that that sentence from anybody. No. 

Philip Hemme: I, I would, I would, I will expand also on what you just said is super interesting on the advances in cell therapy, on the tech aspect and the digital aspect coming into it as well, and software coming. First staying on QEs.

[00:16:03] Raising a Series C

Philip Hemme: I want to talk about the, about the fundraising as well, because I mean, yeah, everything you said, clinical trials, you need, you need a lot of money to to develop it. And you have a very nice list of investors and now you’re raising a series C, I think you closed your first round last year, $25 million and now you’re expanding.

So can you like, yeah, tell me a bit more about this. 

Daniela Marino: Yeah, sure. I mean of course in biotech the investment is rather high. We know that just like in pharma, right? It, it’s not something you can develop in a garage with a couple of people on a laptop. So you have high costs in, in, in, you know, we are now a good is 50 people, five, zero.

We are having a facility that we need to maintain and we need to do clinical trials in nine countries, 22 centers. I mean, it’s, it’s a big enterprise and, and the, the investment is, is that, is needed is, is pretty high. However, I mean, everything is relatively live. And, and there is companies in the us which have done tissues and they have raised to, you know, more than 700 millions altogether.

So, you know, we have, I like to consider K, it’s like the deep seek of tissue engineering. We have done everything with like 90 millions and yeah, last year we started our round C on the backend of the readout to phase two, which was brilliant. And we decided to stage the round C given the, the current market situation.

You know, it’s a bit hard to find raise as it compared to a few years ago. And we wanted to have a first closing to make sure that we can submit our application for phase three. Because you cannot submit for phase three without financial means. And we did the first closing of 25 millions in March last year, and two days later we submitted phase three.

We got the phase three approved in December. We are rolling. And now I’m raising the second, the second closing of that round. So that’s, that’s where we are. 

Philip Hemme: And how is it going so far? 

Daniela Marino: Well, I mean, it’s very challenging. Actually I was at this international meeting just this last two days and people are saying that investors these days are actually doing due diligence to find a way or a reason why not to invest.

There is a lot of skepticism. It’s always going in curves and, you know, the, the, the actual market dense and the geopolitical situation is definitely not supporting fundraising in biotech. Biotech will never die by, by itself because, I mean, we have to keep investing in healthcare. We cannot just, you know, stop doing that.

So people are fighters in our field, you know, all of us are fighting to get this done. Now, how easy it is, I can tell you it’s extremely tough. I mean, everybody’s complaining about the same, you know, tough environments, very conservative approaches, investors trying to actually support their existing portfolio rather than doing new investments because of the situation.

And everybody now expects Q4 to be better. But in Q4, last year they said Q2 will be good. So I. 

Philip Hemme: Here, this Q us is 2022, but 

Daniela Marino: yeah, it’s like, yeah, which Q4, which year? So yeah, but it is tough. I mean, I have to say, especially because now we are in late stage so we are more expensive than we used to be and, and most of the early stage investors are, you know, investing in something a bit smaller, a bit sooner, but we are still not generating revenue.

So we are also not in the, in the, you know, an appeal for those which do growth, for example, you know, which we, so gray zone, which doesn’t make things easy. But yeah, I mean, we don’t, don’t give up or 

Philip Hemme: that’s good and wish really lot. I wish you, I wish you more than good like that. And and actually what, but what, what, what I liked on the, on the investor side is that you have a, a really nice list of investors and board members as well.

Both from, I mean Jen for the Giuliani family who, investors personally and just crazy, the really lot of amazing investments. From the, this Foundation V was on your board as well. And, and then some other family offices. I mean, they must, first, it’s, it’s amazing to have them on board, I guess. And they can help, I guess they can help also a lot with current operation and the next fundraising.

Daniela Marino: Yeah, I mean, they are definitely very supportive. You know, it’s, it’s a, it’s an, it’s a different way of fundraising than the classical VC from Silicon Valley, you know, or, or, or even the, the Nordics. And but yeah, I mean, those families are, you know, they really invested because of the, the cause, I mean the impact of the story and because of the uniqueness, you know, the people that invest their own private money, they wanna feel part of something, you know, very innovative and very new.

They don’t like to invest in Me Too products because it’s not fun enough. They like to invest in things which are really making an impact, you know? And they are all aware that, of the fact that the impact may take time. So these are long-term visionary investors, which are really unique set of, of skills and, and, and they open many doors and they care about what you do.

And I’m extremely blessed with my cap table. I mean, we have really, really educated investors. I mean, people that have invested now their private money or their family office money, but they are, you know, they’ve been in the biotech sector, they’ve made, you know Right, right. Business decisions. And so it’s educated family offices, and I think that’s a unique opportunity we had to, to engage with, with those in the last eight years.

Philip Hemme: Did you, did you, how, how consciously did you go after family offices versus venture capital? 

Daniela Marino: Oh, how much time do we have to allow, okay, so when, when I started I as I mentioned, I had no clue, right? So when we started, we got the first seed round from the life science university of Duri Fund, which was a joint venture of Novartis Venture Fund and University of Duri Foundation.

So Ana Kig actually was on, on, on my board, you know, from Novartis Venture Fund. And of course she, she knows everybody in the sector and she has, you know, the big network of venture capitalists. And we went to many of those. It was 2017 and I was pitching for quite some time, and half of the people I pitched to told me, you are too early.

You only invest when there is efficacy data. And the other half said, oh, you wait too late. We all invest preclinical. And I was like. And now what? So again, because I didn’t know what I was basically doing I started pitching to private individuals and, you know, family offices. I was at the, you know, angel clubs and, and other places, and I realized that these guys actually were willing to invest.

And we did an A round with 11 millions and then I said, okay, the next round I’ll go back to the B. And then I, we opened the round B two weeks before the global pandemic in 2020. So I had a couple of VCs from the US in due diligence. But the moment Europe went into lockdown, they decided to you know, put a break on that and said, okay, let’s talk in October.

I’m like, well, how do you know that October is gonna look better than now? We don’t even know what this virus is. I mean, we don’t know. Right? So I decided to not to lose time, and I went back pitching to family offices and within a year we raised 45 million again. And and then I said, okay, I’m gonna go back to the VCs as the Round Sea.

So now, now I rent the Run Sea and now the VC are like, oh no, that’s bad times. You know, we, you know, we are, you know, we have to rescue our portfolio companies, you know, and the discounts on valuations are too high. And, and I’m like, okay. I mean boo. I dunno. I’m teaching to business as well. I was in San Francisco, I was in New York.

I was in Boston. I did my American Road Show. But it’s tough environment right now for the venture capitalist. So it’s, again, maybe not gonna happen. I don’t know. 

Philip Hemme: But it’s, it’s, it, Remi, I, I, yeah, it’s, it reminds me also of of a story I had the, the founder of CureVac on the show. Oh yeah. He had a similar story when he started, no VC wanted to invest anything, and then somehow we managed to, to meet the family office of Deep Ma, hub SAP founder.

Okay. He put a lot, a lot of money into kerak, like hundreds of millions basically. And the whole company took off. Basically, I mean, thanks to that which is quite like, I mean, and then you have the BioNTech example as well, which another one. And in Switzerland you have quite a few examples of big family offices we large that invest in healthcare.

I mean, yeah, there’s a GII family is is one, the, the, the Sierra family, the, or HBM, which is a former large et cetera. Such there’s more than in other countries I feel like. But it seems to work at least. 

Daniela Marino: I mean, there is also good examples over oceans. You know, there is a company called Crystal Biotech.

They, they went public a couple of years ago, but they only got financed by family offices purely. Also if you look at Pneumocytes they got maybe 70% of their investments through family offices. So people think it’s not common. But indeed, many of those innovative therapies, which are a bit outside of the box really can, can benefit a lot from this kind of investments because you need a be to be a little bit, a long-term visionary to invest in something, you know, very new and very, very breakthrough.

That’s 

Philip Hemme: good. That’s good. Yeah, and I guess that was a advantage to be also in Switzer. I mean, I think it’s quite a Swiss thing. Quite, quite morphed with, so 

Daniela Marino: I said, I mean that’s why I told you there is also over Ocean. A couple of good, good examples, but yeah, Switzerland is a place, it’s an interesting place to be because you have a lot of family offices and they’re international.

So the families are probably from Canada, Lebanon, but they have, you know, they have their, their office here, they’re investment analysts here, so you can access them because it’s, there is no real like network of family offices. So you need to somehow get to know them and if they’re all sitting in Zurich or around Switzerland, it makes it easy.

Right. So 

Philip Hemme: actually my, my first company lab biotech, we, one of our lead investors was a family office from Zurich. So, yeah, 

Daniela Marino: you see, 

Philip Hemme: so I went there as well a few times for that. Cool. And I mean, we could, we could talk about fundraising for, for a long time as well. 

[00:26:34] Next steps for CUTISS

Philip Hemme: But going back to also, I, I’m curious on q this, on what’s, I mean first, what will do you use the fund for and kind of what’s your next steps?

In the next Yeah, short term, midterm. 

Daniela Marino: Absolutely. So we are now really focusing on the phase three. So we would like to complete the, the clinical development and then go for a fast track authorization because we are running the phase three in Burns now with an orphan drug status, which gives us a fast track.

So we really have a chance to be quick there and, and, and start generating revenues quicker. We talk three years. Yeah, three years maybe from now if everything goes well. So, I mean, it may sound long, too many, but it’s very short in biotech, you know, that lifespan. And then we also wanna be ready with our machines.

So we just announced this week our partnership with Tecan to accelerate the machine making because once the product gets approved, it’s all gonna be a question of accessibility and scalability, right? So. The round C now will be really I mean the use of procedures, basically clinical trials and machines so that we can be ready for the market.

If you don’t finish phase three, you get nowhere, and if you don’t have the machines ready, you won’t be able to sell and scale up. So this is really our main focus with this, with this round. 

Philip Hemme: Okay. And, and in detail, the phase three, how does it look like? I mean, is it, is it similar to therapeutics phase three?

Or like how many patients you’re enrolling? How do you compare to placebo, et cetera? I mean, you cannot, like double-blinded or whatever. You cannot do these kind of things. No. 

Daniela Marino: No, you cannot even do single blinding. So it’s an open label control randomized, and every patient has an intrapatient control, just like in phase two.

So there is a burn patient and certain wound is selected by the pi, and then half of the wound is treated with the nose skin, and the other half is treated with standard of care. And we have an endpoint at six months to check for, for scar quality because that’s really our clinical clinically relevant endpoint.

And and the, we have to do 70 patients, seven, zero and this will then most likely be the last clinical trial that will take us to, to market. And we have a two years follow up altogether. So that’s a classical orphan tissue therapy trial. The numbers are not super high, but of course there is you know, recruitment is challenging because somebody has to get bio, you know, cannot have a.

A flyer on the tram saying, do you wanna participate in the critical trial? I 

Philip Hemme: guess the, the, for the involvement, I guess the, the timing is also quite critical as a new, you need to enroll the patient very quickly after the accident happened, I guess. Yes. 

Daniela Marino: Yes, yes, yes. Absolutely. I mean, the time when, when the patient enters the hospital in er you know, the surgeon has to quickly screen and then take a decision whether this will qualify or not.

And then if he qualifies, we usually take the biopsy within a couple of days and then we start the production. And and that, that’s basically how it is. And we have now 21 centers in the trial. So if I, if each center gives me two patients a year, you know, my seventies reached. So we really try to de-risk the recruitment you know or let’s say to, to have the right recruitment speed by having many, many centers because, it’s totally random. And then on the, we’ll have to have an Yeah, 

Philip Hemme: yeah, yeah. And the logistics, because you said with the machines, so like all the biopsies are sent to, are sent to, to Zurich to expand the cell and then you send back the, the skin. 

Daniela Marino: Yes. Correct. Yes. At the moment, everything is centralized in Switzerland.

In the future we, we will also decentralize manufacturing by having those machines in the us. That’s, that’s the first thing. And then most likely in Saudi Arabia or somewhere in another region of the world where we can then reach also upper region, you know, and Africa and India. So the idea will be to have at least three locations.

Philip Hemme: But starting with Europe and the US and the US would be part, I guess, of the CVC also to expand there or like the, 

Daniela Marino: yes, I mean, we will need to, we will need to then also create you know, a, a facility there or join forces with A-C-D-M-O. You know, there is many in the us. So that we can also start producing.

Okay. 

Philip Hemme: And the trial. The trial. But the trial, you’re not running in the US at the moment 

Daniela Marino: right now. Not because we don’t have enough money. So we, as soon as we closed around and we will also integrate the US program US is very expensive. And, and, and you know, at the moment we cannot afford it.

But we already have spoken to the FDAA couple of times. We also grafted the first patient in the US last year under compassionate use. So we are very positive that the FDA will be rather collaborative and pragmatic with us. But we first need to secure the, before we can. Okay. It’s, yeah. Okay. 

Philip Hemme: So you, okay, so the phase three you already started with EMA was 21 centers in Europe.

Europe. And then you will expand it basically to, to us. Okay. 

Daniela Marino: As soon as possible. 

Philip Hemme: And as possible. As soon as the money is in. 

Daniela Marino: Exactly. As soon as the money is in. 

Philip Hemme: That’s, that’s very good. On. 

[00:31:46] Cell Therapy and Tissue Therapy landscape

Philip Hemme: I think we covered what thought you this and, and going more into the industry question. You, you mentioned a few things that quite like can you expand a bit on the, on the cell therapy landscape slash really, and the tissues, like how, you mentioned a bit that some tissues were approved on the market.

Like can you talk a bit more about the space? I’m, I’m not like that familiar with, I mean, I’m familiar with cell therapy as you mentioned, like oncology Yeah. And oncology and the other ones, but less with tissue. So could explain a bit more on the, how the landscape looked like. 

Daniela Marino: Yeah, absolutely. So I mean, you know, these are set of therapies called advanced therapies and that’s different from pharma.

It differs from MedTech. So you either have a medical device or a pharma product, or an advanced therapy. An advanced therapy is having three pillars. So gene therapy, cell therapy, and tissue therapy. So again, everything started with Gene because, you know, the DNA, the genome of the humans was se sequenced and then everybody’s starting, you know, playing with genes.

And then we got into the cells. So how you can use the cells to cure cancer or to, you know, to regenerate certain, certain, certain pathways in the UN body. And now we are getting into tissue and why are we getting a bit later into tissues? Because there is. Not enough knowledge to just regenerate tissues like that.

So it took a bit longer to get to the right mechanisms to understand how tissues are regenerated and how to actually give the right inputs to the cells to regenerate the tissue. Right. So we have now blood vessels. We have corns. There is cartilage, there is liver tissues. There is there is also some sort of arterial like big vessels, you know, for coronary trauma.

So it’s, it’s coming up. I mean, it’s, it’s an interesting field to be in. But we don’t know everything yet. So the more discoveries we’ll unlock into the tissue regenerative knowledge, the more tissues will come up to the market. But it’s just the next step. And and, and it just. It takes time.

You know, I mean, biology takes time and most of the, of, of the, of the discoveries are in academia. And then, you know, the translation from academia to industry takes time. And it is, it is challenging. Tissues are one level of complexity above. Yeah. I 

Philip Hemme: mean, it’s 3D basic and it’s a lot of cells together.

Daniela Marino: Yes. It cells and metrics and, you know, culturing of different cell types. So what’s their inter talk, you know, how do you, which media do you use? Do you print, do you do not print? Do you wanna, you know, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s much more complex than just growing cells in a, in a, I 

Philip Hemme: was about to ask how does it connect to cell, like printing, which I read a bit and, and I was wondering how I, I cannot really make the connection with the.

Daniela Marino: I mean, printing, printing is a, an interesting approach to enable 3D structures to be formed. So if you need to build a bone or a blood vessel, I mean, you could actually try and 3D print. I have to say in the tissue space, I think there is little printing at the moment. So it’s more bioreactors and, and cells being assembled around certain scaffolds rather than printing.

Because one of the issues with printing is that it’s pretty expensive, even though much more accessible than it used to be. You still have a certain level of stress applied to the cells because you need to go through those, those needles and, and, and those processes. And in our case, for example, at uti, we started with a printer very, very early on and we realized that it took us longer and it was more stressful for the cells.

So we, we gave up on printing. We are now creating the skin by having a biological process. There is no, no printing involved. Oh, printer. 

Philip Hemme: And how much is it like, because you, you are using the own cells, you’re basically, yeah. Growing and expanding your own body cell. How much is there like using donor cells or IPS cells?

I don’t know. I guess you have other challenges involved. 

Daniela Marino: No, absolutely. I mean, we, there is a lot of companies which are trying to, you know have universal cells, which will not get rejected to go allogeneic. So like donor cells that can be used for all because of course, if you will go that route, it will be cheaper because you have it in a box and it’s an off the shelf product for everybody.

The problem is that in, in tissue therapy it, it’s more going to the direction and cell therapy as well into the direction of precision medicine. Because the more we know about the, the human, I mean the humankind, like the more we can screen for specific targets and specific markers, the more we realize that having one for all is, is probably gonna be more difficult.

But the field is moving in a, the right direction. Also with the IPS, I mean there is a, a few interesting companies now which are trying to build this universal set and move maybe 

Philip Hemme: early as. 

Daniela Marino: They’re very early, but you know, the, the field is actually divided into alo and and, and and, and autologous.

So it’s really like when you start talking to the people in the field, like, are you doing alo or auto? I mean, it’s like, there is no two religions. In our case you know, we know that to do skin, it has to be auto for the moment, so it’s autologous. And there is products like epigraph, for example, which are allogeneic skin graft.

And this can, it’s still on the market and it’s used for chronic wounds. So it’s basically a piece of skin which is promoting healing, but it’s then rejected. And the heal and the wound is healing below. Below it, right, is skin surgery. In the way we, we approach it is like there is no way to close those wounds by themselves.

So you need to replace the skin fully severe as to, it’s too severe, it’s too large, so there is no way to contract those wounds. And this means you need your own cells. So otherwise, after a while, they would be rejected. That worked, you know, so, okay. Yeah. 

Philip Hemme: Reminds me of the, and we talked on the show a few times with some people in, in in about cell therapy, especially oncology, cell therapy.

Daniela Marino: Yeah. 

Philip Hemme: That I remember covering the, I mean when the autologous came, especially the CAR T, which was ma I mean breakthrough in, in oncology, amazing results. And still today, amazing results on the commercial. Maybe a bit less amazing than was expected, but at least still like 500 plus million products annually.

Revenues annually. But I remember people were talking about allogeneic already, what was it? 20 17, 20 18, and it’s coming and it’ll come. And actually everyone was wrong and it took way more years and it’s still not close to market. Like it’s still in, 

Daniela Marino: it has different challenges. I mean, it’s not easier, you know, it makes sense maybe business wise, because again, you can have your master cell banks and you know, you don’t have to get the tissue in and out, but.

It has other challenges. Right. So yeah, but we’ll see. I think my opinion, especially after being at this meeting now a couple of days ago I think the tool will coexist. I mean, there will be certain therapies where alloy is perfectly fine and some others regenerative processes which require auto and there is no way around.

So, yeah. 

Philip Hemme: And even for you guys, I guess if you can find a solution, I mean, you could, you could have even both use cases or two different things. It’s not projecting the other one, I guess, like it’s 

Daniela Marino: exactly, that’s why I say I think, I think it could be a coexistence and and I mean, we’ll see, we’ll see what, what science says.

And at the moment we are fully auto and we generated a lot of safety data and efficacy data with, with this mode of action. And there is no, yeah, no change of gears at the moment for us. 

Philip Hemme: And okay. And on what I just said also on the, on the commercial challenges of startup, I think at the moment, especially at this.

The last few months. It’s quite a hot topic at the moment and especially, I mean there was a bit of disappointment I guess on the big pharma side and I think at the moment all the earliest stage cell therapy companies are quite suffering, especially in, especially the public listed ones. ’cause there’s just a lot of doubts on, on how commercially viable it is.

I mean, we had that C of adapt mean on the, on the show. There’s a product on the market, but they’re still struggling. Ulu is similar. I mean, just to mention the European companies, I guess this must impact you as well because your business model is basically in the similar space and or investor look at it.

Daniela Marino: Absolutely. I mean, there is a, you know, the return on investment is rather. Uncertain because nobody has, there’s, there’s been no big breakthrough saying, okay, this is a safe product. It’s efficacious and it generates lots of money. Right? So this combination is not there yet. However, it’s not just on us.

I mean, it’s not just a question of the companies. It’s also a question of the regulatory, it’s a question of the HTAs. I mean, the entire machine has to move along the root of promoting those cell therapies and making also accessible schemes for reimbursement and accessible scheme for payments. And this is it’s something which the, the, the, you know, the institutions have to have to you know, also also promote, because we cannot, it’s impossible to make cell therapy and tissue therapy as cheap as collagen.

It is impossible. So it also needs to be the entire ecosystem has to be more yeah. Supportive of, of these therapies and things will come, but. It will take time. 

Philip Hemme: More supportive. And at the same time, the agencies at the moment are more cutting cost and 

Daniela Marino: growing budget. Yeah, yeah. Unfortunately. Yes. And that’s why, you know, in tissue therapy we have maybe a unique opportunity because again, I’m not competing with seven others that do kind of the same.

And in that sense, I mean, we see that the, the acceptance of the authorities is much quicker than for, for CAR T, you know, which have maybe a, a bit different of a structure than the other one, which has been already been tested. And so in tissues, maybe we have a chance to be a bit faster. Just to give you an idea, the, the phase three readout of Cyte with this blood vessel came out in July last year, and they got the approval of FDA in December.

So I think once you show safety and once you show efficacy, if there is nothing else really for these patients at all, this can be a bit more pragmatic. But yeah, at times for authorities is not simple because we have seen big cuts in the US as well, and everybody’s kind of concerned that now there will be delays in approvals and there might be some, some disruption there, but was, yeah.

Yeah. 

Philip Hemme: And for you, I mean, the reimbursement is always, especially in Europe, is always quite a challenge. 

[00:42:36] US Biotech Market

Philip Hemme: And we talk again lot on the show. People are like, okay, I’m at 60, 70% of my market is in the us so they were rapidly going to us. I guess for you guys it’s, I guess, a similar story or it’s 

Daniela Marino: For us it’s a little bit different maybe because the number of patients between Europe and US is identical.

Yeah. So the, the number of, in terms of numbers, U Europe is as good as us. The difference is though, that in Europe 90% of the countries have a specific reimbursement schemes for accidents. While in the US it’s not the case, right? So you still need extra Medicare or Obamacare or whatever, whatever new stuff they have.

So I think for specifically Burns Europe is probably not the wrong place to be because of that universal insurance that people have. No matter how, you know our, our rich or poor, they are right. So we actually see a big opportunities for us being in Europe. And, and we, we actually think that the market here is probably even more prepared for such a product that in the us 

Philip Hemme: almost the best time I hear this, for mobile company 

Daniela Marino: that’s new to you because of the, you know, the accident insurance is, is pretty much universal in, in all countries in Europe.

Why in the us it’s not always the same. That’s 

Philip Hemme: true. And I guess for you also from what you said, it’s the, the over cost benefit is you have a, you have a pretty clear. Like offering there versus, I mean, CAR T you could argue, but, or gene therapy, you could argue, but the price of the therapy is just so high compared to standard of care that it’s becomes, I guess, harder to justify.

Yeah, 

Daniela Marino: absolutely. Absolutely. And, you know, we are really building on, on health economics in, in short, mid, the long term quality of life. You know, our patients are not cancer patients. They, they get get burned at the age of 10 years and leave 120 years. So what’s the price tag on, on an improved quality of life?

Over a hundred plenty, 

Philip Hemme: I hope, but 80, it’s a 80. 

Daniela Marino: Oh, you never know. You know, you never know. But you know, it’s, it’s not just a, a bit longer life or a bit, you know, it’s really quality of life on a long stretch. And with the right you know, assumptions and the right support of the HTAs, I think the case will be strong because if you spend today 10, but you can save 20 and 30 and 50 in the next years.

The 10 becomes almost like a brainless deal. Yeah. So 

Philip Hemme: I like that. 

[00:45:12] TechBio, Hardware and Automation

Philip Hemme: Switch, switching gears a bit to, to the one, one thing that also quite fascinating about about q this is that you’re really merging the tech, let’s say Yeah. Tech software and, and the biotech and your kind of big bio really. Not just a software tech bio, but, or AI tech bio, but really like actual deep tech and actual deep bio 

Daniela Marino: hardware.

Philip Hemme: Like how, like, but I also know that it, it brings quite some challenges as well. It’s, it’s not that easy to do. So how, yeah, how, how was it for you like 

Daniela Marino: Yeah, I mean, look for us, you know, it was almost like a must. When we started with, with Kuti we knew machines were the only way for us to actually generate, you know, the right, the right returns and, and provide the right accessibility to patients because.

People that work in with smaller tissues, they say, okay, let’s do now the trial and then we’ll, we’ll scale up later. But we are producing skin which is, you know, quite extended in terms of surface. So we said, okay, we cannot just have no vision on how we will one day be able to, to produce a lot in, in a short time, in a cost effective fashion.

So we started with those, with those machines eight years ago, and most of the stakeholders were thinking this was way too early back then. Like, ah, but wait, you don’t know? And we said, no. I mean, if we don’t start early enough, we are gonna lose so much time after the approval and we are not gonna make money and the company will die.

So we had this initial vision and we started drawing the machines ourself. We have seven patents now on the machines, and we started with some very cool partners and now we have a competitive advantage because our machines are already. Existing. And and thanks to new partnership, like the one with ticket, now we can really go fast.

So if you will start today with those machines, we will be so far behind now. So it’s, it’s pretty interesting to see how that vision we had eight years ago was exactly where the field was going. And now everyone is doing machines, everyone is using bioreactors. There is no way you bring to market something which is fully manual.

Now it’s like, of course is are machines, I mean, whatever. And when we started, we were like, but how you are biologists, you have no idea. It’s gonna be so tough. And it is tough because you need to find a, a translation mechanism between the biologists and the engineers. And that’s exactly what you mentioned about this tech BioFusion.

But I think today, honestly, it is a reality. It’s not just a, a vision and you 

Philip Hemme: couldn’t partner earlier because the machines just didn’t exist, I guess. 

Daniela Marino: No, I mean, you know, there was a, a, a phase of complete discovery. We had to really build it from scratch and, and even test whether at all you know, the concept would work.

So we did the first let’s say sect of machines together with the, with toolkit and CSC and Switzerland. You know, there is a lot of knowhow here on discovery and in, in, in first phase of innovations. But we were looking really for a partner now, which could you know, produce those machines and, and have them GMP ready and have them clinical ready.

And that set of expertise came out now in, in on the table because the rest has been solved. So we really had to take it in steps. And the manual process also was. Improved in the meantime because we want the machines to replicate the human, the, the manual process. So having the machine ready eight years ago wouldn’t have really helped because in the meantime our process got faster.

We have changed a couple of components, you know, and now in phase three, that’s, let’s say the process which will be approved for market authorization. So now it’s about time we also finish up the machinists. So everything was kind of strategically planned to, to happen in phase. 

Philip Hemme: Okay. Because I’m, I’m asking because we had a DNA script on the show that doing DNA printers, they had the enzymatic DNA printing technology, but then they didn’t build a machine themself.

They had a, a partner who could do the micros and actual machine and the cartridge and everything of your, of course it’s a very close collaboration. But I, I was wondering with, in your case, like. Where is the balance, basically of what you were doing in-house and what you could do or what a partner could do?

Daniela Marino: Yeah, yeah. No, I mean, the machines were not built by Kuti. So the first devices were built with Ulka and CSCM, and then Kutis was responsible for doing all the biotech things. So then these machines came to our labs. We were doing, you know, changes and validations. So it was a strong collaboration with the engineers, otherwise yeah, we did, we wouldn’t have done it.

So the alternative would’ve been to create an engineering team at UTIs and have it done inhouse, but way too expensive, I guess, 

Philip Hemme: way too. 

Daniela Marino: Yeah. I mean, we felt, you know, we would never meet the, the same level of expertise and, and and and team levels that an engineering company for. Right. 

Philip Hemme: So I guess from the, going back to what you said also from the timing, it was really right that you were, the self help you was working, the machines were kind of ready.

Cultivating tissues. I guess on the software side, I guess there’s also something that was starting to be ready, like 

Daniela Marino: yeah, the software is also something which now it will have a different phase because of what’s happening with AI and everything. So there is a component of cybersecurity now, which was not even on the table seven years ago, eight years ago.

So software wise is also super interesting because things are completely different. They use, yeah. So that’s 

Philip Hemme: cool. That’s good. Really cool. 

[00:50:58] Kids preventing burnout

Philip Hemme: And I want to switch a bit more to personal per a more personal background and leadership lessons. One, one thing that yeah, you, you, I saw you, you said, you said I would be, I would sure be burnout if I didn’t have kids.

Yes. Which I hear sometimes I hear more the opposite, but so I’m, I’m curious on why like. 

Daniela Marino: No, I mean, the problem is that when you run a company like this, your brain never stops. You are watching a movie and you think about something you have to do. You are eating or cooking, and you think about something you gotta do.

And you, if you could, you would stop the cooking, open the laptop, do it right away, and then you are on the laptop, you get three emails, then somebody’s poking you, and then you get a team message and you basically forget about the cooking. It means you, yeah, you basically, me. It basically means that you would never really, you know, chop the loop.

It’s like you would always go back and try to do more and more and more. And I never have a day in the last eight years. I say, okay, I’m done for today. I’m never done from today. There is always something on my to-do list. Which I could do today, but I’d rather have to do tomorrow. Why? Because I need to go to the ballet of my daughter, or I need to, you know, cook for them.

I cannot leave them starving and I need to go bring them to the doctor and I need to go take them to the circus and I need to, and because of this moments where you have to, you know, do something else and you can’t open the laptop again, it, it actually gives you those breaks because otherwise I think I would be really gone nuts.

I will be divorced or I will be burned out a hundred percent. 

Philip Hemme: So yeah. So it’s kind forced you to bring you a balance. 

Daniela Marino: It forces you. Yes. It forces you to take holidays because, I mean, what can you do? You’ve never gone off with your kids. I mean, you cannot just say sorry, no holiday. So it forces you to have a rhythm and it forces you to, to say, okay, today it’s we go to Conland and I’m not taking my laptop with me.

And I don’t think there is other. Days in my life where I don’t have my laptop with me, because you never know what happens, right? So I think it’s a way out, you know, it’s a way for your brain to say, okay, for the next six hours. Interesting. Mother, 

Philip Hemme: I, I, I, yeah, I can take personal experience, but I did similar, but without kids.

But I try to be very, very structured and, and have balance and trying to force myself to disconnect without kids, which I guess it makes sense for what you said, that with kids it can be a bit easier. No. 

Daniela Marino: I mean, you know, people are different. I mean, I’m happy if you know how to self balance yourself.

I would not be able, I’m create, you know, I, I, you know, I’m dry my hair and I think of something and I open the laptop and, and pipe while I’m drying my hair, you know? So it’s like I, I don’t have a way to self-discipline myself. You know, I, you know how many times I say I register myself to the gym and I waste money because I about, so.

I was like, and that’s why for me, for myself having the kids, it has been a blessing because I, I have to be How many kids do you direction them All? I stop at the shop is,

Philip Hemme: that’s good. 

[00:54:18] Daniela Marino, Academic and Female Founder

Philip Hemme: And except this, I, I think I always ask, like to ask, I mean, for you, there’s two things that I, that quite stand out. Also, being an academic founder and founder, CEO is also not that common. So do you have any, like, I mean, it exists now, but it’s not super common. Do you have some, some lessons there?

I mean, you mentioned it a bit, but something that you didn’t mention. 

Daniela Marino: No, I mean, for sure. I think the fact that I didn’t have a clue made me almost like naive, you know, towards many challenges. And I think that was probably a blessing because I’m like, yeah, I mean, whatever, I’ll, I’ll find a way. Right? And, and for sure, one thing I realized, and I think that was my luck back then was that I needed help.

So I, the first thing I did was started creating a network, started talking to anybody. I think in, in, within a few months. Everybody knew what I was trying to do. And, and, and it was impressive to me to see that when you actually ask, ask for help, people are willing to help. I had so many people that just did pro bono, you know, they just talked to me for hours and, and gave me introductions and gave me help.

And, and I think that is probably one of the best you know, recommendations. I can, I can give people, if you are an academic and you have no clue, it doesn’t mean you can’t. It just means that you need to know where your limits are. You need to be extremely humble and trying to absorb as much as you can.

I mean, you are so outta your comfort zone that at one point I really had no clue what to do next. I was like, okay, how? You know, I have no, but, but then you start realizing that there is people with specific expertise that you can tap on, and it, it take, just takes, takes you to be humble and, and to, I, you know, there is always something new to learn.

Even today, after eight years, there is not a single day where I’m learning and having a challenge and facing a, you know, frustration and, and I try to rescue the day by doing something new or by giving a call and get some help. Right. So I think that is the best piece of advice. It doesn’t mean that you know what to do.

You can also start doing things without knowing everything and just try to keep your vision up. I mean, I always knew what I wanted, right? And and there is investors now that hear me pitch after eight years and say, it’s impressive. Eight years ago when I heard you, you were pitching the same. Like, you didn’t divert.

And I’m like, yeah. I mean, I knew what I wanted, but the community and the network is really the first thing you need to create. You need to know who to call for certain things and get the right people on the team because it, what we do is so complex. I mean, it requires so much expertise and, and we are in the most you know, crazy field.

So there is not that many experts. So we all try to help each other, which is, which is an interesting, also social adventure, you know? But it’s a good thing. 

Philip Hemme: I can double learn on that. Also, first company creator was 22. Not academic, well by engineer, but yeah, I, I had no idea what at least I, and at the funnel was doing, but somehow we, and all the odds are against you when you found it.

I think it’s a good lesson for anyone listening who is thinking about founding something. You will never be fully ready. I mean, it almost doesn’t exist. Yeah. And you need to get started somewhere. And then sometimes I think sometimes being a bit naive is also, is also advantage. Not too bad actually now it’s struggling now is it’s like basically my third company now, the podcast in the company.

And I know way more than before, but I also know what doesn’t work. And it’s sometimes I feel like, I feel I would, I would love to be a bit more naive and just go for it. 

Daniela Marino: Exactly. Exactly. Now it’s like when you grow up right to the beginning when you were a toddler, you’re like, you know, walking on thin air and it doesn’t matter.

You don’t know if you fall, you’re actually dead and the more you grow it’s like, ah. So it’s, it’s part of life, but yeah. 

Philip Hemme: Yeah. That’s and and talking and the, the second thing, maybe finishing on the lessons, you as a, as a female founder also in biotech is not, is not true. I mean that many, especially on the CEO level.

Like where, how was it for you like. 

Daniela Marino: Yeah, I mean the thing is that very often female founders think that they have to hire a CEO, that they can do the science and they can do the, some of the operations, but they’re not good at, you know, at the, at the, at the managerial position of A CEO and the fundraising.

And, and I think it’s changing. I mean, I know quite some very bold women now in CEOs which never gave up on that role and never, never thought somebody else should take their role. I think it’s really a question of understanding that you know, there is a bias very often. Also with the fundraise and bias with women, we need to win more trust from stakeholders and investors because.

It is, it is. The bias is there. I mean, there is no discussion around that. But I think that we have as women, like all qualities that, that, that need to be there to, to be able to say a tell the story because that’s also what people think. You know, when you fundraise how, but it’s telling a story. You have to tell a story and you have to tell, you have to share your vision and you need to make sure that people actually can buy their vision and can understand what you want and can feel that this is what you want as well.

And, and I think women are good at that. And I think it’s changing, but it takes the guts to say, okay, I’m gonna be the CEO, I have no clue, but I’m gonna be the CEO. And back then I didn’t doubt it a second. I thought, this is my job and it may not be the right job for me all the way up to the end. If the company goes listed Nasdaq, I’m most likely not the right CEO for a listed company in the us.

But I think, you know, it, it really, it really needs the right passion, the right commitment. And if that is your project, everybody will understand that’s your project. If you pitch it, if somebody else will pitch it, it’s not the same. So just go bold. And I mean, my quote is, if you have kids, it’s better.

Right? So then what’s the problem? 

Philip Hemme: I think there, there is also a very, like, there’s a strong benefits of being founder, CEO in, in any domain, but especially, I mean in biotech as well. There’s just, it brings a lot of legitimacy. It brings a lot of like. Also from telling the story, it brings a lot of advantages.

I mean, I guess you, I mean, you have, you have, I mean, yeah. And you, you made it quite well now, so, I mean, you’re still a lot of steps ahead, but so you, you made it well, and, and you, you’re a good example of of someone who can be founder, academic founder, and still staying CEO and growing a, a business. Which I think it, yeah, it’s, I guess, yeah, it’s a, you, you, you could feel it, I guess.

Daniela Marino: Yeah, it’s good. Yeah, for sure. 

Philip Hemme: That’s cool. 

[01:01:10] Quickfire

Philip Hemme: The last part, just a few, so it’s more quick fire, just quick questions and you answer like one, one sentence answer. Yeah. So what’s on the top of your mind at the moment?

What’s your favorite biotech or science book? 

Daniela Marino: Science book? Poor science book. I don’t really read because I want, I should relax, but I read, so I wanna read about something else. I’m actually reading like comic books and like I, I watch a lot of standup comedy, so yeah, I’m not reading this handbook.

I need to relax my brain. Very. 

Philip Hemme: One mistake you made in the past 12 months. 

Daniela Marino: Oh my gosh. In the last 12 months. Honestly, one mistake I did. Yeah, I think it was, it was probably really thinking that phase three would be easier to handle and I think we should have got a bit more ready already before the phase three would start.

Now we are, you know, learning a little bit too late, a couple things, so I think not, I, I underestimated a bit the complexity of the phase three. It’s 

Philip Hemme: a good one, 

Daniela Marino: but I’m catching up. It’s not locked, catching up. 

Philip Hemme: One, one other advice to young left, left sense professionals who want to be I guess want to be in your shoes.

Daniela Marino: Just find a way to keep up with your mental health and your, find a way to, to be resilient because there will be days where you really think what you’re doing is completely wrong and useless, and you should quit. So find a way to, to to stay resilient. Fine. Whatever it is, just find a way. Okay. 

Philip Hemme: A place to myself as yeah.

The, the how is not easy. No one talking about this maybe one new habit you adopted recently. 

Daniela Marino: Trying to go to bed before 2:00 AM because I, I realized that I was really getting too. Tired and spending the weekend really trying to basically recover from the entire week. And I thought it’s going into a, you know, dangerous loop like that.

So I now try to really go to bed before midnight. I mean if, if excluded exceptions, but there was a, a time where it was really four or five hours of sleep every day. That’s not salt, 

Philip Hemme: not sustainable. There was one question, how much do you sleep at night? So that’s, you answered it 

Daniela Marino: Well, I try, I tried.

I, I wear my watch now at night, so I get punished if I sleep well enough, but I try to stay around at least seven hours. I’m, if I, if I can, yeah, that 

Philip Hemme: sounds sounds healthier. Yeah. The one, one of your biotech heroes. 

Daniela Marino: My biotech heroes or someone 

Philip Hemme: who inspires you a lot in, in the, in the field 

Daniela Marino: actually, what inspired me I think you, you just said that you worked there.

It was Christians and the CEO of Malaga partners which unfortunately passed away. Passed away way too young. He was one of the first people I met when I started with this idea of building the company. And I remember talking to him and, and I said, but you are a PhD. I mean, you are not A-A-C-E-O.

How do you do that? And he said, what do you mean? I know exactly what to do and you should just go for it. It was, it was really the first time that somebody told me, yeah, I mean, you don’t, you don’t, you just go and you become a CEO. Don’t, don’t be afraid. And I will never forget those words. So he’s still, he is still, I still actually, if I close my eyes, I can remember exactly where we were and how he told me.

So he is always gonna be in my heart. 

Philip Hemme: Oh, awesome. Awesome. Let’s, I think it’s a great way to, to finish the whole conversation. It’s, yeah, it was amazing. Thank, thanks a lot for taking the time. Next time we do it in Zurich for sure. Welcome to 

Daniela Marino: let’s do it like, 

Philip Hemme: but I think it, it worked also really well online, so 

Daniela Marino: good luck with 

Philip Hemme: everything and we stay in touch then.

Thank you. Great. 

Daniela Marino: Thank you. Thanks Al.

Philip Hemme: I’m impressed by how Daniella managed to grow Qs into one of the best companies in the space globally. I’m also impressed by her hard work while having fun. If you also enjoyed this episode, please hit the like, follow or review button. Any of these actions would help a lot to give access to Monkey Book to the show.

If you want to go even further, you can make a donation via paper with a link below. If you wanna see similar videos, please feel free to check out our channel where we have many more. I will be also curious to hear what you think. So if you could either comment wherever you are or shoot me an email@philipatflo.bio.

Alright, thanks for staying to the end and catch in the next episode.