Executive Summary / Key Takeaways

• GlycoMimetics has completed its merger with Crescent Biopharma, Inc., fundamentally shifting its business focus from glycomimetic drug development for AML to Crescent's oncology pipeline targeting solid tumors.
• The merger was accompanied by a significant $200 million private placement, providing the combined entity with a cash runway expected to support operations through 2027.
• This strategic pivot follows the failure of GlycoMimetics' lead program, uproleselan, in its pivotal Phase 3 AML trial and the subsequent decision to discontinue development of its original pipeline.
• The new entity, operating as Crescent Biopharma under the ticker CBIO starting June 16, 2025, is advancing a pipeline including a PD-1 x VEGF bispecific antibody (CR-001) and novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs).
• Key upcoming milestones for Crescent include an IND submission for CR-001 in Q4 2025 and proof-of-concept data from a Phase 1 trial in H2 2026, representing the new investment thesis for former GLYC shareholders.

A Strategic Metamorphosis: From Glycomimetics to Crescent Biopharma

GlycoMimetics, Inc., originally founded in 2003, embarked on a journey rooted in the intricate science of glycomimetics – small molecules designed to mimic the structure and function of carbohydrates involved in crucial biological processes. The company's initial vision centered on inhibiting the disease-related roles of these carbohydrates, particularly in areas like cancer and inflammation. This scientific foundation led to the development of a pipeline of proprietary candidates, most notably uproleselan (GMI-301), a specific E-selectin antagonist aimed at disrupting the binding of cancer cells to the bone marrow microenvironment, a mechanism believed to contribute to chemo resistance in acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The company positioned uproleselan as a potential adjunct to chemotherapy, designed to be agnostic to specific genetic mutations or treatment backbones, thereby offering broad utility across the AML spectrum. Preclinical and early clinical data suggested the potential for uproleselan to improve response rates and potentially facilitate hematopoietic cell transplantation by overcoming this resistance mechanism. This unique approach in targeting E-selectin represented GlycoMimetics' core technological differentiator, aiming to provide a tangible benefit over standard chemotherapies alone. While specific, quantifiable performance metrics for this technological advantage in human trials were pending pivotal data, the strategic intent was to improve patient outcomes by addressing a fundamental biological interaction in the bone marrow. Beyond uproleselan, the company also developed GMI-1687, a second-generation E-selectin antagonist with potential applications in inflammatory diseases like sickle cell disease, leveraging the same foundational glycomimetic technology but with a focus on subcutaneous administration.

Operating within the competitive landscape of hematologic oncology, GlycoMimetics faced formidable, well-established players like Jazz Pharmaceuticals (JAZZ), Novartis (NVS), Pfizer (PFE), and Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY). These companies command significant market share in AML with approved therapies and robust pipelines. Compared to these giants, GlycoMimetics was a clinical-stage entity with no commercial revenue, relying entirely on financing and partnerships to fund its extensive research and development efforts. While its focused glycomimetic technology offered a potentially differentiated approach in specific biological pathways, it lacked the diversified revenue streams, global infrastructure, and deep financial resources of its larger competitors. Historically, GlycoMimetics' financial performance reflected its R&D-intensive nature, characterized by significant net losses and negative operating cash flows, a stark contrast to the positive margins and cash generation of companies like Jazz, Novartis, and Pfizer. For instance, GlycoMimetics reported an annual net loss of $37.88 million and negative operating cash flow of $31.10 million in 2024, alongside a TTM Net Profit Margin of -54517.30%, highlighting the financial demands of its clinical development strategy compared to the profitable operations of its commercial-stage rivals.

The investment narrative for GlycoMimetics was heavily tied to the success of its pivotal Phase 3 trial for uproleselan in relapsed and refractory AML. Management had guided for top-line results by the end of Q2 2024, a timeline enabled by an FDA-cleared protocol amendment allowing for a time-based analysis given the longer-than-anticipated patient survival in the study. Contingent on positive data, the company had outlined plans for a U.S. NDA filing by the end of 2024 and was undertaking pre-commercialization activities, aiming to transition into a commercial-stage company.

However, this trajectory was fundamentally altered in May 2024 when GlycoMimetics announced that the Phase 3 uproleselan study did not meet its primary endpoint of statistically significant improvement in overall survival. This outcome, coupled with subsequent feedback from the FDA indicating the need for an additional clinical trial for potential regulatory approval – a path requiring capital resources beyond the company's means – led to a critical strategic decision. In July 2024, the company initiated a significant workforce reduction of approximately 80% to conserve cash and commenced a strategic review to maximize shareholder value. The NCI-sponsored Phase 2 trial data in October 2024, also showing no statistically significant improvement in event-free survival, further solidified the challenging outlook for uproleselan. Consequently, the company determined it would not continue the development of uproleselan or its other drug candidates, including GMI-1687.

This strategic review culminated in the Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization with Crescent Biopharma, Inc., a privately held biotechnology company focused on developing oncology therapeutics for solid tumors. The merger, which closed on June 16, 2025, effectively represents a reverse merger, with Crescent's business becoming the primary focus of the combined entity. Pre-merger GlycoMimetics stockholders are expected to own approximately 2.6% of the combined company, reflecting the significant shift in ownership and the value attributed to Crescent's pipeline and the concurrent financing.

The merger was accompanied by a substantial private placement, raising approximately $200 million. This capital infusion is critical, as GlycoMimetics' cash and cash equivalents stood at $5.61 million as of March 31, 2025, with management acknowledging substantial doubt about the company's ability to continue as a going concern without the merger and financing. The $200 million in proceeds, combined with existing cash, is expected to provide the combined company, now operating as Crescent Biopharma, Inc. (NASDAQ:CBIO), with a cash runway extending through 2027.

The new investment thesis for former GLYC shareholders now rests entirely on Crescent's pipeline and strategic direction. Crescent is advancing a pipeline of oncology therapeutics, including its lead program, CR-001, a tetravalent PD-1 x VEGF bispecific antibody. This asset is strategically designed to replicate the cooperative pharmacology of ivonescimab, which has shown superior efficacy compared to pembrolizumab (a market leader like Pfizer's KEYTRUDA) in a Phase 3 non-small cell lung cancer trial. Crescent's strategy is to leverage this validated biological approach to rapidly advance potentially best-in-class therapeutics for solid tumors. The company is on track to submit an IND application for CR-001 in the fourth quarter of 2025 and anticipates reporting proof-of-concept clinical data from a Phase 1 trial in the second half of 2026. Additionally, Crescent is developing novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), CR-002 and CR-003, with an IND submission for CR-002 anticipated in mid-2026.

The competitive landscape for Crescent's pipeline is also intense, involving large pharmaceutical companies with established oncology portfolios and numerous biotech firms developing bispecific antibodies and ADCs. Crescent's competitive positioning will depend on the clinical performance of its assets relative to existing and emerging therapies. The strategic focus on replicating a clinically validated mechanism with CR-001 aims to de-risk development and accelerate market entry.

Key risks for the combined entity include the successful integration of the two companies, the execution of Crescent's clinical development plans on time and within budget, potential challenges in the highly competitive oncology market, and the need for future financing beyond the current runway, which will depend on achieving significant clinical milestones. The substantial change in business focus means that the historical performance and pipeline of GlycoMimetics are no longer the drivers of value; instead, investors must evaluate the potential of Crescent's oncology assets.

Conclusion

The completion of the merger with Crescent Biopharma marks a definitive end to GlycoMimetics' original journey focused on glycomimetic drug development and the uproleselan program. Following the disappointing Phase 3 results and the subsequent strategic decision to discontinue its pipeline, the company has undergone a fundamental transformation. The new entity, Crescent Biopharma, backed by a significant capital raise, now pivots to an oncology pipeline targeting solid tumors with bispecific antibodies and ADCs. The investment thesis has shifted from the potential of E-selectin inhibition in AML to the promise of Crescent's novel oncology assets and their ability to compete in a crowded but lucrative market. Investors in the former GLYC now hold a stake in a company with a new strategy, new pipeline, and a fresh cash runway, with future value creation dependent on the successful execution of Crescent's clinical development milestones and its ability to carve out a competitive position in the solid tumor landscape.