For decades, biotech has had two ways to move a medicine forward: build every capability in-house, or rent pieces of the work from a fragmented supply chain of CROs, CDMOs, and software vendors. Each solves part of the problem. None of them builds the product.

There has only ever been one operating model that integrates all five steps (basic research, discovery, preclinical, clinical, and commercial) into a single system where every program makes the next one faster. It has lived inside the handful of companies large enough to afford it. And every one of those companies uses it to advance a pipeline of its own.

That is the quiet contradiction at the center of the industry. The only players with fully integrated development capability are also competitors to anyone who might want to use it.

We built Alloy to resolve that contradiction. Alloy is the world’s first, Product Development Organization: integrated development infrastructure, proprietary data, and long-term partnership that discovers and develops medicines alongside innovators – from composition of matter through the clinic and to market. We coined the term because no existing category described what we spent the last decade building, or what we intend to become at scale.

This is not a thesis in search of proof. We have more than 220 partners. We have over 110 partnered drug programs in the hands of other companies advancing their medicine through the clinic. We already have 24 drugs in the clinic. And through our affiliated venture studio, 82VS, we have already helped create 18 new drug companies. The infrastructure works. What comes next is scaling it to the entire world.

Here is what makes a PDO new, and it is the whole point: Alloy will never have a pipeline of its own. Not now, not at scale, not ever. We do not compete with our partners. We cannot. The architecture forbids it.

If that sounds like a limitation, look at what happened in the tech industry when similar trends converged.

Twenty-five years ago, computing and hardware was fragmented and application-driven. Everyone who wanted to build something first had to build the ground they stood on – the servers, the storage, the networking. Then the hyperscalers arrived. They made a strange and disciplined promise: we will run the infrastructure for the entire world, and we will never compete with what you build on top of it. That neutrality was not a weakness. It was the reason they could scale to serve everyone, and it is why they became the most valuable companies on earth.

Biopharma is where technology was then – brilliant, fragmented, and forced to rebuild the same rails over and over. The future will be served by PDOs that are hyperscaled: infrastructure that any innovator, any founder, any pharmaceutical company, and any government can build on without owning it, and without ever wondering whose side it’s on.

That last part matters more than it looks. A pipeline company can be a vendor to its partners, but it can never be pure infrastructure, because its incentives are split the moment its own program competes for the same target. A PDO has no such split. Its only business is advancing everyone else’s medicines. That is what makes the trust real, and trust is the thing that lets infrastructure scale without limit.

Even nations feel this gap. Governments increasingly understand that the ability to discover and develop medicine is a matter of sovereignty – of health security, supply-chain independence, and the capacity to answer the next crisis on their own terms. But sovereign capability requires an infrastructure partner whose interests never diverge from the nation it serves. That is precisely what a PDO can be, and what no pipeline company ever could.

And now the timing is right, because of AI. Artificial intelligence will transform drug development – but only when it is paired with proprietary experimental data and the laboratory capable of generating it. AI alone is not the future. CROs alone are not the future. Software alone is not the future. The future is integrated infrastructure where AI, proprietary data, and physical lab capability continuously improve one another across every program – where the insight from one discovery compounds into the next, across silos that have never been connected before. A PDO is the only structure that can hold all three in one place and let them teach each other.

This is not just a services company. It is the infrastructure layer for curing disease – built to be neutral on purpose, built to scale to the whole world, and built to serve everyone working to defeat disease without ever competing against a single one of them.

That is the model: an ecosystem approach to integrating and accelerating drug discovery and development for all companies, countries, creators and collaborators.  This is the company Alloy has been building from the beginning, and we will be scaling for the decades to come.  Let’s make some medicine together.

SAN DIEGO & BOSTON – June 18, 2026  – Voro Therapeutics, a biotechnology company developing tumor-activated biologics designed to improve the therapeutic index of immune therapies and Alloy Therapeutics, a biotechnology ecosystem company dedicated to empowering the global biologics community, today announced a strategic research collaboration focused on the discovery and development of next-generation masked T-cell engager (TCE) therapeutics.

The collaboration combines Voro’s proprietary tumor-activated biologics platform and experience in T-cell engager development with Alloy’s optimized CD3 antibodies and multispecific engineering expertise to develop novel immunotherapies designed to selectively activate immune responses within the tumor microenvironment while minimizing activity in healthy tissues.

TCEs have demonstrated significant therapeutic potential across a broad range of cancers but are often limited by systemic toxicities associated with widespread immune activation. Through this collaboration, Voro and Alloy aim to advance novel approaches that may improve the therapeutic index of TCE therapies, potentially enabling broader clinical utility and expanding the reach of immune-based cancer treatments.

“T-cell engagers have shown tremendous promise, but their broader impact has been constrained by the same challenge facing many powerful immune therapies: how to deliver potency without unacceptable systemic toxicity,” said Ugur Eskiocak, Ph.D., Co-Founder and CEO of Voro Therapeutics. “We believe tumor-activated T-cell engagers represent the next evolution of the field. By combining Voro’s PrimeBody platform and TCE design expertise with Alloy’s discovery and multispecific engineering capabilities, we aim to create highly potent, tumor-selective therapies that broaden access for patients.”

“We are excited to collaborate with Voro as they apply their innovative tumor-activated biologics platform to address important challenges in immuno-oncology. By integrating Voro’s differentiated linker and masking technologies with Alloy’s optimized CD3 antibodies and cell engager engineering expertise, we can accelerate the development of next-generation TCE’s with potentially best-in-class safety and efficacy.  Partnerships like this demonstrate how Alloy’s discovery ecosystem can help enable the next generation of therapeutic innovation,” said Mike Schmidt, CSO of Alloy Therapeutics.

This collaboration reflects a shared commitment to advancing innovative biologics and generating novel therapeutic approaches that expand the applicability of T-cell engager therapies, while further strengthening Voro’s growing ecosystem of strategic partners.

About Voro Therapeutics

Voro Therapeutics is a biotechnology company developing the next generation of engineered precision biologics that deliver potent therapeutic activity only where disease is present. Its PrimeBody platform is designed to unlock inaccessible targets by overcoming the systemic toxicity that limits conventional biologics through selective activation within diseased tissue. The company’s lead program is a first-in-class conditionally activated CD47 inhibitor that combines high-affinity target engagement with Fc enhancement to overcome the historical safety and exposure limitations of CD47 blockade. The program has demonstrated curative activity in preclinical models and is currently advancing through IND-enabling studies. PrimeBody is broadly applicable across T-cell engagers, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), cytokines, CD47-targeted therapies, and other modalities, enabling a diversified pipeline across oncology and immune-mediated diseases.

About Alloy Therapeutics

Alloy Therapeutics is a biotechnology ecosystem company powering the future of drug discovery and development with AI-powered platforms and scientific expertise. Through a collaborative partnership approach, Alloy provides access to proprietary technologies, services, and company-creation capabilities that are foundational to discovering and developing therapeutics across multiple modalities: antibodies, bispecifics, TCRms, genetic medicines, cell therapies, and drug delivery.

Alloy integrates AI/ML into its discovery and development infrastructure, combining proprietary models, real-world data, and human expertise to help partners advance therapeutic programs. At Alloy, we are redefining biologics development by reducing the time and cost to advance programs from discovery to human data. Join the Alloy community by visiting www.alloytx.com and following Alloy on LinkedIn.

Media Contacts

Voro Therapeutics
Jack Tsai, MD, MBA
Head of Business Development
bd@vorotx.com

Alloy Therapeutics
Nora Dowd
Director, Marketing and Communications
nora.dowd@alloytx.com

Alloy’s perspective on the multispecific engineering problem

Most protein engineers designing multispecifics today learned the craft on monoclonals, and some of the discovery and development infrastructure followed the same path. That’s a reasonable starting point. It’s also where a lot of the late-stage surprises come from.

Multispecific antibodies aren’t just harder monoclonals. They’re a fundamentally different class of molecule, and programs that treat them as an incremental engineering problem tend to find that out the hard way.

What Makes Multispecifics Different

Conventional antibody therapeutics leverage millions of years of evolution to their advantage. Immunize the right animal, screen broadly, and nature has done most of the work. The molecules that come out are often already optimized for binding, expression, stability, and manufacturability.

Multispecific antibodies don’t have that. No animal produces a molecule that engages two distinct targets through a single scaffold (IgG4 half-molecule exchange being a caveated exception), because there’s never been an evolutionary reason to. Every multispecific format in use today is a human invention, and they all share one property: solving a protein engineering problem in one place tends to create a new problem somewhere else.

There are several conventional approaches: common light chain, heavy and light chain heterodimerization mutations and domain swaps, pairing-free scFv and VHH-based designs, among others. None of these work universally across a given pair of antibody clones. They work often, somewhere in the range of 50-80%, but not always. That tells you something important: multispecific engineering is still fundamentally an empirical problem, not settled science. Common light chain makes downstream engineering more tractable, but constraining the light chain during discovery can sometimes make hit identification more challenging. scFvs reduce pairing complexity but introduce biophysical liabilities. VHH domains sidestep the pairing problem but carry immunogenicity and developability considerations that need active management. Every solution trades a pound of flesh somewhere.

The practical consequence is that format selection is a deliberate choice. It has to be grounded in the specific target biology, affinity and avidity requirements, route of administration, and what the molecule will encounter in vivo. Choosing by default or by analogy to a previous experience with different biology is one of the more costly mistakes a multispecific program can make early on.

How to Navigate the Combinatorial Complexity

The toolset has gotten significantly better as the field compounds its experience. Alloy’s unique mAbForge Multi can screen thousands of format variants in parallel, with results in four weeks. That matters because multispecific activity and manufacturability remain difficult to predict computationally. The experiments have to be run to determine how a given format and VH/VL pair will express, purify, and bind in the pharmacologically relevant orientation. Generating that data across many variants at once, early in the program, is a different kind of de-risking than committing to a format and waiting months to find out if it works.

Discovery infrastructure has evolved in parallel. Common light chain transgenic animals, phage- and yeast-displayed antibody libraries, and VHH-specific platforms have expanded what’s accessible for constrained discovery campaigns. Extensive characterization of both the building blocks and the final bispecific for function and drug-like properties creates early visibility into manufacturability and developability fitness, including for subcutaneous delivery where problems tend to surface at the worst possible time.

What the toolset doesn’t replace is accumulated judgment. For teams without deep prior exposure to multispecifics, the decisions at the front of a program can look familiar. They’ve made calls on format, affinity, and developability before. The difference is that in multispecific programs those calls carry more downstream consequence and the feedback loop is longer. The ability to design multiple robust engineering streams, move with high velocity to generate data, select the winning format, and iterate again if necessary, is how Alloy approaches these programs.

What the Field Still Needs

Where the field is genuinely behind isn’t engineering. The tools for making complex molecules have advanced considerably. Understanding biology and having translationally relevant models remains the bigger challenge.

A bispecific targeting two pathways needs a disease model where both human targets are expressed and active in a disease-relevant context. A trispecific needs three. In many cases, that animal doesn’t exist. Programs end up validating one mechanism at a time, which is a real limitation when the scientific rationale depends on the combination. The most complex multispecifics being designed today are ahead of the model systems available to test them in any translationally meaningful way.

Advances in genetic engineering and CRISPR-based humanization are helping close that gap. And the data generated from the programs Alloy runs across formats, targets, and indications is part of how the field is building its way there. Every program teaches something the next one benefits from. The validation playbook for multispecifics is being written right now, one partner program at a time  and getting it right requires connecting early discovery and engineering decisions to in vivo outcomes from the start. That’s a thread that runs through every multispecific program we take on.

If you’re navigating any of this, from format selection to building a full multispecific discovery campaign, we’re sharing what we’re learning at our upcoming webinar. Come see the thinking in practice.