Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining the 25th Annual Needham Healthcare Conference. My name is Joey Stringer, and I'm one of the biotech analysts at Needham & Company. It's my pleasure to introduce our next presenting company, Phathom Pharmaceuticals. Joining us today from the company is President and CEO, Steve Basta, and Chief Financial Officer, Sanjeev Narula. For those of you joining on the webcast, if you would like to ask a question, please do so at any time. You can submit a question using the chat box feature at the bottom of your screen. Steve and Sanjeev, thank you so much for joining us today.
Joey, thanks for the invitation. It's a pleasure to be here.
2026, certainly lining up to be a pivotal year for Phathom. For those who are less familiar with the company, can you provide an overview outlining the company strategy and top priorities, and maybe lastly, any important updates that investors should be aware of?
Certainly. Let me just briefly touch on company history and then talk about strategy today and then updates.
Yeah.
Phathom has a commercial product, which is VOQUEZNA, which is the next generation treatment for gastroesophageal reflux. This is a PCAB, which is a different mechanism of action than PPIs and provides better elevation of pH in the stomach. The target market opportunity really is any patient who has gastroesophageal reflux, has used standard of care PPI or H2 blocker therapy and didn't get adequate relief. We can provide better pH elevation and relieve their reflux symptoms for many of those patients. The product was launched late in 2023. In 2024, first full year of commercialization, did 155 million of revenue. In 2025, we did 175 million in revenue. For 2026, we've guided to revenue of 320 million-345 million. We are maintaining a significant growth rate on a year-over-year basis.
The core strategy that is driving our current execution, and this is a strategic shift that we made last year, is to focus heavily on the gastroenterology prescribing community. Now 70% of our sales calls, we've got a commercial organization with 300 sales reps in the field. The core commercial focus, our core sales activity, is targeting 70% of our sales calls are basically going into gastroenterology prescribers. That is either gastroenterologists or the PAs or nurse practitioners that work with the gastroenterology patients. The reason for that focus is that the patients who end up in a gastroenterology practice with gastroesophageal reflux are generally the patients who were in pain, saw their primary care physician, were prescribed standard of care therapy and were still in pain, and therefore got referred to the gastroenterologist.
The patients who land in the GI practice are actually the ones who need our product most. We're finding that that improves the efficiency and effectiveness of our sales calls and has been a core driver of our growth strategy. We've also taken strides over the past year to carefully manage our expenses, and as you said, 2026 is going to be a pivotal inflection point for the company. We have guided not only to hitting our revenue target, but to achieving operating profitability for Q3 and Q4 of this year, and to being positive cash flow generating in 2027. We're making a fundamental transition for the company.
Joey, one other thing that.
Yeah
It's a priority for 2026, but it's already done. I just do want to talk about the cap structure.
Sure.
There were a lot of noise about cap structure. People were not clear. They were not sure whether we'll be able to meet our obligations, particularly on the liquidity covenants. With the equity raise that we did beginning of the year and then we restructured the debt, now we have a cap structure, which is what I call it very sustainable, transparent, and cost-effective. We have sufficient cash to meet all obligations this year or next year, or any time in future, and then we'll be generating enough cash flow to meet all the obligations and be able to invest in the business.
Got it. Steve, Sanjeev, the stock has faced some sustained pressure here year-to-date. What do you think is the biggest disconnect for investors around the story?
Well, so many of our investors track the weekly IQVIA script numbers pretty carefully.
Yes
The biotech and pharma investing universe. What we see every year, we saw this last year, we're seeing this again this year is Q1 is always our softest quarter because Q1 has all of the plan resets. If a patient is on a high deductible plan, they may have the product fully covered for much of the year, but in Q1, they might not get coverage for that product. They might not have reached their deductible yet. You do see that plan reset phenomenon impacting many branded products. In our category, it clearly impacts us in a meaningful way. We saw soft script volume.
Yeah
We saw soft script volume last year in January and February, but that naturally produces the psychology of some concern about whether or not the growth trends are being maintained. In March, we're seeing that recovery is robust, and it looks a lot like the pattern we saw last year, which then led into Q3 of sustained growth last year.
Yep. We'll get into some of the IQVIA data in a little bit more detail in just a bit. I want to go back to what are, in your view, the key factors that'll be important to drive next leg of growth for VOQUEZNA here, and as it pertains to 2026 revenues, what are the potential upside drivers to growth and guidance?
The key activities that are driving our growth aren't changing in 2026 versus what we were doing in 2025. The pivot was made in Q2 of 2025, and that pivot was to reduce the amount of time we were spending calling on primary care physicians and to increase the amount of time and focus that we were spending calling on gastroenterologists. That's working. North of 70% of our prescriptions are coming from gastroenterology prescribers. We're now approaching spending 70% of our sales force time in terms of dedicated call activity going into the gastroenterology prescribing base.
The core driver of our success is growing prescription volume as physicians become more comfortable with the product, as they become more familiar with prescribing the product, more confident that, A, their patients are going to do really well when they receive our product, and B, that they can get access to the product, that when they prescribe it's going to get covered by their insurance. The patient is going to end up with a low out-of-pocket cost. As physicians gain more comfort on both the safety and efficacy of the product and the ease of access to the product and the consistency of access that their patients can reliably get to it, we can have more significant conversations with them about broadening the population of patients that they will adopt.
What we see is just organically, there's a natural growth pattern as a gastroenterologist adopts the product. They tend to start by prescribing it to their most severe patients that have failed other therapies, that have severe erosions, and it was hard to heal them. They see success in healing the esophageal erosions in those patients, and then our sales team is having a conversation with the physician about broadening the universe of patients in whom they're using the product to a broader group of their erosive esophagitis patients, and eventually to thinking about their non-erosive reflux patients who are still having residual pain when they are on current standard or prior standard of care therapy with PPIs or H2 blockers. There's an evolution of a physician's prescribing habits from the most severe patients to broadening the universe of patients.
As that evolution happens, the volume of prescriptions coming out of each physician's office grows. That's how we grow the business. It's really that straightforward, and it's an iterative evolutionary process in every account.
Joey, one other thing that we obviously are mindful, you see we've optimized our spend to right levels.
Yep
From where it used to be beginning of the year last year to where we are now, right? We paused the DTC, but we continue to focus on revenue-generating marketing programs opportunity, just making sure we continue to do those and fine-tune those as we go along to drive the growth. Those things are important as well to the field force activity that Steve just alluded to.
You previously guided for around 1 billion in peak revenues in just the GI specialists alone, and with a potential for an additional 1 billion from the primary care setting. I guess what's the current revenue split between the GI and primary care setting right now? Maybe what's the current prescription split between those two? Maybe as a follow-up to that, if you're kind of currently focusing primarily on the GI specialists now, what's your strategy to kind of reach that 1 billion in the primary care setting?
Terrific. Joey, I think that the way you framed the question was very helpful, that there's a natural evolution. We are focused today very heavily in GI, and there is a natural evolution that will grow in primary care in the future. Let me describe the drivers of that evolutionary process. Today, 70%+ of our prescriptions are coming out of the gastroenterology prescriber base. That's where we're focusing our time. We are finding that if you think about the patient journey, that's actually instructive for how this evolution is going to go. A patient with gastroesophageal reflux will first talk to their primary care physician about the fact that they're experiencing some heartburn, they're experiencing some pain. Routine standard of care, they're going to get a PPI prescription. They're going to be prescribed omeprazole, and if that solves their problem, they're fine.
They don't need to have another conversation other than, "Doc, I feel much better." That's great. If they're still in pain, they might be switched to a different PPI. They might have their dose doubled. They might go to BID dosing. They might get an H2 blocker. The physician is going to do something more for them to try to alleviate their pain. Again, if they're fully resolved, that's probably the end of that conversation. Patient's reasonably well managed. If the patient is still in pain, the physician is going to refer them to a gastroenterologist, so the patients that land in the gastroenterology practice are patients who significantly need our therapy. That's why we're focusing on the gastroenterologist.
Those are the high-need patients that can be switched to our therapy today that meet the market access prior authorization requirement and that aren't going to be adequately treated with PPIs. They've already tried PPIs, and they're still in pain. That's why our focus is on gastroenterology. There are today 20 million PPI prescriptions per year coming from HCPs in the gastroenterology environment. That 20 million PPIs is the core first market that we're going to go after. You're talking about the first billion in revenue we think we can get out of GI. Well, the easy way to think about the math on that is we're currently annualizing it, based on our Q4 numbers, at something north of 1 million prescription run rate.
When we get to 4 million-6 million prescriptions, we will be doing $1 billion of revenue coming from GI. That's 20%-30% penetration of that GI PPI total prescription volume, of that 20 million prescriptions for PPIs. The reason we think that's achievable is we're already doing that in several hundred accounts. Our top 300 providers are already approximately at that 20% penetration level, and they're continuing to grow. When we look quarter-over-quarter at their prescribing habits, their volume is continuing to grow. We think we can go north of that, and it's not 10 physicians or 20 physicians, it's 300 physicians. Can we generalize that as an achievable target across the gastroenterology prescribing base? We believe so. There's nothing different about their patients versus patients that are seeing every other gastroenterologist. *
We believe that that's achievable across the entire gastroenterology base. That's how you get to the first billion in potential peak revenue. The way that you get to the second billion in potential peak revenue is that those patients don't stay in gastroenterology. They are going to go back to their primary care physician.
Right.
Once a patient has been converted to VOQUEZNA and has realized that their pain is now gone, we've now resolved the pain that they were experiencing associated with the esophageal reflux. They're stable. Their erosions have healed if they had erosive esophagitis. The gastroenterologist is going to send them back to their primary care physician. Naturally, most of those patients are going to want to stay on VOQUEZNA because it's relieving their pain. They're going to ask their primary care physician for another prescription. If they had a script that had six months of refills, they're going to need another script. Their primary care physician is going to be then writing that new prescription for the next six months.
The primary care physician is going to be hearing from his or her patients repeatedly how much better they feel that this was the product that was recommended by their gastroenterologist. That raises confidence in the primary care physician that the gastroenterologists in their community are using this product. Their patient is doing well on this product. The patient was able to get access to the product, so their confidence in prescribing it goes up substantially. As a primary care physician has four, five, six, eight patients come back on VOQUEZNA, the ability for us to then go into the primary care office and drive broader adoption is significant because they will be educated.
Yeah
By their own patients cycling back. We're already starting to see trends toward that effect. We're already starting to see primary care physicians writing the product whom we've never called on. The only way that they're going to be writing VOQUEZNA if we've never called on them is they referred somebody to a gastroenterologist, we converted the patient at the gastroenterology practice, and they went back, and now they're writing the script.
Went back, yeah.
That's the most likely path to how a physician would be adopting this product. We think that pattern leads to the first billion by capturing 20%-30% of the PPI script volume in GI. That's the first potential billion in revenue. The second potential billion of revenue is all of those primary care physicians who are educated by all of those patients whom we then are able to call on. There's a natural evolution. Today, we focus on GI. That's probably 2026, 2027. By sometime in 2028 or 2029, we're going to be calling much more broadly in the primary care audience.
Got it. Makes sense. Steve, you mentioned, and certainly is true, investors do pay a lot of attention to the weekly or to IQVIA prescription data. A couple of questions on that, if I may. The first one is just more on how accurate is the current IQVIA prescription data to the actual prescriptions that are being filled?
The IQVIA prescription data only reflects covered prescriptions. We actually have some of our prescriptions are covered by insurance, and some of our prescriptions go through cash-pay channels. Primarily, we have a collaboration with Blink where they will offer a cash-pay price to patients who either don't have coverage or for whom the copay is too high. For what's reported in IQVIA only represents our covered scripts. Now, the important thing for investors is that's the majority of our revenue.
Right.
Because the cash-pay price is much lower than the reimbursed price, the majority of our revenue comes from the covered scripts, and that's what goes through IQVIA. There's always a capture rate where there is some percentege of scripts that isn't captured adequately by IQVIA. That's usually in the single-digit percentage. It varies a little bit from period to period, but there's always some under-capture phenomenon in the IQVIA numbers.
And that's primarily to do with non-retail channels where IQVIA does not, or those channels don't report to IQVIA, and that's standard practice in the industry. That's nothing unusual for us. And as Steve pointed out, it's single digit. Sometimes it's in low single digit, sometimes it goes to high single digit. But directionally, those numbers are in line with how our covered scripts, which is where the revenue is driven, they are aligned.
Steve, you also mentioned earlier about seasonality that was reflected in the IQVIA prescription data. Just curious if you could maybe expand upon that a little bit more. We've certainly seen an uptick in the prescriptions the past several weeks. How fair is it to compare this seasonality cycle to last year's in terms of how quickly the trajectory could rebound here?
I think it actually is a really reasonable parallel to make to think about seasonality on a year-over-year basis and look at what trends we're seeing January, February, March of 2026 versus January, February, March of 2025. Now, it's not precisely the same.
Yeah
You won't see exactly the same numbers because the underlying growth rate of the company changes on a year-over-year basis. What you see if you look at the 2025 numbers is weakness in January and February that started to recover in March and then started a growth pattern. We're seeing again in 2026 some weakness in January and February and then a nice recovery in March, and that same pattern seems to hold on a year-over-year basis at a high level. Again, there are differences. For example, this year certainly was impacted by the storms.
Mm
Perturbations to that every year.
Yeah. In terms of a potential inflection in the IQVIA prescription data, if we consider now getting through some of the seasonality, when would you expect the full impact of the refocused sales effort in the GI setting to be reflected in the prescription data?
Well, I think you're going to see it reflected through the course of this year. I don't think there's going to be a date.
Yeah.
Because if you think about what we're able to achieve with sales calls on a physician, the key variable that we drive is new-to-brand patient conversions. When you get a new-to-brand patient conversion, say we get a new-to-brand patient conversion in March, we get one prescription in March. That turns into three refills in Q2 and another three refills in Q3, so the majority of the impact actually is spread out over multiple quarters.
Mm-hmm.
It's an incremental impact in any one period of time, but it's a cumulative building impact over time. I don't think you're going to see sort of sales force expansion and then the next month there's some dramatic shift in the total TRX volume.
Right.
There's a gradual incremental shift in TRX volume, but then it builds on itself. It becomes cumulative. As you have that effect every month, it grows in terms of its cumulative impact. You will see a gradual progression of growth associated with the effectiveness of our strategy in calling on gastroenterologists, and that's built into our forecasting process and methodology in getting to our guidance estimate for this year.
On your recent earnings call, you noted that VOQUEZNA had surpassed around, I think it was 20% penetration into the PPI to VOQUEZNA switch category amongst your top prescribers. Can you explain why this is an important metric for long-term growth?
Well, the important metric there is to get to the topic we were talking about earlier. What is reasonable peak revenue?
Yep.
One of the ways that we've gotten comfortable suggesting to the street that we believe peak revenue in the GI prescribing base is potentially $1 billion of opportunity in that base is we wanted to see is it reasonable for us to convert 10%, 20%, 30% of the total patient base that those physicians are seeing with gastroesophageal reflux? The best benchmark of that is the early adopter physicians. The physicians who started using our product first and now have two years of experience, whom we've been calling on the most, who have seen the most patients, what are they doing? Well, that's the 300 early adopters that are now heavy users of our product. If you just look at our top 300 earliest adopters, what you find is in their practices, we're reaching about 20% penetration.
That is 20% of their PPI script volume has now switched over to VOQUEZNA. That suggests that when a physician has two years of experience and has consistent sales calls over a course of two or three years, and it will vary for every physician how long it takes to get to that level, how comfortable they are converting their practice to a new therapy. It suggests that absolutely that's an achievable benchmark in a GI practice, because that's an achievable benchmark, not in one practice.
Yeah
In 300 practices, if that's an achievable benchmark for 300 practices, it should be in 15,000-20,000 practices.
Yeah
We build that confidence. We build that confidence through sampling, we build that confidence through repeated sales calls, we build that confidence through education programs, we build that confidence through the feedback that patients provide to physicians on how much better they feel. That confidence builds by virtue of physicians who scope their patients, see significant erosions, give them our product, see their patients back, and they see they've healed, and they know that the product is working in materially impactful ways for their patients.
It kind of leads into my next couple questions here. I'm just curious, what are the main reasons why a doc is switching a patient from a PPI to VOQUEZNA? Maybe conversely, what are their main reasons why they aren't, or they haven't? I guess maybe where I'm going with this is that what's needed to drive that percentage above the 20%, you know, range of PPI switches, and what's a realistic percent conversion goal here?
Yeah. I agree with you. I believe it is possible to go north of that 20% number. That's the number that gets us to the billion-dollar number. That's where I was trying to provide the explanation, sort of how do you get to the calculation of $1 billion. Is it possible that we could do north of $1 billion in revenue in GI? Absolutely. Is there a world one could imagine where we convert 30%-40% or more of their PPI prescription volume? Absolutely, that's a possibility. That would happen if physicians become more and more comfortable using the product in a broader array of patients. What tends to drive conversions is sort of a limited number of factors. One is patient pain is the first starting point for the conversation. That's the reason that a patient gets to a gastroenterologist.
They get to a gastroenterologist, a GERD patient, so there are obviously other referral factors, but a patient with gastroesophageal reflux who is treated by their primary care physician is going to be talking to their primary care physician about their gastroesophageal reflux if they're still in pain. If they're not in pain, they don't have another conversation about it. So pain is the driver here, that the patient experiencing discomfort is what's going to cause that patient to be referred to the gastroenterologist, and that's the primary thing that the patient wants resolved. If that can be resolved with a once-a-day PPI, they don't need our product.
If they failed on PPI therapy, then they do need our product. What will both motivate prescribing of VOQUEZNA is, "I need to solve pain for my patient," and what will reinforce prescribing of VOQUEZNA in additional patients is their patient coming back and telling them, "Oh my God, Doc, I feel so much better.
Right.
That happens all the time. We get patient testimonials all the time from patients that say, "Oh my God, I feel so much better." The more that a physician hears that from their patient, this is a self-reinforcing product. The more you prescribe this product, the more you hear from your patients that this product makes them feel better, the more you're going to want to prescribe this product. The other factor that clearly drives prescribing behavior is in this condition, particularly in erosive esophagitis, when a physician has scoped a patient and they've seen significant erosions, they will typically schedule a second scope for 8-12 weeks later to see how those erosions have healed. When they give them VOQUEZNA, they see significant healing.
Right.
We have very high healing rates in erosive esophagitis associated with use of VOQUEZNA, and that's due to the pH elevation, so they can get the qualitative feedback from their patient that they feel a whole lot better than they have felt in years, and they can see with their own eyes that the patient is healed in ways that are really quite satisfying to the physician. I mean, it's why someone goes into medicine. You go into medicine to make your patient feel better and to heal their condition. We can do both of those things for them.
You guys alluded to this earlier, but what's your current thinking on when the right time is to potentially expand the sales and marketing efforts into the primary care setting? Could DTC advertising come back into play at some point?
We haven't set an arbitrary date for when we're going to go back into primary care in a big way. We are actually in primary care offices today. Just to be clear, we said earlier we're spending 70% of our sales force time in GI. The other 30% is going mostly into primary care offices.
Yeah.
Many of our sales territories, we're still calling on the top decile primary care offices. We're also calling on primary care physicians who have previously prescribed the product so that we're maintaining that business and we're growing those accounts. We're already in primary care offices. That leads to how to answer your question. The way that we're going to determine when it makes sense to potentially do a sales force expansion in primary care is very much going to be ROI driven. One of the metrics that we look at is NBRX per sales call. How many new-to-brand converted patients do we get for a set number of sales calls in an account?
As we see the NBRX per sales call number improve, and it is improving gradually over time, we're going to be able to forecast out, okay, how many prescriptions do we get then for additional sales time in primary care when that's providing a positive ROI within a defined period of time that makes sense for our investment horizon. We've not defined exactly what those metrics are going to be and when we're going to pull that trigger. This is the thing Sanjeev and I and our analytics team and marketing and sales teams are having a conversation about on a regular basis is how are those metrics changing? We look at this on a quarterly basis. We track where it's headed.
At the point in time here we think it's an attractive positive ROI investment, we'll make the investment in expanding the sales organization to spend more time in primary care. We've chosen to rightsize the organization today at 300 sales territories for a heavy focus on GI with top decile primary care calls. The expansion of that happens as we get to better returns in the primary care audience.
Got it. Makes sense. Very helpful. In terms of the competitive landscape, can you assess the competitive threat from the other companies with PCAB programs? Cinclus and Sebela are two of the most notable ones. Any others, and what are your thoughts on these?
Those are the only two that we really track on an active basis in that Sebela's already completed their clinical trials in the U.S. and have filed their NDA. What they've publicly said indicates that they think that the product will launch sometime in 2027. The Cinclus product is further out. It's probably three, four, five years out before it launches. They both seem to be effective PCABs. They will both raise pH in the stomach in a meaningful way. We fully expect that both of these products work.
Okay.
One of the things that happens when, and particularly, in thinking about competition, we think more about the competitor that's launching in a year. I don't actually view us as really being in competition with the second PCAB. We are both trying to convert PPI script volume. There are 100 million prescriptions per year for PPIs. This is a landscape where we've only 1% penetrated that market. Having a second entrant isn't going to erode our market. It's going to be more share of voice that there are going to be two sales organizations talking to physicians about the need to switch patients from PPIs to PCABs if they're still experiencing pain or discomfort while they're on a PPI. When a second product enters, you create a category rather than just a product.
Yeah
A physician thinking about, do I use a PPI or do I use VOQUEZNA? It's, do I use a PPI or a PCAB? If you're going to use a PCAB, we have three years of experience and several 100,000 patients who've been on the product, and the physicians have three years of experience knowing that they can prescribe it, knowing they can get it for their patients, knowing their patients are going to have a really good outcome. I think we get the lion's share of the business. I think that's been historically true in many pharmaceutical categories, that the first-mover advantage is significant in this process.
Got it. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but you currently have market exclusivity until May 2032, potentially November 2032 if you get a pediatric extension. Really, what's the earliest time in which we could see a market entry of generic competitors? Can you walk us through any factors which could affect how soon a generic would enter the market?
Joey, I think that's a very important point for all of our investors is, we have confirmed with FDA the exclusivity window. There had historically been some uncertainty about what that window would be, but we've confirmed with FDA, it's in the Orange Book, the May of 2032 date. In fact, as you described, if we get a six-month extension for our pediatric program, and that's partly dependent upon the results of our EoE phase II trial, whether or not we would qualify for that, if we could get the six-month extension. Can you hear me still?
Yes.
It looked like I'd frozen for a second. My apologies. If we get the six-month extension, that would take that date out to November of 2032. Importantly, that's the earliest date under the regulatory exclusivity rules that a generic company could file an ANDA. That's not a generic.
File
Instruction date.
Yeah.
That's a filing date. Typical rounds of review, you could expect a generic review could be as short as 10 months, but is often 20 months-30 months. It is likely that we have exclusivity well into 2033. It's possible that we have exclusivity into 2034, associated with the expected generic ANDA review timelines.
In terms of the pediatric extension, what are the actual requirements needed to get it from FDA? What do you need to show clinically for the agency to grant it?
What we need to see in our phase II trial is sufficient evidence that warrants moving into phase III, and we need to receive from FDA a written request to include pediatric patients in that phase III program. Most likely, adolescent patients would be included.
Right
In the phase III program, it's dependent upon the results of the phase II trial. Do those clearly indicate that there's a benefit associated with VOQUEZNA therapy in EoE patients that warrants doing the phase III program? We'd have to agree with FDA on what the design of the phase III trial is. They would provide us a written request to include adolescent patients or pediatric patients in the phase III program, and pursuant to that written request, we would then, upon conduct of that trial, qualify for the extension. We don't actually have to get the indication approved.
Right
Provide any specific result, but it needs to be conducted pursuant to a written request from FDA for the study of pediatric patients in that population.
Got it. Sanjeev, you kind of mentioned this earlier, but I wanted to circle back to it on the capital structure. Anything else you want to add there? You kind of gave us an update where things stand, both in terms of the debt and the revenue interest financing agreements. Can you talk about some of the updates there? What's your current cash position, and what are your expectations for cash runway?
Yeah. Thank you for that, Richard. We've been busy. After the successful capital raise that we did in the beginning of the year, and then you saw that we modified our term debt. Now we have a term debt which is $175 million. The interest rate on that is 9.85%, and the maturity is extended to February 2029. All those terms are now favorable and better. Our interest cost has come down. Our maturity is now more aligned with when our cash flow gets generated. With all that, we still would have a cash on hand at the beginning of the year was about $190 million. All that would enable us to meet our liquidity covenants, not only this year, but next year, and thereafter as well. I think we got a very sustainable cap structure.
The other important point to note is on the royalty financing, no change has happened. We still have $275 million, and we continue to pay that as 10% royalty through the interest line. We have minimal cash flow requirement for that, which will be for the first time applicable this year on September 1st, which will be approximately $120 million. Again, with the cash on hand that we have, we'll be able to meet that liquidity requirement. I think in summary, I'd say we have a cap structure which is now sustainable. We've brought transparency in terms of what the requirements are, and we have the cost-effective interest cost, and then we will have sufficient cash on hand to meet all liquidity requirements and being able to invest in the business from now and in times to come.
Great. Well, is there anything that we missed, Steve and Sanjeev? Any final takeaways for investors for the Phathom story this year?
Well, Joey, thanks again for the invitation to be here. I think that the take-home message is, A, we've got a terrific product. I mean, the reason that this product is successful is that it meaningfully improves care for patients who are still experiencing pain. Two, our market opportunity is enormous. There's 65 million patients with gastroesophageal reflux. Now, we're not trying to target that entire population. What we are trying to do is help the patients who have tried PPI therapy and have failed on PPI therapy, meaning they're still experiencing pain while they're on a PPI. The opportunity is if we can raise pH in the stomach further, then we can relieve pain for those patients. We've proven that that is true for many patients.
We provide a product that makes a meaningful difference for a population of several million patients, many millions of patients, in fact. We've already demonstrated success of driving adoption. Our path forward is just straightforward execution.
Yeah.
This is just the blocking, tackling, and good execution in sales and marketing over the next two years to get to profitability and cash flow positive operations.
I think company setup is very great. I think where we are with the strategy in place, resources in place, top talent we have, it's a matter of execution, and we'll have a very different set of financials and capabilities for the company as we go forward.
Great. Well, thank you so much, Steve and Sanjeev, for participating. It was an excellent discussion.
Joey, thanks for the invitation.
Thank you.
Thanks.