Hi, good afternoon. I'm Serge Bélanger, one of the healthcare analysts at Needham & Company. I want to welcome everybody to Needham's 25th Annual Healthcare Conference. For our next fireside chat session, we have Liquidia Corporation, a company we've covered for a while now, and made the transition to a commercial company in 2025. Pretty exciting launch. From the company, we have the CEO, Roger Jeffs, as well as the Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Mike Kaseta. I'll hand it over to Roger and Mike. They'll give us a quick overview of the company, and then we'll proceed to Q&A. Roger and Mike, welcome. I'm glad to have you guys here this afternoon, and I'll hand it over to you.
Thanks, Serge. Always a pleasure, and appreciate the invite to the conference. Thank Mike for joining me today to help tell this wonderful story. Also thank those who are joining virtually online. As you sort of noted, Serge, this has been a truly transcendent period for Liquidia, both with regard to our commercial success and the many development initiatives that we've begun as we look to fully position ourselves as a leader in inhaled prostacyclin delivery across the indications of high unmet need. We're really looking forward to sharing our continued progress at our next earnings call, which is in a few weeks' time, so we won't give you updated numbers today, but we're eagerly looking forward to updating the community in a couple of weeks.
As a reminder, in early March, just to level set things, we had 3,600 referrals and 2,900 new patient starts as of the end of February, so spectacular start from scratch in June. Based on this continued momentum, we remain confident in our belief that YUTREPIA will be a billion-dollar product in net product revenues in 2027. Equally, we're excited about initiating our RESPIRE study under the leadership of our CMO, Rajeev Saggar, as we've already received multiple approvals in multiple countries and look to proceed in enrolling our first patients in the coming weeks. Hopefully, by our next earnings calls, we can even have accomplished our first patient in the RESPIRE study, our phase III registrational study. With that, Serge, I'll hand it back to you for questions.
I know there's a lot to talk about today. I look forward to answering your questions as best we can.
Yeah. Perfect. As I mentioned, the product was approved in May of last year, and we've seen pretty impressive uptake. Maybe to start off with, just highlight how the YUTREPIA, the product, differentiates itself from the other inhaled treprostinil products that are on the market.
Yeah. Great question. This maybe is a good primer for people who are newer to the story that really what is the backbone of the differentiation is the PRINT formulation technology, and it really accomplishes what we call the three Ds. One is deep lung delivery, so the particles are uniquely manufactured at the one micron size uniformly, which helps them deposit preferentially in the lower airway. It doesn't take any device energy to disaggregate those particles because they're monodisperse as manufactured. The advantage of that is then we can also pair that with a easy-to-use device, so the second D is device, which is a low-resistance dry powder inhaler. There's a long history of use in other indications like COPD and asthma. It's robust, not physician-dependent, it's familiar to pulmonologists, and really very comfortable and portable for patients to use.
Finally, this is sort of tethered to the formulation technology as well. Because we don't deposit in the upper airway, we have very good tolerability, so the third D is we're able to improve the dose range versus competitive and historic standards. We have safely titrated YUTREPIA to 3-4x the targeted dose of the competitive therapies, and really changing the paradigm and the therapeutic profile that inhaled treprostinil has allowed to deliver. Really it's quite unique in what it can do versus Tyvaso DPI, for example. There isn't a lot of data with Tyvaso DPI in the field. What is there is not very favorable, so there's the National Jewish data subset, where about 70% of those patients discontinued Tyvaso DPI within that just 40 days in a PH-ILD population that has a predilection to cough.
We've been able to mitigate the cough, which allows us to dose to higher effect, which gives us a better outcome and should give us a better durability curve. With all of that, like I said, we have transcended sort of what was the common standard and created a new standard and a product profile that everybody else now has to aim for.
Yeah. I believe in the fourth quarter of last year, the latest quarter, product generated about $90 million in sales. In your last quarterly update, forget if it was in March or late February, but you did update the launch metrics. Maybe highlight those and kind of gives us a preview for 1Q.
Yeah. Maybe Mike, since that can lead into some financial aspects as well, if you don't mind answering that one.
Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Roger, and thanks for having us, Serge. As Roger said, through the end of February, we had over 3,600 prescriptions, over 2,900 patient starts. Our prescriber base had increased to 860 prescribers. We've seen a linear curve from launch, literally from launch. We provided data at the beginning of August, end of October, end of December, and end of February, and the line has remained straight, and we couldn't be happier with the launch. Obviously, as Roger said, we'll have earnings here in a couple of weeks. We're really looking forward to sharing additional metrics when we present our earnings then. The bottom line is what we're seeing, and as Roger said, we are setting a new standard. 75% of our starts are new to prostacyclin therapy. 25% are transitioning from other therapies.
We're seeing both breadth and depth as 25% of our prescribers have referred five or more patients. This is really the pattern as we move from an initial trial by doctors into the standard of care, which we feel we're moving to. As of Q4, we had represented about 17% of the market revenue. That was up from 10% in Q3. I think what we'd expect is another step change in increase as we move into Q1. We're very excited for where we are. As Roger said, we are on a path. We're confident that we can achieve $1 billion in sales in 2027. If we continue to execute the way we have to date, we're very confident in that.
Where has the uptake been? I know you're approved for both PAH and PH-ILD, so what's the current split? When you mention 17% market share, is that treprostinil patients?
Yeah
On treprostinil or is it?
Yeah
PAH patients?
From a market share point of view, we're talking about the inhaled treprostinil market.
Sure
... from a revenue point of view, we represented 17%. Now, as it relates to share by disease state-
Mm-hmm
We're basically at 50/50 between PAH and PH-ILD. As we've always said, we always thought that the PH opportunity would start a little earlier. PH-ILD would be more of a longer-term investment, is getting closer to the community physicians, educate those doctors to identify patients and ultimately treat these patients. One of the things that we're also doing is we're expanding our sales force by 33% here. We should have them in the field by the end of Q2. We're going to go from 48 reps to 64 reps. We're going to increase our target from 6,500 physicians up to 8,000 physicians. Like we've done from the beginning, we're really leaning into this opportunity.
We think we have a golden opportunity here to really become the prostacyclin of choice, and this is just an indication of our confidence as we increase that sales force and get them out into the field.
Okay. Since 70% of current patients are new to prostacyclin, are you more or less the de facto first-line treatment for any newly diagnosed patient across PAH and PH-ILD at this point?
Yeah, I'll answer that. I think it's because the products go through closed channels, we don't have visibility to the competitive data. I think it's somewhat self-evident that if we've gotten to 17% revenue share by the end of Q4, that we are consuming most of the NRx share. I think the other metric Mike talked about at our last earnings call is the inhaled treprostinil market grew by 5% in Q4, and we captured more than 100% of that growth. Clearly we are getting the lion's share of new patient starts, but we're also getting 25% transitioning from existing therapies. We're getting it both ways. It's kind of, again, about being transcendent and exceeding expectations. I think we've done it with great breadth, both across PAH and PH-ILD. We've done it from naive and transition patients. We've also transitioned oral patients.
Now we're going to do some targeted and directed studies, both in patients on Tyvaso DPI and on background orals to switch them over to really inform practitioners on how to best do that based on what they're experiencing with those current patients, either with regard to etiology or dose. Really looking to drive those transitions even harder as we move forward as well, in addition to, as Mike said, expanding our sales force so that we can teach and preach to a broader audience and continue to drive the awareness around the importance of starting a prostacyclin like YUTREPIA for their patients.
In terms of patient switches, that 25% mostly transition from other inhaled products or kind of a mix from orals and maybe even.
Well, in PH-ILD, it's exclusively from other inhaled because that's all that's approved. In PAH, where there's oral therapies, oral prostacyclins approved, and parenterals, 70% is coming from inhaled background therapy, and 30% or so is coming from oral therapies. Not insignificant. I think if you aggregate that up over time, we're getting to a pretty hefty critical mass, a couple of 100 patients or so who have now transitioned from oral therapy to YUTREPIA and done so successfully. Not trivial in terms of what's happening in the marketplace just on its own. As we look to drive that, we certainly look to port more and more of that our way.
Coincident with this, what we've heard in the marketplace is that Uptravi's no longer being supported fully by J&J, so there's less patient assistance, and I think that that business may be more portable than it was prior to this.
Got it. I know for most products in their first year of launch, getting products on formulary is usually one of the key focus. Curious where you are now in terms of access and reimbursement for YUTREPIA?
Yeah. Mike?
Yeah. As you know, Serge, one of our launch goals was to make sure that patients had the ability to choose. We wanted to make sure that if a patient wanted to take YUTREPIA, that they would not have hurdles. What I can say through the efforts of our amazing market access team and our equally amazing field reimbursement team is we've achieved broad access. Broad access across Part D, across commercial, across government-mandated channels. One of the metrics that we've also talked about each quarter is our referral to fill rate and the fact that in the first three quarters of launch, that we are over 85%, I think is testament to all of those efforts and all of the preparations that we did. We showed the value proposition that YUTREPIA brings to the payer landscape. That was met with acceptance.
We are now in a position where we feel very confident. There are no hurdles to clear, opens the door for our sales team, and ultimately gives us open access, which we think will fuel the continued success of this launch.
In terms of coverage, is the product on par with Tyvaso? Is there any prior auths?
Yeah. What I would say is it is nuanced, but what I would say there are certain segments that all products have to go through medical exception or prior auth. What I would say is, we feel confident that we are not disadvantaged whatsoever across the board. Now, we also have a patient support team and offer a full suite of patient support services to navigate reimbursement. If there's a situation where neither product is approved, we feel very confident in our ability. We do not feel that there are any hurdles that our competitors are approved and we are not, which would obviously be an uphill battle. That is the goal that we had achieved and one that we're very proud of and think is going to fuel our growth here in 2026.
Okay. I know the company has numerous studies underway to broaden the opportunity of the product within and beyond PAH and PH-ILD. Your $1 billion sales goal is for 2027, so it's unlikely these studies will be drivers for that goal. Just curious, how do you get there at that level of sales for 2027?
Yeah. I think one of the things Mike just talked about is we have to have a positional strength with the payers, which he nicely said we did. I think the other one is new patient adds. There's several levers that are important here. One would be new patient adds to sustain the current level of referral-to-start trajectory across both PAH and PH-ILD. We've had an 85%-plus conversion rate almost since day one, and we need to maintain that. That was an aspirational target, which we've over-exceeded there already. Again, we just need to maintain our current rate, which as you've seen historically now, our referrals have been pretty linear and standard at about 100 per month or so. Maintenance of the trajectory is essential to achieving the billion-dollar target in 2027.
A second lever would be what we talked a little bit about oral-to-inhaled transition. There's 10,000 patients on oral therapies. It's in current-day dollars, $2 billion in addressable market opportunity. We're going to do those directed studies to switch oral patients. I think the more oral patients we can move and as well as displace. I think the thing that is open to us as an opportunity is we can displace the use of oral as first prostacyclin choice. We want to be the best-in-class inhaled and the first-in-choice prostacyclin. I think continued movement in that direction will benefit us. A third lever is the PH-ILD white space. We think there's at least 60,000 patients that are addressable. Roughly, there's only 6,000 patients treated, so most of that opportunity is in front of us.
Part of the reason or one of the main drivers of expanding our sales force is so that we could reach that community with greater depth and greater calling frequency. That will start, as Mike said, at the end of the second quarter. Well, finally, another lever which is starting to be pulled hard is depth of prescription. We want to reach more prescribers, get more breadth, but we also want to push greater depth because what we're finding is there's this critical mass moment that happens after 3-5 scripts, essentially, that once the physicians have that sort of personal data and experience with YUTREPIA, they begin to position it as their prostacyclin of choice in their practice, and that's why we're capturing the NRx shares that we're capturing.
About 1/4 of our prescribers to date have hit that metric, so we have a lot of room to grow there. 75% haven't. That's an opportunity to continue to grow the business towards that billion-dollar capture rate in 2027. The good thing about all of it is it's basically continued execution on the same path that we're on. There's nothing Herculean or extraordinary that we need to do or change. We just need to continue to be who we are because the product profile is so unique and I think preferred at this point.
Okay. Like I mentioned earlier, you have numerous studies ongoing to broaden the opportunity. I believe the ASCENT study in PH-ILD is near completion at this point?
Correct. So that one will completed enrollment in March of 2025. It's a 52-week study, so we've completed essentially the last patient visit should have occurred by now. The 24-week data we've presented already at PVRI in January of 2026.And what we've shown there, I think it's important to remember what we've shown there. So it's the first study of a DPI in patients with PH-ILD, and we could show very good tolerance to the drug. So we pushed dose aggressively. We were reaching doses of 15, 18, and 21 breaths at, I think it's 16, 20, and 24 weeks, so much higher than the historical standard. And coincident with dose, we were driving the six-minute walk distance where we were going from 20 to 30 to 40 meters benefit over time. So dose correlates with benefit.
It's one thing to say your drug's well-tolerated and you can push the dose, but it's important to also demonstrate that that has clinical meaning. What we've shown is we can benefit the patients through increased dose, which again, because we don't think the competitive products can dose as aggressively as we can, it's certainly a much more marketing differentiator than we thought. I think that's all good. I think the other thing that we're going to take on is an adjunctive study with sotatercept. Sotatercept patients are stabilizing, and those patients want to get off of their prostacyclin therapies that are burdensome, particularly the parenteral, because of the route-specific issues, and the orals because of the GI toxicities.
What has happened in the field is people have tried to withdraw those therapies as those patients improve on sotatercept, but what the physicians have found is they can't do it because sotatercept is not an inotrope, and it doesn't push contractility and cardiac output like a prostacyclin can. When you withdraw the prostacyclin, you're losing some of the cardiac benefit that the prostacyclin essentially provides. What they want to do is swap in YUTREPIA. We've seen that in the field. It's happened in a number of cases. It's still growing, but now under Rajeev's leadership, we're going to go do both sponsored studies as well as investigator-initiated studies to sort of demonstrate the benefit of doing that. We'll get some cardiac hemodynamic data to show that this inotropic effect is important and that the drugs are synergistic.
There's mechanistic reasons that I can see that probably not for this call, but the drugs certainly do seem to be synergistic in terms of how they would behave together.
Okay.
We're also going to do a couple of other studies that are a bit more longer term in reach. One would be use of YUTREPIA in patients with IPF or PPF, just to answer the question, do the same sort of advantages in terms of tolerability and dosing that we've seen in PAH and PH-ILD, do they apply to the IPF and PPF populations as well? I think the answer is obviously going to be yes, but we just want to demonstrate that in a very empiric and data-driven way. The other newer areas, we're going to begin studies in scleroderma patients with Raynaud's phenomenon to look at just to see if we can improve the digital vasculopathy or ulcers that those patients unfortunately experience due to cold. A lot going on in our clinical program.
I think our regulatory group in parallel has been very busy getting these worldwide approvals for these different studies and doing all the requisite regulatory interactions that they need to do. Really, really pleased with both how YUTREPIA is performing in the market and the pace at which we're developing both supporting data for YUTREPIA and then new indication data for YUTREPIA, and then subsequently L606 as well.
Yeah. Your main competitor recently reported results from a new once daily oral product. They also unveiled a new inhaler product. Just, I guess, first, curious what you think the impact will be on the oral PH market segment with this new product, and then if you want, just comment on the other. The new inhaler doesn't have much data or really any, but just curious what you think about that paradigm that they've discussed.
Yeah. The oral study they did was with ralinepag, and congratulations to them for achieving success in that study. I know it took them a long time to get there. I think in essence, it's more of the same. It's a Uptravi 2.0 because you're looking at a once a day versus a twice a day, so there's a mild convenience advantage per se. What you're going to see clinically is the same. You're going to give a full day's dose in one bolus dose this time. What they reported was even higher toxicities in terms of frequencies of GI-specific AEs, nausea, emesis, and diarrhea.
Those are the things that we're trying to move the whole field away from, like why experience off-target effects when you don't need to when you have something like YUTREPIA and then the next-gen program for us, L606, that will give you all the advantages of a prostacyclin with very targeted delivery and minimized off-target effects. I think, to me, that's not going to change the way we view our opportunity and potential at all. Will people try it at some point? Perhaps. I think over the long haul, we're going to displace the oral programs in large part is my view. The soft mist inhaler they talked about, until they show me data in patients, I can't really speak to it. It seems a bit mythical at this point.
Yeah.
What we do know, though, it's the same solution. It's the polydispersed formulated. It's an aerosolized product given to the lung. You're giving it with a different device, so it may improve portability, but you're not going to change the toxicity or dosing tolerability of that drug. Those two are linked. If you don't have good tolerability, you cannot dose to higher effect. You haven't solved for safety and efficacy. I also don't feel that that's going to change our trajectory in any way, sense, or form.
Yeah. I thought it was interesting that the new product does seem to address the coughing issue that they've experienced with their other treprostinil product.
I don't know. It was in normal volunteers. I don't know what the comparator was when they say there was a diminution in cough. What are they comparing that to? Certainly not YUTREPIA.
Yeah, maybe an admission that coughing is an issue with.
Yeah. Well, I think your point's fair. When we first heard it, I think it's two things. One, it's validating because they've acknowledged that tolerability is key, which is where we're differentiated. I think in some way, it's a capitulation that their DPI obviously isn't behaving the way they'd like it, and they're having to pivot to another platform. I think if you just read the tea leaves, all the tea leaves sort of read in our favor.
Okay. We couldn't complete a discussion on YUTREPIA without talking about the legal cases. Unfortunately, that's still lingering. We've asked you many times in the past for any updates. It's taken much longer than expected now.
I'll turn that over to Mike, since he enjoys that question more than I do.
Sure.
Yeah. Flat out, there's been no changes to our review. We remain confident in the arguments we made at trial. As you know, the trial was held in June of 2025.
Yeah.
Post-trial briefing was done in August. We're now over nine months from trial, over seven months from the completion of briefing. Frankly, we won't interpret on the speculation of timing.
Yeah.
District Court carries heavy caseloads. When the Judge is ready, he's going to rule, and we're all going to find out. I think the bottom line is the current status quo is to support patient access, and our strong commercial trajectory supports that there's a level of unmet need that YUTREPIA is addressing. The only thing we can focus on is commercial execution. That's what our focus is. The only other thing I will say is, whatever the outcome, I can assure you that Liquidia will be ready to address it immediately and promptly. We are just focused, heads down on all the trials that Roger talked about, on the flawless execution of our launch, and everything else will work itself out.
Okay. The Judge hasn't reached out to seek additional info from other parties?
No.
Okay. All right.
Not since the Fall that you knew about.
Yeah. Okay. There's another lawsuit around a different patent, '782. Just curious what that case is about and how it's proceeding.
Yeah. Listen, it's another patent. Just so you know, it's a descendant of the '793 patent, which is probably familiar to you because we invalidated that in 2022. The '782 patent expires in May of 2027. It is a strategy that our competitors have employed. There's no doubt in our mind that they will continue to. We're going to focus on patients. We're going to focus on executing. We will defend our rights. We really don't have much else to say there.
Okay. Let's talk a little bit about the L606 program. You spent a lot of time highlighting it during your Investor Day back in November. Just how different the clinical profile here would be versus YUTREPIA, and then we can talk about the development path for the program.
Yes. Just again, as background for people who are newer, L606 is a sustained-release liposomal formulation of inhaled treprostinil delivered twice a day via the Fox Mobile modern next-generation mesh nebulizer, a highly portable device that's both CE marked and 510 approved already. It takes about a minute to administer the dose in those two sessions per day, looking to really retain the benefits of YUTREPIA in terms of tolerability. Because it's liposomal encapsulation, it's not released in the upper airway. It's only when it hits the lower airway that essentially the pH profile of the lower airway releases the drug from the liposome. Because of that, we can dose to high effect. We've shown that in an open-label study in patients for over a year now, where we could show that only 14% of the patients had a drug-related cough.
The lowest cough we've seen in any study to date of inhaled treprostinil. We think we've improved the safety profile. As I've said, you need that link to get to dosing and efficacy. What we've shown with L606 is we can also go four-or-more-fold higher than the historic nine-12 breath equivalents with Tyvaso. Finally, we can do it in a twice-a-day format, so it will have more portability. It's sort of a step change in improvement of YUTREPIA as we know it today, because it's going to be twice a day versus 4x a day. What we've done with the program is we know we need a single registration study for PAH and PH-ILD that's been discussed with the FDA. We've been working hard to get that study underway.
That study, as I said, should enroll its first patients in the coming weeks or certainly in the coming month. People always ask about what's the timeline of getting that done. It's a 350-patient study, randomized 1/1. It's going to take at least two to two and a half years to enroll it. Perhaps we can do it faster because a lot of the enrollment will come from ex-U.S. sites, so there's no available alternative therapy for those patients. I think there'll be a demand to get into the trials in those ex-U.S. territories. It's a six-month study window, observation window, so it would be another six months, and then from the time you scrub the data, put together your filing, and then get it approved, let's just add another year.
You're three and a half to four years from first patient in to approval. That's kind of the way we're looking at that, Serge. We're excited about what we're going to do. I think why we think we have the best opportunity is because of the tolerability is one, we think that's advantage because we see this low rate of cough, and two, because in our early open-label study, we saw that the peak and trough standard of change in terms of six-minute walk distance was the same. That's why we're doing it twice a day, because we want to make sure that the patients have a pseudo-steady-state exposure that leads to a consistent improvement in patients that doesn't wane during the daily interval.
We could have given it once a day, we could have measured a peak, and we could have shown a benefit, but then the trough effect would be diminished, which is what we're going to see with a competitive product that's in the market in development as well. We think we have the preferred modality. We think we're doing this correctly in terms of how one would like to match PK and PD, and we'll see. Right now, we're just head down executing, going to get the trial enrolled. We'll be very fastidious about the quality of patients that we put in because we want to make sure speed is not everything you want to put in quality as well.
I think that's why I think two to two and a half years is a reasonable expectation, and people say, "Could you drive it faster and harder?" Certainly you could, but then you might compromise the quality, which we're not interested in doing.
Would this be a 505(b)(2) filing since it's also based on treprostinil?
Yeah, that's the current discussions with FDA.
Okay. As you think, you mentioned a couple other studies to expand YUTREPIA usage to beyond PAH and PH-ILD, you would conduct those with YUTREPIA and not with L606?
I think the open-label experiential trials we'll do with YUTREPIA because we have availability to do that now with drug product or clinical trial material. I think for full-on registrational studies, let's say we go into a registrational trial in IPF or PPF, we'll do those with L606. Again, we want to do it properly, so we've already coordinated thought leader meetings to talk about the protocol. We have templated protocol concept sheets, in essence, that we want to review with practitioners globally and get their buy-in on how to advance the next programs. It's not a rush to do these. I think that opportunity is still going to be fresh when we get going and get to market.
Okay. Since we have the CFO with us, I'll ask him to just give us an overview of financials for the company.
Yeah, all of the execution, where it has left us is, in the first two quarters after launch, we've been profitable as a company, which I think cannot be understated. In Q4, we showed adjusted EBITDA of $27.3 million. We actually showed net income of $14.6 million, and we generated positive cash flow of over $30 million in Q4 alone. We are executing precisely to our plan. One of Roger's foundational goals is we want to grow profitability, and then when we grow that profitability, we can invest part of that profitability back into the company to create more shareholder value. We're accomplishing that through the expansion of the sales force that we talked about. We're accomplishing that by all of the clinical trials that Roger just talked about.
We're also accomplishing that by building a new manufacturing facility that will almost triple our capacity to manufacture YUTREPIA that we plan to open in 2027. We are in a very unique position for a biotech company that has just launched to have $190 million of cash at the end of December and can say that we can fuel all of our future goals, both clinically, commercially, and operationally with that current cash flow in addition to our future revenue growth, which we're very bullish about.
Yeah, I agree. There's not many companies that can boast about being in that position. Maybe to wrap up, just highlight some of the catalysts we should expect for the rest of this year from you guys, Liquidia, but as well as some other ones you may be keeping an eye on from competitors.
I think for us, I think every earnings call is an opportunity to validate what we've said today, that there's a massive opportunity and that we can continue on the trajectory that we're on now or even grow beyond that. I think there's reasons to think that that's highly reachable. The market opportunity in PAH is underappreciated, especially given the oral transition market. That's a $2 billion market, about 10,000 patients, and we're going to aggressively go after not only switching those patients, but displacing oral as first-line therapy. I think YUTREPIA's role along sotatercept is underappreciated, that the mechanism is genuinely complementary and the real-world adoption pattern is playing out now. We talked about the PH-ILD is veritable white space that we can continue to garner significant share of and really move the needle in terms of improving those patients.
I think the durability of our launch, some people thought this was a sort of bit of a pent-up demand. We've been described by our competitors as the new toy. This is clearly not a one-time event or a bolus event. We have foundational basis to be the prostacyclin of preferred inhaled, preferred prostacyclin, and the prostacyclin of first choice. I think all of that is sort of inures to our benefit. I think certainly the legal overhang, it has admittedly compressed our valuation more than I think the facts warrant. Once we unlock that with a successful outcome, then certainly I think Liquidia will re-rate in a positive direction, and all of the value that shareholders seek will be there for them.
There's a lot to look forward to for sure, and what we're going to do is work hard on the things that we can control. We're going to execute on YUTREPIA's continued commercial success. We're going to execute on our clinical development plan, and we're going to execute as best we can on the legal, which has pretty much been argued to date already.
Great. Great wrap-up. I want to thank you both for spending time with us this afternoon and telling us about Liquidia. I think it's a great opportunity here.
Thank you, Serge.
We appreciate the opportunity to talk with you.
Thanks, Serge.
Thank you.