Why Lextro Bio Might Be India’s Next Big Biotech Breakthrough

Pharma Now: Welcome to our show. It’s truly an honor to have you here at Pharma Now. I went through your background, and your journey is astonishing. It’s inspiring to see Indians venturing into drug discovery, a bold and adventurous step, given the huge investments it requires. Congratulations on taking that leap forward.

To begin with, I’d like to go back to the very start. You did your doctorate in Japan, followed by a postdoc at the NIH in the U.S., and then returned to India. But let’s rewind even further. Did you always dream of this path as a child? What was your earliest vision for yourself?

Dr. Murali: Thank you for inviting me to this talk. That’s a big question. Did I realize it in my childhood? Quite frankly, no. My journey took multiple turns along the way, but I was deeply influenced by a few mentors who guided me here.

First and foremost, my father had a PhD and was a reader in college. Since childhood, my interactions with him often pushed me toward biological sciences, though I sometimes thought, “Let’s see what happens later.” Still, that influence played a significant role in my choosing Hyderabad Central University for my postgraduate studies.

Even then, I was still somewhat aimless after my master’s. But everything changed during my second or third semester. I still remember it vividly. Professor C.H. Radha Krishna Murty taught us neurobiology. His very first class was supposed to last one hour, but it went on for three. Not a single student left the room. The way he explained how the brain functions, what it requires, and how nature designed the neural system completely moved me.

That was my turning point. I realized there’s so much to learn, and I felt, why shouldn’t I build a career in this domain? That day truly changed my perspective. Even though I’m not working directly in neuroscience today, that moment set me on the path to biotechnology, and I never looked back.

Pharma Now: What was your primary area of research during your doctorate and postdoc?

Dr. Murali: During my doctorate, I explored host–pathogen interactions, essentially, how microbial components affect the host when an infection occurs. For example, in humans or even plants, how does the pathogen interact with the host? What are the signaling mechanisms behind infection? That was my core area of focus in my PhD.

Later, during my postdoc, I shifted into a different but connected area, understanding gene expression and its link to cancer. At that time, the human genome project wasn’t fully completed, so we didn’t know the functions of many genes. My work involved identifying new genes and proteins that are continuously expressed in the body, and trying to see whether they play a role in carcinogenesis. The broader theme of my postdoc was really about unraveling how these novel genes might contribute to the development of cancer.

Pharma Now: Very interesting. Now, usually people choose the U.S. or Europe for their doctorates. Why did you decide to go to Japan?

Dr. Murali: To be honest, I did try applying in both Europe and the U.S., but I was also open to opportunities in Japan. After completing my master’s, I worked briefly as a project assistant in Bhavnagar, Gujarat, where I was studying seaweeds and marine algae. Interestingly, my mentor there was originally from a lab in Nagasaki, Japan. He encouraged me to pursue my PhD there and even offered to recommend me to his professor. That’s how the opportunity came up, and I decided to take it.

Pharma Now: How was your experience in Japan?

Dr. Murali: Initially, it was tough. The language barrier and cultural differences made me think, “Maybe I should just return to India.” But the Japanese people were incredibly kind, and my professor was very supportive. He gave me the time and space to adapt, which was invaluable. The local community also went out of its way to help me adjust to daily life.

It took me about three to four months to really settle in and feel comfortable, but once I did, I began to appreciate the culture and the work environment. Honestly, if the people hadn’t been so helpful, I might have given up and left. But instead, their support turned my experience into a very positive one.

Pharma Now: You’ve trained in Japan during your PhD, then in the U.S. for your postdoc, and eventually came back to India. How has this global exposure shaped the way you think about biotech innovations in India today?

Dr. Murali: One of the most important realisations for me is that science is always evolving. Learning one specialization in one place is not enough if your dream is to develop a medicine that can truly reach patients.

There are still so many diseases with no effective treatments, and people are suffering. As a scientist, I often ask myself: Can I contribute, even in a small way, to creating a better medicine for them? To move toward that goal, you need exposure to multiple areas of science and the ability to adapt to the latest technologies. Staying confined to one position or one narrow field can sometimes limit that progress.

Personally, I didn’t want to restrict myself to academic research alone. My goal was always to translate science into something tangible, something that could eventually become a medicine. That’s why I began looking for opportunities to move into the industry.

At the time, making the transition from academia to industry in the U.S. was quite challenging. The system there, combined with visa restrictions, made it difficult to switch quickly. On top of that, I had family responsibilities in India that needed my attention.

Fortunately, Reliance Life Sciences was looking for scientists with my background, and I was offered an opportunity to join them. That was a turning point. I felt it was the right decision, and I took it. Looking back, that decision to return to India and enter the industry gave me the chance to work directly on applied research with real potential to impact patients.

So in short, it wasn’t one single factor but a combination: the desire to move closer to applied science, the limitations of staying in the U.S., personal responsibilities at home, and finally the right opportunity at the right time. All of this together brought me back to India.

Pharma Now: Okay, that’s interesting. You have worked with giants, Nektar, Biocon, BMS, Reliance Life Sciences and over 15 drug discovery programs. That’s incredible. Can you share a moment from your time in the industry where science was moving fast, but something else nearly broke the process, maybe regulatory or clinical trial related? I’m sure that, across those 15 programs, you must have faced many challenges. Let’s talk about that.

Dr. Murali: Sure. Let me start with my journey at Reliance. In technology or science, sometimes we are ahead of the times, and sometimes behind. In either case, we are bound to fail. At Reliance Life Sciences, we were ahead of our time. I was working with small interfering RNA, and we made a good number of molecules, with almost five global patents. However, we were still ahead of the time because there was no proper delivery system for applying RNA to humans in a stable and effective way. The technology was not developed enough, and building such technology in the industry takes a very long time. Companies may not always be able to invest that much time. This was around 2005 — so, scientifically we were ahead, but technologically the field was not mature enough. That made me shift gears.

I moved to Biocon and then Bristol Myers Squibb. There, I briefly worked on generating human-derived chimeras and setting up a bank of surgical samples for testing. The idea was that drugs tested on patient-derived samples would generate data more translatable to humans than using cell lines. But this required approvals and was a time-consuming process, which eventually made me move to Nektar Therapeutics in Hyderabad.

At Nektar, I worked on multiple programs, about nine in total, spanning biologics and small molecules. At least three of those molecules reached Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials in the US, which was very rewarding. One of them was NKTR-358, now partnered with Eli Lilly. Nektar is a San Francisco-based company, but much of the pharmacological and in-vitro work was conducted by my group in India. That molecule is currently in Phase 2 trials, and it was a rich experience.

Another molecule, NKTR-350, targeted psoriasis and dermatitis. A different program, in oncology melanoma, reached Phase 2 under a partnership with Bristol Myers Squibb. Unfortunately, despite a $4 billion deal, the molecule failed to meet its endpoints in melanoma. It was disappointing, but there was valuable learning. Another program, NKTR-255, is currently being tested alongside CAR-T therapies in early clinical phases.

Beyond these, we worked on several small molecules from concept through IND-enabling studies. Some failed due to toxicity, others due to lack of efficacy. A few made it to Phase 1 but did not progress further. Still, the successful molecules reaching Phase 2 bring great satisfaction.

One key question always remained: why can’t we predict in humans? This drove me toward new models like organoids. Traditionally, we worked with cell lines and then with patient tumor samples, but now three-dimensional organoid models have emerged. Organoids mimic human tissue more closely, improving the translatability of preclinical results to clinical success.

For example, a tumor tissue isn’t just cancer cells. It also has fibroblasts and diverse immune cells, some cytotoxic, some suppressive. When a drug enters, the question is: can it still work in that complex environment? Two-dimensional cell cultures often give great results in isolation, but the true challenge lies in that complexity. Organoids allow us to test drugs in miniature, tissue-like structures that reflect the real human system. That’s where truly predictive data comes from.

Pharma Now: How expensive is organoid-based treatment or research? And how complex is the process of building organoids?

Dr. Murali: It really depends on the field. Organoids are still in a nascent stage, but they’re far more reliable than many traditional models. I wouldn’t call them “cheap” — cost is always relative. For example, if I don’t use organoids, I’d have to generate data from humanized immune mice, which is actually more expensive and less controlled.

With organoids, I have a system that is better controlled and more translatable, rather than relying solely on animal models. In drug discovery, costs are always high, but the key is weighing risk versus benefit. If I run cheaper experiments in unreliable systems, the price I’ll pay for failure later in clinical stages will be far greater. Using organoids may cost more upfront, but it provides better predictive value, and that knowledge is worth the investment.

Pharma Now: In terms of percentage, how much accuracy does using organoids improve drug prediction?

Dr. Murali: Organoids aren’t a solution for everything, but they’re a major step forward. With traditional two-dimensional cultures, the predictive value might be around 50% — just hypothetically. With organoids, we can reach about 70–75%. That’s a significant improvement. But can we reach 90 or 100%? No. Organoids still don’t fully replicate the human body. They are close, but never perfect.

Pharma Now: Can you walk us through the process of building an organoid? I’ve heard it involves stem cells. How exactly does it work?

Dr. Murali: There are multiple ways to generate organoids. For instance, in one of our programs, we worked on non-small cell lung cancer organoids. We started with patient-derived tumor cells carefully banked and characterized and combined them with cancer-associated fibroblasts. These were grown together in a supportive matrix material.

Over two to three weeks, they formed a three-dimensional structure, about 200–500 micrometers in diameter. This wasn’t just cancer cells: it included fibroblasts, endothelial cells (to mimic blood vessels), and human PBMCs to simulate immune activity. Essentially, we recreated a miniature version of the tumor microenvironment with stromal components, immune cells, and even hypoxia (low oxygen), which is common in real tumors.

Once this organoid structure forms, we characterize it using tests like flow cytometry and histochemistry to confirm that all components are present. Then we test drug penetration and efficacy. Unlike 2D models, where drugs easily reach cells, in organoids, we see barriers similar to real tumors, poor blood vessel networks, hypoxia, and immune exclusion.

In our own experience, as well as in literature, the difference is striking. For example, in 2D models, a compound’s IC50 might look as strong as one nanomolar. However, in organoid models, the same compound may require 1–10 micromolar to show activity. This means the 2D system overestimates efficacy, while the organoid gives a more realistic, clinically relevant picture. That’s the real value.

Pharma Now: Is there any live case study where organoid-based models have actually been implemented with patients? Maybe not in India, but globally?

Dr. Murali: No, not at present, we are still in the discovery stage, so we don’t have direct patient case studies. But there have been a few attempts elsewhere. For example, one U.S. company and even an Indian company that no longer exists tried taking patient tumor samples to create three-dimensional models. Before doctors prescribed treatment, these models were used to test multiple drug combinations in the lab. The idea was to identify which therapy might work best for that specific patient and then guide the doctor’s decision.

Some trials and experiments were done, but to my knowledge, they weren’t very successful. This is not because the science was wrong, but because of challenges in logistics, timelines, and the complexity of consistently creating these models. This is exactly where AI now has the potential to step in to speed up the process and overcome these hurdles.

Pharma Now: Exactly. AI seems to be helping a lot with simulations and accelerating the process. Let’s shift gears. You mentioned Lextro Labs earlier. You’ve worked across many drug discovery programs as a scientist. How did you decide to start your own company?

Dr. Murali: Since the beginning of my career, I’ve carried one desire: to contribute something tangible to patients, ideally to see at least one drug I worked on reach the clinic and get approved. That drive has never gone away.

I was fortunate to meet my co-founder, Mr. Srinivas Akkina, who shared the same vision. Together, we asked ourselves: “What exactly should we work on?” Instead of focusing on a single therapeutic area, we decided to build a platform technology that could generate multiple molecules across domains. That’s how our IMC platform — Immune Modulation and Cytotoxicity was born.

The idea is simple: in any disease, the immune system plays a role. If immune homeostasis is disturbed, disease arises. So, our platform focuses on modulating the immune system, either upregulating or downregulating, while also enabling cytotoxicity where needed (such as killing cancer cells, bacteria, or infectious agents). By addressing both aspects, we aim to target diseases more effectively.

From this platform, we’ve already developed several therapeutic molecules. One of them is LXT801, designed for chronic wounds. Unlike oncology, where the goal is destruction (killing tumor cells), wound healing requires construction and rebuilding tissues. Construction is always harder than destruction, which is why we call our work “reconstruction science.”

Chronic wounds are a huge unmet medical need, especially in India, often called the “diabetes capital of the world.” Every 20 seconds, somewhere in the world, an amputation occurs due to non-healing wounds. Yet, globally, as of December 2023, there is only one FDA-approved biologic therapy for wounds and just two cell-based therapies. There are no approved small molecules, only wound management solutions, and no true treatments.

With LXT801, a bispecific biologic, we aim to modulate the immune system while simultaneously promoting skin cell growth to close wounds. Currently, we’re in the phase of PCT studies, completing GLP toxicology studies and plan to move into Phase I clinical trials soon.

Pharma Now: Wonderful. Best wishes for that. Is this the only molecule you’re working on, or are there others in the pipeline?

Dr. Murali: We are working on several molecules. LXT801 is our most advanced candidate, soon entering Phase I trials, with global patents filed and pending approval. But beyond that, we’re also developing LXT702 for chronic and acute kidney injuries.

This program also stems from our focus on the immune system. In acute kidney injury, for example, the proximal renal tubules often get damaged, either due to sepsis or as a side effect of certain drugs. A classic example is the chemotherapy agent cisplatin, which damages the kidney lining. Once that lining is compromised, the kidney can’t filter waste effectively, leading to severe toxicity.

The biggest challenge is the timeline: in ICU settings, doctors have only about 72 hours from detection to intervention. Right now, treatment is largely limited to stopping the offending drug and managing electrolytes, but nothing directly works on restoring the epithelial lining or reducing kidney inflammation.

This is where LXT702 shows promise. In our early studies, it appears capable of: Suppressing overactive immune responses, reducing inflammation and regenerating microvilli in the proximal tubules, which are crucial for filtering waste.

We believe this dual action could accelerate recovery and potentially save patients who otherwise deteriorate very fast.

Another exciting aspect is its potential prophylactic use, for example, in patients receiving chemotherapy drugs like cisplatin or carboplatin,  which are effective but nephrotoxic. LXT702 could protect the kidneys while allowing chemo to work at the required dose. That’s a game-changer if proven successful.

Pharma Now: That sounds like a breakthrough. At Lextro Labs, is this a funded company, or are you operating bootstrapped?

Dr. Murali: We’re bootstrapped at the moment. And yes, it’s a very courageous step to develop molecules at this level without significant funding. I’m grateful to my co-founder, Mr. Srinivas Akkina, who has supported me constantly. What helps is my own 20 years of experience in drug discovery, which gives me the clarity to pinpoint where to go and how to focus. That experience is carrying us forward.

Pharma Now: Apart from the science, I want to touch on the emotions behind this journey. You’ve worked across multiple drug discovery programs and are building your own pipeline. Drug development takes years, sometimes 7, 8, or even 10 years. The moment of breakthrough must be overwhelming. To give a cricket analogy, it’s like when Virat Kohli finally hit that shot after 18 years of playing and realized the World Cup was theirs. What is that moment like for a scientist when something finally succeeds after years of work?

Dr. Murali: Beautifully put. In a scientist’s life, there is always both joy and sorrow. Most experiments fail, sometimes for months in a row. But when something finally works, even a small breakthrough, all the failures fade away, and the joy takes over everything.

Drug discovery has no shortcuts. We’ve been on this journey in Lextro for three years now. We’ve created the platform, and we’re just stepping onto it. The real climb begins with funding, scaling, and clinical validation. It’s not a finished story yet, but we are proud of its progress.

And most importantly, this is not a one-person dream. It takes a village to make a drug. At Lextro, we’re a team of 14 passionate people. Each contribution matters, and without them, nothing would have been possible.

Pharma Now: So what's your road map now for Lextro Lab?

Dr. Murali: Now we’ve reached a stage where we want to move to clinicals for our molecules quickly. While we are working on that, we are also looking for funding. Co-developments and partnerships are what we are globally exploring currently. We are talking to several people. Hopefully, we will get some good news soon.

Pharma Now: Best wishes for that. Such efforts have to get recognized, appreciated, and supported with the right funds. Without funds, it is tough, and being an entrepreneur, I can certainly understand how important it is to have the right funds at the right time so that the whole journey can survive. The molecules you are working on are truly life-saving. So yes, this journey must get funded to proceed and sustain.

Dr. Murali: Yes, we hope the science we have generated to date can convince potential investors. The science speaks on its own. It is the data that speaks on its own. It’s not just something we say, it’s the data that proves it.

Pharma Now: I hope some investors will be interested in such molecules and journeys. I’m sure about it. Let’s also talk about your 20 years in the industry. You must have mentored so many people. Can you tell us about a story where one of your mentees has grown, and you feel very proud of them?

Dr. Murali: Sure. If I recollect, I’ve worked with more than 40 people during my 20-year journey. Maybe even more. One of my colleagues, with whom I worked closely, has now become a director in a big multinational company, taking care of the entire research domain. Now I go to him and say, “I don’t know what to do here, help me out.” Although he started with me and grew alongside me, I’m proud that he has reached a point where I can go to him for technical advice. That makes me very happy.

I’ve also taught several people about cell culture. Today, if I go and do it myself, I might contaminate it. But they will stop me and tell me how to do it. I’m proud of them because they’ve mastered the art, and that’s what their journey reflects. This is why I keep saying drug discovery is not a single person’s dream. It has to be a team. It has to be a great group of people who make success happen.

Pharma Now: Tell me about one piece of advice you received in your career that you’ll never forget.

Dr. Murali: It might sound funny. During my PhD, I once spoiled an experiment. My professor called me and asked, “What did you cook yesterday? How did it taste?” I was confused. What’s cooking got to do with my experiment? He asked me the same question three days in a row. Finally, I admitted I hadn’t cooked; I ate outside, so the food tasted good. That’s when he explained: “If you had cooked it yourself, you would have known how to improve it. The same goes for experiments; if you don’t focus, they won’t work. Keep trying, improve, and refine until you get it right.” That lesson about focus and persistence has stayed with me forever.

Pharma Now: That’s a brilliant analogy. I agree you need to focus on whether you’re cooking or running experiments. Very inspiring! Now, just as you received that advice, what’s one message you’d like to share with the next generation of pharma innovators?

Dr. Murali: Dream big, don’t restrict yourself. Opportunities are always there, but your dream pushes you forward.

Pharma Now: Wonderful. That reminds me of Dr. Abdul Kalam’s words, that dreaming big is the first step to achievement. This conversation has been truly enlightening. From your innovations at Lextro Labs to your inspiring journey, I’m sure our audience will take away science, perseverance, and leadership lessons. On behalf of Pharma Now, we wish you and your team great success ahead.

Dr. Murali: Thank you very much for the opportunity. Together, I believe we’ll all be successful.