Good morning. Welcome to Needham's 24th Annual Healthcare Conference. I'm Serge Belanger, one of the healthcare analysts at Needham . We are happy to have Arcutis Biotherapeutics for our next fireside chat session. From Arcutis, we have the company's CEO, Frank Watanabe, as well as the company's CFO, David Topper. I just want to highlight that we do have the ability to take questions from the audience. For those listening in on the portal, you can submit questions on that portal. We will take them as they come in. I will hand it over to Frank and David if they want to give us a quick overview of the company, and then we will jump into some Q&A.
Sure. Thanks, Serge. Arcutis is a commercial stage biotherapeutics company focused in the medical dermatology space. For those of you who aren't following story, we currently have three FDA-approved products. We've got a cream that's approved for the treatment of plaque psoriasis. It's been on the market for about two and a half years. We have a foam for seborrheic dermatitis that was approved just a little over a year ago. We have a cream for eczema or atopic dermatitis that was approved last summer. As you mentioned, before we're talking, we have a couple of key regulatory decisions coming up. We have a PDUFA for our foam in scalp and body psoriasis that's scheduled for an action date of May 22. We have another approval for eczema in a younger population with a PDUFA date in mid-October.
We have our own specialty sales force, sell to dermatology clinicians. We also have a partner who sells in primary care and pediatrics for us. That is a deal we did last year. The product is performing very, very well, growing nicely. It is the leading branded topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent in the United States. We have communicated that we are in a very strong position capital-wise and do not anticipate the need, at least for our existing business, to raise capital in the future. David, I am sure can comment more later about our financial position.
Great. Thanks for the overview. I wanted to start with some, I guess, some recent developments. Some of them have been probably the topic du jour, tariffs. I know pharmaceutical products have so far been exempted, but I think the wide consensus is that it's temporary. Just curious, what would be your exposure if we were to see some pharmaceutical tariffs?
I think it will depend on the details of what the tariff looks like. But we anticipate that it would have really minimal impact on Arcutis. We do the majority of our manufacturing in the United States, and we have pharma-like cost of goods sold. So we're not anticipating a major impact on us from any potential future tariffs.
Okay. The other item related to our government is the FDA. There have been some key changes at the FDA over the last few weeks here. Like you mentioned, you do have an upcoming PDUFA. Just curious if there have been some changes at the division, the FDA that is reviewing this NDA.
Yeah. At this point, we're not aware of the changes having had any impact on at least our division. Folks may be aware that CBER and CDER have been largely shielded from the reductions, partially because most of those budgets are paid for out of PDUFA user fees. I think there are certainly the risks that going forward, we could see the departure, particularly of experienced FDA leadership, given some of the turmoil at the agency. As far as impact on us, we have not seen any signs that there's any slippage in our timelines. Certainly, I think, given how late we are in the review cycle for roflumilast foam for scalp psoriasis, Zoryve foam for scalp psoriasis, I'm not anticipating that that should have any impact. We expect an on-time decision from them in May.
Okay. Maybe the most recent development pertaining to Arcutis is the, I believe it was late last week, you entered into an agreement with your generic filer. It stayed all of the patent litigation. Maybe just give us a description of that agreement and what it entails.
Sure. Yes, the other party in that litigation who had filed an ANDA against Zoryve came to us, I guess it's almost two weeks ago, and requested that we stay that process. They appear to have run into some significant challenges along the way with their effort and did not want to continue the litigation at this point. After some discussion, we agreed to that stay. I think really importantly, under Hatch-Waxman, as you're probably aware, Serge, the first to file has this period of exclusivity. In return, the originator can file a lawsuit, and there's a 30-month stay for the FDA. They can't approve the originator or the generic product during that 30-month stay. That clock has been ticking, and we burned off about 13 months of that 30 months.
As part of the agreement, the other party had to agree that we have preserved our remaining stay. If the lawsuit should start back up again, we would be able to enjoy the remaining 17 months of that stay to litigate the case against them. I think the most important thing, though, is that we continue to believe that we have very, very strong patent protection on Zoryve across the formulation, the pharmacokinetics, and the usage of the product. We had filed this lawsuit to enforce those patents. Should they or another company try and genericize Zoryve, we intend to fully enforce our intellectual property rights. I feel very confident that we will prevail if we have to do that.
Okay.
Serge, I'll just add, there were a number of people that asked us last week when they saw the announcement. They assumed that this meant we were in settlement talks. That is not correct. We are not, and we do not have any current intention to.
Yeah. Good point, David. Yeah.
I don't know if you can comment, but the difficulty the other party encountered, was it at the litigation level or it was more the regulatory level with FDA?
I can't really comment on the nature of their problem. You have to talk to them, but it must have been a fairly significant problem, I would say.
And just look at some of the circumstantial evidence, right? They filed their ANDA originally in January of 2024. PDUFA takes 10 months. Nothing happened. Something's going on.
Their ANDA remains under review here by FDA as far as.
Again, you'd have to talk with them. We don't know the exact status. I think importantly, though, under the agreement, and this was in the press release, any communications they have to have with the FDA, they would have to share that with us so we have a good bearing on what's happening going forward.
Perfect. All right. Let's talk about Zoryve. 2024 was pretty transformational for the company. We saw sales really seeing uptick. I think the sebderm launch was a big factor. Maybe talk about your expectations for 2025 and what should be the drivers. Maybe as part of that, what kind of, if there's any seasonality in the quarters that we should be looking for.
Sure. Yeah, 2024 was a really transformational year. I know that word gets thrown around a lot, but I would argue that it really does apply to 2024 at Arcutis. Clearly, the foam was a major driver of our growth. We had a vertiginous launch, I think is probably the best way to describe it in the first quarter. In addition to that, we saw very strong growth of the underlying, the original plaque psoriasis business throughout the year. With the launch of atopic dermatitis in the summer, that product has also grown very nicely through the back half of 2024. We see that continuing trend going into 2025. We're seeing good growth across the board, all three SKUs, as you all can see in the weekly data.
I think for 2025, certainly there's the launch in scalp and body psoriasis, which I think is an underappreciated opportunity. That's almost half of psoriasis patients have involvement of their scalp. I think folks have seen with seborrheic dermatitis just how differentiated that product is in the marketplace. The same thing is true in scalp psoriasis, right? There really aren't good alternatives, and there are no non-steroidal alternatives to Zoryve foam. I think that'll be another important catalyst for growth. The back half of the year with the launch in atopic dermatitis in ages 2 to 5, I think that will also be a contributor to growth. On top of the underlying business in those two launches, we have continued growth in our insurance coverage, particularly in the government sector, right? We've been making a lot of very rapid progress on Medicaid.
We expect that to continue. We continue to be very hopeful about getting Medicare coverage maybe starting this year as well. The Inflation Reduction Act and the changes in Part B have slowed the rate of change in Part D, but we still think that we have a very compelling argument for the Part D plans. Lastly, I think the other factor that's going to be important going forward is the conversion from topical steroids to non-steroidals. The topical steroid market is still 16 times bigger than the branded non-steroidal market. We are seeing, I think, gathering momentum in the dermatology community amongst dermatology clinicians themselves talking about the need to move away from topical steroids.
I think there have been three or four articles just since January 1 in the medical press talking about the risks of topical steroids and the need to move over. As that pace accelerates, Zoryve is really positioned to be the primary beneficiary since we're the leading branded non-steroidal on the market.
Okay. When we think about converting from topical steroids, that's basically the focus, whether we're talking about psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, or sebderm. Is that the right way to think about it? I guess, how do you drive that? Is that a physician-driven decision, or can you also push the patients to demand for it?
Yeah. First of all, it is across all three indications. Topical steroids are the standard of care in each of the three indications. The majority of patients are on a topical steroid for each of those three diseases. In terms of where the impetus is going to come from, it's probably going to be a combination of both physicians and patients. There certainly is a great deal of steroid phobia amongst the patient population. We hear frequently from doctors that patients are hesitant to use topical steroids. I think that's particularly true in the atopic dermatitis community. Also in seborrheic dermatitis, it often occurs on the face, and that's an area that people are very worried about. There is the push from the patient side.
I do think it's important that we're seeing dermatologists themselves saying to each other, "Guys, we really need to rethink how we're using topical steroids." You can see how they got where they were, right? One of my favorite expressions is, "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." For 70 years, steroids were really the only thing that they had that were effective topical agents in treating these diseases, right? There were other alternatives, but they really weren't very effective. They weren't very well tolerated. They kept going back to their topical steroids. Now they have several very good choices that are on par in terms of efficacy and far safer, particularly in the case of Zoryve, safer for chronic use and safe for use anywhere in the body. That's a game-changing value proposition in dermatology.
What we hear the dermatologists saying is, "Steroids are okay for these short periods of use, but we really need to get away from chronically managing our patients with steroids and thinking about Zoryve and the other non-steroidals as the long-term treatment plan for the majority of their patients.
Okay. Is the path to achieving this basically, like you said, expanding access, making prescribing easy, and raising awareness of how easy it is? That is how you get them to start changing their practices?
I think the ease of use is certainly a factor. I think that one of the things that has made it difficult in the past to displace topical steroids is also just the force of habit, right? If you do something 30 times a day for your entire career, it's a pretty ingrained habit. We believe, and we have some good evidence, that one of the key dynamics supporting Zoryve is getting doctors to write it regularly where Zoryve becomes a habit. One thing I think that I find very interesting is we can see in the data, if the doctor writes Zoryve for a single indication, they write a given level, depends on the doctor. If they write for two indications, they do not write twice as much Zoryve. They write three times as much Zoryve.
If they write all three indications, they do not write three times as much Zoryve. They write 10 times as much Zoryve in total, right? There is this, our Chief Commercial Officer calls it a portfolio effect, right, where the more you use Zoryve, the more you use Zoryve. That is probably because it becomes part of habit. As you said, doctors recognize that it is relatively easy to get as well. That can have a power in and of itself.
Okay. Can you give us an update on where the sales force currently stands in terms of how many reps and when's the last time it was expanded and what drives the scalability of it?
We expanded the sales force contemporaneous with the atopic dermatitis launch last summer. It was slightly before, but effectively, it was contemporaneous with that. We're now 140 sales reps in dermatology. That gives us very good coverage. We cover 90% of the prescribing volume in dermatology, not 90% of the doctors, right? 90% of the prescribing volume. There are a lot of doctors that are very, very low volume that we don't call on, but we're covering 90% of that business. We think it's a right-sized sales force. It's very comparable to other dermatology sales forces, even some of the large pharma companies that are selling biologics in the space. I don't see a need to expand it in dermatology.
In addition to our 140 reps, just as a reminder, our partner Kowa has another 220 reps in the primary care and pediatric space, starting promotion of Zoryve in that therapeutic setting as well.
Okay. I had a couple of questions on Kowa. I do not think a lot of people know about Kowa. It is not that familiar of a company for a lot of people. Maybe just talk about who they are and what their capabilities are and why they were chosen over maybe somebody that would be more familiar to investors.
I'll start out with why they were chosen. When we went out to look for a primary care partner, we were looking for three key things. The first one is they needed to have a primary care sales force, right? We weren't looking to build a sales force. We were looking to rent an existing sales force. The second, and this was really important, we needed a company that had a high-priority position that they were willing to put Zoryve into, right? For example, Lilly and Novo both have primary care sales forces. I wouldn't have been first position or second position or third position or fourth position behind the likes of Mounjaro or Zepbound, right? They have big primary care sales forces, but they don't have the capacity to promote my product.
The third one is, ideally, we were looking for someone who had been in partnerships, collaborations like this before. There are certain idiosyncrasies, let's say, to co-promotes, and we wanted someone who's had some experience doing co-promotes. We scanned the landscape, and we settled on Kowa as meeting all three of those criteria. They had an existing primary care sales force. They were willing and able to put Zoryve in the first position in that sales force, which is a big win, I think, for us. They have had a track record of co-promote deals in the past that have been very successful. Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, which is the group that we're working with, is the US division of a big Japanese drug company called Kowa Pharmaceuticals out of Japan. They built this organization to promote Kowa's statin, which was called Livalo. It is called Livalo.
It's now generic. It went generic, I think, about a year ago, a little over a year ago. They were also promoting a cardiovascular drug for AstraZeneca, and they were promoting another cardiovascular drug for Amarin. Two co-promotion deals that were very successful. Both of those have also now ended. They had the capacity and the flexibility to pivot their organization, focus on primary care and pediatrics, which is obviously slightly different than who you're going to target for a cardiovascular drug and to give us that first position detail.
Right. Just so you know, Kowa is a private company. It's very large, but it's private, which is probably why a lot of people don't know much about it.
Yeah. Correct. I think you entered the deal last fall, early fall.
We signed the deal during the summer. They started promoting late, very, very end of Q3, beginning of Q4.
Okay. We should start seeing the impacts in 2025 as they begin.
I think we will start seeing some growing contribution from them as the year progresses. I think as it becomes a meaningful number, we certainly will let investors know what portion of it is coming from primary care and pediatrics. Like the psoriasis launch, right? Kowa is introducing in some cases themselves to the physician, and then they're also introducing Zoryve. That just, it's a longer selling cycle when you first introduce a drug versus seborrheic dermatitis or eczema or scalp psoriasis where we're building on all this positive experience of Zoryve and of Arcutis and knowledge already, right? It's much easier to launch second, third, fourth indications or products after you've launched the first. It is just taking them some time to get doctors up to speed on Zoryve and to get them to start writing it. We are seeing scripts coming through.
Okay. I forget if you've disclosed this, but the economic arrangements between Arcutis and Kowa.
Yeah, we haven't. We haven't disclosed the specific terms. We will be reporting the commission that we pay to them as part of our SG&A. I think as it becomes a meaningful number, we'll need to provide more color to Wall Street about how much of it is the Kowa commission.
Got it. Okay. I guess next is just how, based on what you've seen so far, how's the product being used? You mentioned earlier you're trying to convert the topical steroid scripts, but are you seeing specific usage in more moderates or severe patients?
Yeah. In psoriasis and sebderm, right, we have indications across the board. In atopic dermatitis, we're actually only indicated for mild to moderate because that's what we studied. I think certainly in psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, for severe patients, there are good systemic options. Most of those severe patients are going to go on a systemic option, right? IL-17, IL-23, IL-4, IL-13 antibodies. In many cases, the patients will use a topical adjunctively to their systemic therapy. The use cases we're seeing is either adjunct to systemics, mostly biologics, or monotherapy for the more mild to moderate patients. sebderm is a little different because there isn't a biologic, and we're head and shoulders, pun intended, better than the alternatives. That's being used first-line monotherapy or sometimes with ketoconazole really for every patient.
I think it will redefine the standard of care in seborrheic dermatitis.
Okay. Is the usage of how many tubes and things like that kind of starting to show up for each of the indications?
Yeah. Yeah. We're getting, particularly for psoriasis and for sebderm, we have enough data now where I think we can say with some confidence that our estimates are correct. Patients are consuming somewhere around two tubes a year on average. That's consistent with, if you look at the script data, about half of our business for psoriasis and a rapidly growing number of our business for sebderm as well is refills, right? That would be consistent with the pattern you're seeing where patients are using about two tubes a year. I think that speaks well to compliance. That's what we had anticipated. It's meeting our expectations.
Got it. I think another large focus for 2024 is on expanding coverage of Zoryve across both commercial and the government coverage programs. Just curious where we're at for 2024.
Yeah. For psoriasis and seborrheic dermatitis on the commercial front, we're 80% commercial live coverage. That's very good coverage. That last remaining 20% sometimes can get expensive. I don't know how much more we'll chip away at that. We're very happy with where we are commercially. Atopic dermatitis, it's a little bit earlier in the launch, but that's catching up very quickly. I would anticipate we will get to a similar level of coverage as what we're seeing with psoriasis and sebderm in the very near future. On the government side, we've made really dramatic progress, I think, in Medicaid. We reported, I think, as of the end of last quarter, Florida, Texas, New York, and California, so the four big states. It's about a third of all Medicaid lives in those four states. We've also picked up Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio.
We've had a number of additional wins. We've continued to make progress on that front. When we report out Q1 earnings, we'll provide a full update of where we are in terms of Medicaid coverage. I think at the end of last quarter, we were sitting at about 50% of all Medicaid lives had access to Zoryve. Generally, it's very, very high-quality coverage. For example, in California, there's no step for California Medicaid to get Zoryve. We're a first-line treatment. In New York, there's no step for seborrheic dermatitis. It's only a single step for psoriasis and atopic dermatitis through a generic steroid. We're really happy with the coverage we've been getting in Medicaid. Medicare, as I mentioned, it's been slower going than we had hoped. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with Zoryve or something that we control.
It really has to do with the changes that were wrought on the Part D program through the Inflation Reduction Act that started January 1 of this year. There's just a lot of uncertainty with the Part D plans of what their financial liabilities are going to be. They're being very hesitant to add any new products to their formularies. I think we're going to get there. We're very well positioned with Medicare. Remember, we had priced the product in such a way that we are not a specialty product in Medicare, which we think is really important for getting good coverage as well as getting any coverage, right? We continue to negotiate with those plans, and we hope to start making progress this year on Medicare as well.
Okay. I think in the last couple of quarters, you've reported that gross and nets have kind of met their steady state. As more Medicare and maybe a little more Medicaid comes on board here, should we expect any changes or things?
No. We've said before that, at least in the case of Zoryve, and I know this is quite unusual, that our Medicare and Medicaid business, we anticipate will be similarly profitable to our commercial business. Medicare and Medicaid should not have an impact on our gross to nets, a meaningful impact on our gross to nets. As you said, I think we had said in Q3 of last year that we had about reached steady state. There is still a little bit of improvement to be seen on atopic dermatitis as we get more insurance coverage. Certainly, the psoriasis and the sebderm businesses and the overall portfolio is effectively at steady state. There will be the typical sort of perturbations in the first quarter. Every retail product sees it as patients' deductibles reset, and they change insurance plans and have to go through prior authorizations again and so forth.
We expect that to trend back down rapidly to steady state and then to continue on through the rest of the year at steady state. We are really happy with where we are. We have told the market publicly we are in the low 50s. That is about as good as anyone achieves anymore on a retail product in the U.S., right? Topical, oral, injectable, regardless. We are very happy with where we have gotten. I think most importantly for shareholders, that means they are getting paid when we generate a script, right?
Yeah. Okay. In 2024, I think we can safely say that the foam and sebderm was kind of the headlining act in terms of sales growth. As we think of 2025 and all the changes we've seen on expansion of formulary coverage, the Kowa collaboration, how do we think about the three major indications and the growth prospects for each?
Yeah. I think that we're still in very early days with atopic dermatitis. I think atopic dermatitis will continue to be a big contributor to growth this year, particularly when you think about that expanded indication coming in October. I also think that scalp and body, as I mentioned before, is going to be a very important contributor to growth. I think today, investors can look and see each SKU, each indication, they know what's driving growth, right? When we get the foam approved in scalp and body psoriasis in just six weeks or so, or at least that's what we expect to happen, it's going to be a little more complicated because you won't know whether a foam script is for sebderm or for plaque psoriasis, right? We won't know either. We'll be able to estimate.
We'll have to triangulate looking at some things, but you won't be able to tell from the data what it is. What I would expect to see is a bump up in the growth of the foam with the approval of scalp. We may see some slowing of the growth in the cream as patients go on to the foam for their psoriasis instead of going on to the cream.
Okay. In terms of DTC advertising, clearly it's a popular advertising avenue for derm products for anybody who watches any kind of television. They'll be aware of that. Just curious, what are your plans there? I know you entered into a partnership with Odell Beckham Jr. Has there been any impacts from that yet?
Yeah. To be clear, we do do direct-to-consumer, right? Search engine optimization, various other types of direct-to-consumer. What we do not do is direct-to-consumer TV, right? Every time we switch it on, it actually is one of the largest segments of pharmaceutical marketing is dermatology for some reason. It is all of the systemic therapies, right? Skyrizi and Otezla and so forth. The economics of a $70,000 a year drug and doing direct-to-consumer TV, it makes sense. It really does not make a lot of sense economically for a product that might be $2,500 a year, right, to do direct-to-consumer TV just because of the cost. That is why we look at other types of direct-to-consumer. On TV, you are competing with the car companies and the airlines and the food companies, and everyone else for eyeballs. It really drives up the price to a very high level.
Not to mention the competition from all the other injectable products in dermatology, right? We anticipate we'll continue our direct-to-consumer efforts, but I don't anticipate us doing direct-to-consumer TV. With regard to OBJ, yeah, so he's actually a Zoryve patient and came to us and said that he wanted to raise awareness about seborrheic dermatitis. He has been doing just that along with his dermatologist who put him on Zoryve and who introduced us to him. He's also been doing a lot to raise awareness. That's much more of a grassroots sort of social media presence. He has 17 million followers or something crazy like that on his various social media accounts. Really, that's what he's using to communicate with the community, the people that follow him and talk about both his experience with seborrheic dermatitis as well as his experience with using Zoryve.
Okay. I'll put David on the spot here, but just his thoughts on guidance for Zoryve, maybe not in 2025, but any updated thinking there?
First of all, while we haven't given explicit detailed guidance for 2025, what we have said and we stand by it is that we're very comfortable with the consensus estimates for revenue in 2025, which is right around $305 million. We continue to be very comfortable with that number. I'm the one who has been hesitant to give detailed guidance only because we keep having launches and we keep having new things like the Kowa partnership and so forth that make it complicated for me. I am waiting to see when things calm down a little bit, if ever. We will continue to help people understand how comfortable we are, at least with top line.
All right. Just talk about the pipeline a little bit. I think we're going to see data on one of the pipeline assets later this year, maybe even this half.
Yeah. Yeah. We've completed the phase I study of ARQ-255, awaiting the readout from that. What we said is that we would communicate that probably the first half of this year. Just a reminder, it is a phase I study. We're primarily looking at safety and tolerability. We did include some biomarkers to try and get a sense, maybe get a hint that the drug is working. It certainly isn't a powered study, and that isn't the primary objective. We'll share with the street what we learned coming out of that study. I think it's a very exciting asset, interesting asset, but it's a very challenging use case, right? This is something no one's been able to successfully do. Hopefully, we'll be able to pull it off. We'll have to see. That's why we run the experiment.
In addition to ARQ-255, we also have reported that we expect to open up the IND for our biologic for atopic dermatitis during the year. Just as a reminder for listeners, that's a fusion protein targeting CD200R, which is an immune checkpoint. If you think about the checkpoint inhibitors in oncology, you inhibit the checkpoints, the immune system gets revved up and attacks the cancer. If you agonize the immune checkpoints, you downregulate the immune system. What you effectively do is you normalize activated immune cells without immunosuppressing. Very promising. There's been some, I think, really compelling clinical data from another drug targeting this target, which is what led us to be interested in this and acquire the asset. We're really excited about getting into the clinic.
I think it could be a very, very differentiated asset in the atopic dermatitis space, which is a large and growing market.
Okay. At this point, is there an appetite to continue growing the pipeline via BD, or you're satisfied with the current assets?
I would say there's always an appetite. I would not say I was a starving man. I think that business development is something that we're always looking at. I would say I've lost count on the tally, but I would guess that since we founded the company, we probably looked at 250 assets, something like that. We have a dedicated team that's always looking at assets. We actually see pretty much everything in dermatology. People will call us because we're one of the few development stage MedDerm companies. We have a pretty high bar. So far out of the 250, we've acquired two, right? ivarmacitinib and our CD200 fusion protein. If an interesting asset comes along that we feel we could create shareholder value with, absolutely.
We've got, I think, the team in place who can be very effective, have shown outstanding clinical development and product development skills. We would be very open to doing a deal that we felt that would be accretive for our shareholders in terms of shareholder value.
Got it. We only have a few minutes left, so maybe we'll ask David to provide an overview of financials, kind of where the cash balance is. I think you've recently started talking about a pretty clear path to profitability.
Yeah. We're in the fortunate position and sort of unusual for the biotech sector in that we said publicly that we don't feel we need to come back to the capital markets. I know the bankers get upset when I say that, but we don't. Our current outlook for the business in steady state scenario, we just don't think we need to come back, which is a good thing. We said that we believe we're going to break even, cash flow break even in 2026. Importantly, I know a lot of people remember that we had $200 million of debt on the balance sheet. We actually renegotiated that last year and improved a number of terms. Most importantly, in my opinion, we built in the ability to repay half of it and then redraw that half if we ever want to.
We may not anytime through the middle of 2026. We sort of did not hurt our liquidity, but we saved half the interest, if you will, for that period. I think we felt good about that decision. Again, most people think every time a biotech churns out good news, whether it's earnings or anything else, that you're going to launch a deal the next day, right? I think we've now finally convinced people that that's not the case.
Okay.
Yeah. David may have said, "Read my lips," but.
Yeah. Yeah, I tried.
Maybe just to wrap up in the last few minutes here, I think the Arcutis story has changed a lot in the last couple of years, first to transition to commercial, and then I think you can say a commercial success now with a topical product, which I think is a rarity in the derm field. Maybe if you can just, if you think there's anything that remains underappreciated or misunderstood about Zoryve or Arcutis in general by investors.
Yeah. I think if there's anything that I would impress on them is the sheer size of the opportunity, right? As I mentioned before, the steroid market is 16 times bigger than the non-steroidal market. There's no question that that is going to change dramatically, right? I don't know by how much, but a significant percentage of those patients are going to move from steroids to non-steroidals. If you do the math, it doesn't take a very large shift to make Zoryve into a very, very large product. We get this question all the time about, well, how can you sustain your growth? That's how we're going to sustain the growth is that 16 to 1 ratio becomes 10 to 1 or 5 to 1. Do the math. It really is a very attractive opportunity.
Zoryve is such a good product and is so well positioned to take advantage of that transition as it occurs that we have very, very high levels of excitement and confidence about the future.
All right. Gentlemen, thank you for your time. Appreciate it.
Great to see you.
Always a pleasure.
Thanks.
Thanks, Serge.
Thank you.