Thank you. Good morning, and thanks for joining us. Also on the call with me today are Rob Michael, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Jeff Stewart, Executive Vice President, Chief Commercial Officer; Roopal Thakkar, Executive Vice President, Research and Development, Chief Scientific Officer; and Scott Reents, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer. Before we get started, I'll note that some statements we make today may be considered forward-looking statements based on our current expectations. AbbVie cautions that these forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated in our forward-looking statements. Additional information about these risks and uncertainties is included in our SEC filings. AbbVie undertakes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law. On today's conference call, non-GAAP financial measures will be used to help investors understand AbbVie's business performance. These non-GAAP financial measures are reconciled with comparable GAAP financial measures in our earnings release and regulatory filings from today, which can be found on our website. Following our prepared remarks, we'll take your questions. So with that, I'll turn the call over to Rob.

Thank you, Liz. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. AbbVie delivered another outstanding quarter with results exceeding our expectations. We are making excellent progress advancing our pipeline and adding more depth through strategic transactions that support our long-term growth. Turning to our second quarter performance. We delivered adjusted earnings per share of $2.97, which is $0.11 above our guidance midpoint. Total net revenues were $15.4 billion, more than $400 million ahead of our expectations. This overachievement includes sales growth of 22% from our ex-HUMIRA platform with continued robust performance from Skyrizi and Rinvoq, which are now on pace to deliver more than $25 billion in combined sales this year, well above our initial expectations. We also delivered strong double-digit growth from neuroscience, driven by Vraylar, Vyalev and our leading migraine portfolio. Based on our momentum through the first half of the year, we are raising guidance for the second time. We now expect full year revenue of $60.5 billion, an increase of $800 million. We have now raised our revenue guidance by $1.5 billion since the start of the year. We are also raising our full year adjusted earnings per share guidance by $0.21 and now expect adjusted EPS between $11.88 and $12.08. In addition to our strong financial results, we are making great progress with our R&D pipeline across all stages of development. Notable highlights from our late-stage programs include the recent approvals of EMRELIS for non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer and Rinvoq for GCA. The regulatory submission of TrenibotE, a first-in-class short-acting toxin in aesthetics as well as highly differentiated Phase III results in alopecia areata, a potential tenth indication for Rinvoq in the U.S. We are also focused on augmenting our pipeline with therapies and platform technologies that have the potential to elevate the standard of care for patients. These include promising early-stage programs that have the potential to drive growth for AbbVie in the next decade. We have executed more than 30 business development transactions since the beginning of last year. Our recent activity includes closing the agreement with Gubra for a long-acting amylin analog in the treatment of obesity as well as announcing our planned acquisition of Capstan Therapeutics, giving us an in vivo CAR-T platform that can further strengthen our immunology pipeline. We also in-licensed ISB-2001, a novel trispecific antibody for multiple myeloma, and we announced the collaboration with ADARx to develop next-generation siRNA therapies across multiple disease areas, including immunology, neuroscience and oncology. In summary, I'm very pleased with the performance of our business and the progress we are making against our long-term strategy. AbbVie's outlook is strong, and we are well positioned to deliver on our commitments in 2025 and beyond. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jeff for additional comments on our commercial highlights. Jeff?

Thank you, Rob. I'll start with the quarterly results for immunology, which delivered total revenues of more than $7.6 billion. Skyrizi continues to demonstrate impressive growth. Global sales were $4.4 billion, up 61.8% on an operational basis. We continue to capture robust in-play patient share in psoriatic disease. In the U.S., this includes clear leadership in psoriasis across all lines of therapy versus both biologics and oral agents as well as continued strong performance in the PSA derm setting with frontline in-play share leadership more than double the next closest biologic oral therapy. Globally, Skyrizi continues to grow and achieve total psoriatic disease market leadership in numerous major markets around the world. I'm also very pleased with Skyrizi's performance in IBD, where we are on track to double our sales this year. In the U.S., we continue to capture more than 1/3 of new or switching patients in Crohn's disease and nearly 20% of new or switching patients in ulcerative colitis. As we look ahead, we feel very confident in Skyrizi's profile, including compelling efficacy, safety and dosing and our very robust head-to-head program, where we have demonstrated superiority and clear differentiation against multiple novel therapies sets a high bar for comparison. So as we do compare our current dynamic share to total prescription share, it's clear there is still a substantial opportunity for continued total share gain across all of Skyrizi's indications over time, especially in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, which are still earlier in their launch trajectory. Turning now to Rinvoq, which is also demonstrating outstanding growth. Global sales were $2 billion, up 41.2% on an operational basis as we continue to see nice momentum across all of Rinvoq's indications. Uptake in IBD continues to be very strong. In the U.S., Rinvoq's in-play patient share across all lines of therapy for both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease is second only to Skyrizi among branded medicines. So as a portfolio, Rinvoq and Skyrizi together are capturing 1 out of every 2 in-play Crohn's disease patients and 1 out of every 3 in-play UC patients in the U.S., a very strong combined leadership position in gastroenterology for AbbVie. I'd also highlight that we are making excellent progress with Rinvoq's global launch in giant cell arteritis, our sixth indication in rheumatology. Initial prescription trends as well as feedback from rheumatologists have been positive, with access in the U.S. expected to ramp quickly over the rest of the year. Finally, we announced impressive Phase III results in alopecia areata, a chronic autoimmune disease leading to unpredictable hair loss with nearly 2 million diagnosed patients globally. The results from this indication highlight the transformative potential of Rinvoq's application in a new therapeutic area.

Thank you, Jeff. Starting with immunology, where we continue to make meaningful progress advancing our pipeline with several regulatory and clinical milestones since the last earnings call. FDA approval was granted for Rinvoq in GCA, representing our sixth rheumatology indication. Additionally, top line data from the first Phase III Rinvoq alopecia areata trial were just announced. In the study, Rinvoq met the primary and key secondary endpoints, demonstrating a statistically significant improvement in hair regrowth across both Rinvoq doses compared to placebo. Baseline scalp coverage prior to treatment was approximately 16%. In the Rinvoq 30-milligram group, 54% of patients reached 80% or more scalp hair coverage and 47% reached 90% or more coverage at 24 weeks. A robust effect was also demonstrated with Rinvoq 15 milligrams. These are truly transformative results and compare very favorably to the efficacy shown in pivotal trials for other JAK inhibitors. The placebo-adjusted SALT 20 and 10 scores for Rinvoq 30 milligrams were approximately 20 percentage points above the rates for the highest approved doses of other JAK inhibitors. For the Rinvoq 15-milligram group, rates were approximately 10 points above. We are very pleased with these results, which certainly surpassed our expectations. Results from a second Phase III alopecia areata study are anticipated in the third quarter, followed by regulatory submission starting later this year. The vitiligo program for Rinvoq is also nearing completion with top line results from Phase III studies expected later this year. External innovation has supported the expansion of our growing immunology pipeline. We recently announced plans to acquire Capstan. Their novel platform allows for in vivo programming of cells through mRNA delivery using targeted lipid nanoparticles. Capstan's lead asset currently in Phase I generates CD19-specific CD8-positive in vivo CAR T cells. The CAR T cells are designed to achieve rapid and deep B-cell depletion without the need for lymphoablating chemotherapy while also avoiding other challenges associated with conventional ex vivo CAR-Ts. This innovative approach has the potential to become a transformative new treatment modality to reset the immune system and provide deep, durable drug-free remission for patients with autoimmune disease. Capstan's technology is a strong strategic fit for our early immunology efforts, where we have a number of internal assets designed to reset the immune system via depletion of pathogenic cells with the goal of delivering functional cures. We have executed more than 30 business development transactions since the beginning of last year. Some of our other highlights from the ASCO meeting included encouraging early-stage results for ABBV-706 in high-grade neuroendocrine tumors and results from a registration-enabling Phase II study evaluating PVEK in BPDCN, which will support a regulatory submission later this year.

Thank you, Roopal. Starting with our second quarter results, we reported adjusted earnings per share of $2.97, which is $0.11 above our guidance midpoint. These results include a $0.42 unfavorable impact from acquired IPR&D expense. Total net revenues were $15.4 billion, reflecting growth of 6.5% on an operational basis, excluding a modestly favorable impact from foreign exchange. Adjusted gross margin was 84.4% of sales, adjusted R&D expense was 13.7% of sales and adjusted SG&A expense was 21% of sales. The adjusted operating margin ratio was 44.3% of sales, which includes a 5.3% unfavorable impact from acquired IPR&D expense. Net interest expense was $678 million. The adjusted tax rate was 16.2%. Turning to our financial outlook, we are raising our full year adjusted earnings per share guidance to between $11.88 and $12.08. Please note that this guidance does not include an estimate for acquired IPR&D expense that may be incurred beyond the second quarter. We now expect total net revenues of approximately $60.5 billion, an increase of $800 million. This reflects a relatively neutral impact from foreign exchange on full year sales growth. Our updated revenue forecast includes the following approximate assumptions for several of our key products and therapeutic areas. In Immunology, we now expect Skyrizi global revenues of $17.1 billion, an increase of $600 million, reflecting continued share gains in psoriasis and IBD and U.S. HUMIRA revenues of $3 billion, a decrease of $500 million, reflecting biosimilar competition. In neuroscience, we now expect global sales of $10.5 billion, an increase of $300 million. This includes a $100 million increase for VYALEV, reflecting strong international uptake with the remaining $200 million increase split relatively evenly across Vraylar, BOTOX Therapeutic, and the total oral CGRP portfolio. And in oncology, we now expect Imbruvica global revenues of $2.9 billion, an increase of $100 million, reflecting higher persistency rates for existing patients and Venclexta global sales of $2.8 billion, an increase of $100 million, reflecting continued strong demand in CLL. Moving to the P&L for 2025, we continue to forecast full year adjusted gross margin of approximately 84% of sales. We now expect adjusted R&D expense of approximately $9 million and adjusted SG&A expense of approximately $13.5 billion. We also now anticipate an adjusted operating margin ratio of roughly 45% of sales, in line with our previous expectations after including the 1.8% unfavorable impact of acquired IPR&D expense incurred through the second quarter. Turning to the third quarter, we anticipate net revenues of approximately $15.5 billion. This reflects an estimated 1% favorable impact from foreign exchange on sales growth. We expect adjusted earnings per share between $3.24 and $3.28. This guidance does not include acquired IPR&D expense that may be incurred in the quarter. In closing, AbbVie once again delivered outstanding top and bottom line performance with results well ahead of our expectations. I'm pleased with the momentum from our ex-HUMIRA platform, including Skyrizi, Rinvoq and neuroscience, which further supports AbbVie's long-term outlook.

Thanks, Scott. We will now open the call for questions. Operator, we'll take the first question, please.

First question comes from Mohit Bansal with Wells Fargo.

Congratulations on all the progress. I have a question about the effect of the STELARA biosimilar on Skyrizi and Rinvoq, particularly Skyrizi. On one hand, it could have a negative impact. However, as we observed with the HUMIRA biosimilar, many chose not to switch to the biosimilar but opted for a more effective treatment like Skyrizi and Rinvoq. How do you perceive the influence of the biosimilar in light of these two factors?

Yes, thanks, Mohit. It's Jeff. You are correct that we observed some movement following the first exclusionary formulary from CVS last year. Not all of the switch from Humira went to biosimilars; some transitioned to Skyrizi and Rinvoq. STELARA is still in its early stages, and there are additional interchangeable biosimilars available. However, it remains a smaller drug focused primarily on gastrointestinal issues, making it challenging to precisely determine the extent of the movement. We have noticed that some physicians, when considering a switch, are more open to exploring the higher-end products. Overall, I believe that the main driving force behind the success of Skyrizi and Rinvoq is the excellent data supporting them, the wide range of indications, and our strong relationships with physicians regarding our value proposition. Therefore, I would say the impact is relatively minor.

And this is Rob. I'll just add on. If you recall, we had the Sequence head-to-head trial, Skyrizi versus STELARA, and we did see significant share gains following the release of that head-to-head. And so when you think about Skyrizi's performance versus STELARA before the biosimilar, we saw a very notable share inflection. And as Jeff mentioned, what we're seeing right now is just continued momentum from Skyrizi. I would not attribute that to be an impact from the biosimilar, but I should want to make clear that we did see very nice share uptake following the Sequence head-to-head trial.

Next question comes from Terence Flynn with Morgan Stanley.

Great. Maybe 2 for me. Obviously, another solid quarter here from Skyrizi. It's annualizing at about $18 billion now. I know you have the 2027 guidance out there for over $20 billion. So just maybe help us think about that number and confidence there. And kind of if you could tie in Rinvoq as well, again, annualizing $8 billion, I think that guidance is for over $11 billion in 2027. And then I know you might not have a lot of details yet, but just any thoughts on the latest tariff announcement regarding the EU and how that might impact 2026?

Terence, this is Rob. I'll address both questions. You're absolutely right; we are witnessing outstanding performance from Skyrizi and Rinvoq. I'm very pleased with our progress and we are raising our expectations for this year. We periodically update our long-term guidance, usually around the time of the fourth quarter call or at the JPMorgan conference, and we will refresh our long-term guidance as needed. Currently, we are performing well against our previous long-term guidance and will provide an update at the appropriate time. Additionally, Street expectations have also increased, which we are pleased about. Concerning tariffs, we feel insulated from any impact this year due to our inventory management actions, but we won't speculate on the longer-term effects without specific policy details. We need to see the results of the 232 investigation and how tariffs will be phased in. I can say that we do not anticipate our exposure being significantly higher than our peers. As I mentioned in the first quarter call, we have a broad U.S. network with 11 sites that manufacture APIs, biologics, toxins, and small molecules. Notably, our largest product, Skyrizi, is produced in the U.S. for the domestic market. In the long term, we plan to increase our U.S. manufacturing capacity as part of the $10 billion capital investment we announced during the first quarter call, which includes adding four new sites to our U.S. network for APIs, peptides drug products, and devices. We are well positioned and will continue to invest in the U.S. Our discussions with the administration regarding sectoral tariffs are constructive. The most effective way to encourage that is through tax incentives and a trade strategy that emphasizes innovation. However, we won't be able to provide more details until we know the results of the 232 investigation.

The next question comes from Chris Schott with JPMorgan.

Just a couple of follow-ups here. Just on Skyrizi, obviously, meaningful upside to results this year. And I just would love if you'd lay out what in particular is driving this. I guess, specifically, is it all IBD? Or are you also seeing upside to the derm indications as well? And then second question was just kind of a bigger picture kind of BD question. I know the focus is on strengthening the growth profile 2030 and beyond. But just given the momentum of the core business, it seems as AbbVie could fund significant growth in its pipeline in R&D over the next few years and still have pretty healthy earnings growth. So just should we think about this still being kind of the string of early stage or mid-stage deals? Or is there appetite to also look at later-stage assets that maybe have more spend upfront, but could also contribute as we get later in the decade?

Yes. Thanks, Chris. It's Jeff. And the momentum on Skyrizi is across the board. Clearly, we've spent a lot of time talking about the more recent launches of Crohn's and ulcerative colitis. Rob mentioned the Sequence head-to-head trial, which was quite remarkable in what that drove. But really, it's across the board. I mean, particularly continue to be very, very impressed with our momentum in psoriatic disease. So it's been 7 years since the initial psoriasis approval, and we are still gaining in-play share, really not been observed on a brand this big over that amount of time. And that's across both psoriasis and as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, in frontline PSA derm. So it really is strength across the board. We even see continued momentum in PSA in rheumatology, where our combined share with both Skyrizi and Rinvoq in terms of PSA room is the leading portfolio. So it really is well balanced.

Chris, I would just add to Jeff's comments that $600 million raise, $400 million of that you could think of as IBD, $200 million in psoriatic. So that's going to put the split of the 17.1 at 11.3 for psoriatic and 5.8 for IBD.

And Chris, this is Rob. I will address your question on business development. When considering AbbVie and the diverse growth platform we have today, it presents us with the opportunity to achieve top-tier performance and a clear path to growth for at least the next eight years. Strategically, our pipeline, external innovations, and investments are all centered on driving growth in the next decade. We are well-positioned based on our current portfolio to facilitate that growth over the next eight years. The focus now is on how to set the company up for expansion beyond Skyrizi and Rinvoq. We have made several compelling investments. Notably, without any significant losses expected this decade, we have the flexibility to invest more in research and development and continue acquiring external innovations, and we absolutely plan to do that. We have many exciting programs coming from our internal pipeline, especially in oncology and combination approaches in immunology. Our business development strategy will remain centered on assets that can significantly propel growth over the next decade and beyond. If you look at the deals we've executed, we have enhanced our immunology pipeline with novel mechanisms while also adding important capabilities with oral peptides and B-cell depletion methods. In oncology, we have strengthened our position in multiple myeloma with our own program in Etansamig, as well as two trispecific deals, Simcere and IGI, which greatly increases our depth in the area. Additionally, we have made substantial advancements in neuroscience, covering psychiatry, migraine, and Alzheimer's. Furthermore, our siRNA transaction with AR provides a robust platform that can create opportunities across immunology, neuroscience, and oncology, alongside our entry into obesity through the Uber deal, which we aim to expand with further business development. Strategically, we need to keep investing in early-stage programs that can effectively drive growth for the company in the next decade and beyond, and we are well-equipped to achieve growth this decade with our current portfolio.

Our next question comes from Dave Risinger with Leerink Partners.

Congrats on the phenomenal financial momentum. So my question is, could you please discuss your vision for leveraging your global aesthetics commercial footprint to sell obesity drugs in the future? And also, how are you thinking about potentially adding to your obesity R&D portfolio in the future?

Yes, David, it's Jeff. This is a very crucial point. We have a strong global presence, and we've noticed some shifts in the last few quarters. Specifically, in our aesthetics practices, the cash pay market for obesity or weight loss has become the second largest revenue source, following toxins in first place and dermal fillers in third. Recently, this trend has moderated due to changes in the clinics' approach and the loss of some compounding dynamics. This was a significant factor in our Gubra transaction, as we anticipate continued demand in this area. Many patients who have already explored GLP-1 options, whether through compounding or branded drugs, will seek ways to integrate weight loss into their aesthetic journeys. We believe we are uniquely equipped to support aesthetic clinics worldwide in delivering these solutions. It's vital for us to leverage our distribution capabilities while considering AI interactions and how these will integrate with both our emerging portfolio and existing brands. This played a major role in our deal and was certainly appealing.

And this is Roopal discussing R&D in the obesity space, which we are definitely open to exploring further. The current asset we possess is in the amylin class, and our considerations focus on enhanced tolerability and a favorable dosing profile that could enhance longevity of use. The challenge we face is that while many individuals will initiate treatment, a significant number tend to drop out relatively quickly, missing out on the benefits of weight loss. Additionally, we are mindful of concerns regarding muscle and bone loss. In relation to this, if there are other assets that address these issues similarly to the amylin class and we can explore combinations, that would greatly interest us. We also appreciate that the 295 molecule has a neutral pH, which could simplify its combination with other assets to tackle these ongoing unmet needs.

Our next question comes from Carter Gould with Cantor.

Maybe to change pace and ask on VYALEV. Obviously, you raised the guide there. Should we think about that being primarily driven by U.S. or OUS? I guess, specifically, has the OUS success sort of changed the way you think about the U.S. launch there?

Yes. Carter, it's Jeff. So again, as we mentioned, we're super pleased with the launch in Vyalev. And what we're seeing is just very, very strong demand. The drug device combination is really transformational. And what we see with the control over the Parkinson's or the advanced Parkinson's disease is you get 24-hour effect. And so that helps manage the motor disorders and the sleep disturbances and throughout not just the day when people are awake, but also through the night. So this quality of life impact and the control of the disease is quite remarkable. So we're just seeing real demand that's coming through largely across the international markets. So as we've highlighted before, we're very confident that we're going to start to see the Medicare ramp in the U.S. start here in the latter part of the year, and we're right on track for that. but the raise really is largely related to just the core demand. You think about it really the first full year, a $400 million running rate in the international market, very impressive based on the performance of the brand.

The next question comes from Tim Anderson with Bank of America.

I have a question on IRA price negotiation. You guys have a horse in the race again with Vraylar in this upcoming round. You had Imbruvica in the first round. There have been investor fears that this next round of negotiations will be worse than last year, so Trump can make his mark. any assurances you can give us that this won't be the case? Or can you otherwise provide any color on how those negotiations are matching up with your expectations as you first headed into those negotiations? And then second question on aesthetics. I know you talked about pushes and pulls, a question I've asked in the past. The impact from the GLP-1s on BOTOX and dermal fillers, what's the latest? Is it helping sales, hurting sales or net neutral?

Tim, it's Rob. I'll take your first question. Obviously, as we go through these negotiations, we don't publicly comment for obvious reasons. And as you know, the price will be public in November, and we'll comment as appropriate at that time. But as it relates to the IRA, I do think one important notable change as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is the expansion of the IRA orphan drug exemption, Drugs with more than one orphan designation are now exempt from IRA negotiations, which will be a benefit to our own cancer therapy, Venclexta. So we previously would have assumed we had a time line as we model the impact of IRA. Now with this change, we would not expect Venclexta to be negotiated. And that's an example of a good policy change where innovation is being rewarded and not penalized. But as it relates to the current negotiations, we'll provide commentary once those prices are public.

Yes. And regarding the GLP-1s, I would say, overall, what we see after numerous discussions and working with our clinics, Tim, is that it's really a net neutral. I mean, if anything, if you look at it, I mean, the filler market, where, in some cases, people are interested and as they lose their facial muscle and fat, you think that would be a tailwind for the dermal filler market. And we've seen that, that's just been more afflicted clearly by macro issues and some sentiment issues. So net-net, we see it as really a neutral effect.

Your next question comes from Vamil Divan with Guggenheim Securities.

On the quarter. So just 2 for me. One on the alopecia areata data you touched on earlier in the call in the press release from yesterday. Wondering if you can just sort of talk about the commercial opportunity for that indication. Obviously, Rinvoq is a big product and going to get bigger, but just curious how much of an impact that can have on Rinvoq sales? And then second, going back to the aesthetics commentary, maybe you can just give a little more color on what you're seeing on the ground in terms of the impact of the macro? Are things actually getting better in the practices? Or are you seeing an increase in patient flow as maybe the macro sentiment is getting a little better over the last few months?

Yes, it's Jeff. The data has been quite impressive; the recovery of hair growth has been striking compared to other JAK inhibitors that have reported and gained approvals. We view Rinvoq's new indications as the third wave of product development. We initially focused on major rheumatology indications, then expanded to atopic dermatitis and IBD. Now we are adding new indications such as GCA, lupus, and others that overlap with dermatology and rheumatology where we have strong momentum. We believe this expansion could contribute approximately $2 billion to peak year sales for Rinvoq. We will need to continue our studies to understand if we can generate more momentum from the transformative nature of this data. In our research with alopecia patients, hair recovery significantly improves their perception of their immune disease. Whether we can achieve the desired SALT scores and more momentum than we have seen in the market remains to be seen. Overall, this is a significant strategy for us, expected to unfold towards the end of the decade, starting around 2026 to 2028, and we are encouraged by the data. Regarding the aesthetics side, we have seen stability, but a notable issue has been the decline in the dermal filler market in some major territories. Patients are more sensitive to the pricing of fillers compared to toxins or BOTOX. Additionally, there is a prevailing sentiment of concern over potential overfilling or the desire for a more subtle, natural appearance. We will be addressing this in the second half of the year with our clinics, thought leaders, and trainers to help consumers understand that exceptional results can still be achieved with dermal fillers. While we see stability, we recognize the need for efforts to ensure the market stabilizes and eventually grows.

Your next question comes from Steve Scala with TD Cowen.

I have two questions. First, regarding aesthetics, your comments have not been very reassuring. Previously, the company has referenced earlier times of uncertainty and highlighted the resilience of these brands during those periods. My question is, what makes this economic uncertainty different from the past? It seems to be lasting longer than previous downturns. Are there other factors at play, such as increased competition affecting these franchises? Secondly, about the pipeline, you have an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody that completed a Phase I trial in April. What is the current status of this product? Is it possible for AbbVie to move directly to a potentially registrational trial using imaging as an endpoint?

Yes. I think, Steve, to your point, I think there is a difference between this and some other areas where we've had some economic uncertainty. It's been sort of more short-term recessionary issues. I think the longer-term impact on the pocket book of the consumers has just been more chronic, and we've seen that across even just recent reports on luxury good items and significant issues. So I do think it's more chronic than we've seen before. Ultimately, I think we'll be able to work through it. We still see high levels of interest in aesthetic procedures, and we do see the target customers complain about issues of their wallet. I also did highlight that I do think something is different in terms of the sentiment around this natural look and worry about being overfilled in terms of the derma fillers. All of these are addressable. And I also think that we have the right portfolio, and we also have the right disruptive innovations that's pretty close, particularly around the toxin space with our short-acting fast on, fast off TrenibotE. So I do think we're set up for taking advantage of the long-term recovery, and we'll look forward to that as we continue to progress the strategy.

This is Roopal discussing our Alzheimer's assets. We have a monoclonal antibody, 916, which yielded data similar to what is currently on the market. Around the same time, we acquired the Aliada technology, which is also a monoclonal antibody like 916, binding with high potency to pyroglutamated amyloid. It features technology that allows it to cross the blood-brain barrier via the transferrin receptor, enhancing penetration into the central nervous system. Additionally, this asset shows a relatively long half-life. Our goal is to deliver it subcutaneously, and next year we expect to start treating patients with this next-generation asset. We plan to move directly to Phase III and seek approval based on imaging results, which is a common industry goal to save time. However, we still need to demonstrate a positive impact on cognition alongside these results. In the future, these imaging results may serve as a predictive biomarker, but for now, we are preparing to conduct the study focusing on its effects and cognition readings.

Steve, this is Rob. I want to revisit your question about aesthetics. When I assess this business and its performance, it's key to differentiate between market growth and market share. Our market share has remained stable. Over the long term, considering the low penetration rates, our leadership in this area, and the upcoming innovations, there is significant potential. This leads us to be confident that, in the long run, this is a strong business. We've faced ongoing economic challenges, and as Jeff mentioned, there are specific dynamics in various markets, particularly regarding dermal fillers. However, given our position and our proven ability to compete, as shown by our market share performance, we are very optimistic about the short-acting toxin, which could significantly impact market growth and our market share, along with the other products in our filler pipeline. There is considerable potential here. Additionally, there was an earlier question about the role of aesthetics in obesity. Strategically, we have the opportunity to enter that market as well. So in the long term, we are very confident in the aesthetics business. Despite the difficulties we've faced in recent years, our market share performance has been strong, although market growth has been tough, but we will overcome that.

The next question comes from Chang with UBS.

So when I compare your Skyrizi 2Q sales to prescription trends, it suggests pricing has been quite favorable, which seems at odds with your commentary around low single-digit price concessions. The major missing piece is the contribution from IV IBD induction scripts. So perhaps can you give us some help on the proportion of sales from Skyrizi in IBD now or percentage of number of scripts getting IBD induction? And if we take that into account, is the 1H pricing performance consistent with the full year expectations? Or should we expect a more meaningful step down in pricing in the second half of the year?

It's Scott. Let me address your question. So I think you're correct. From an overall perspective, the first half of the year, we did see some price favorability. Now quickly on the volume side, when you look at that IQVIA data as we've spoken about in the past, there is a disconnect from the induction. And that really, I would call that about a 10-point differential that you need to add to what you're seeing in the data to get to the volume trend. But we still do have favorable price in the quarter and also the first half. And there's really a couple of things going on there. It's really some price gating items that were unique. We also are seeing from some of the information that we've received, the Part D redesign impact will be a little bit more heavily weighted towards the back half of the year. So that was less of a headwind in the first year, but really some pricing gating items. We do expect on an overall basis that pricing to be neutral for Skyrizi. And on a long-term basis, of course, low single digits, consistent with what we've said. But this year had some anomalies. And so neutral for this year. You will see some negative price in the back half of the year.

The next question comes from Gary Nachman with Raymond James.

Nice quarter. So first, also on Skyrizi. What are you seeing regarding the competitive dynamics in the IL-23 class, especially with J&J's TREMFYA with their new IBD approvals, if that's impacting at all? Or is there just a ton of headroom in the IBD market to absorb that? And then on neuro, it was very strong in 2Q. Is that mainly volume demand driven across the various products? Any changes with gross to nets that are worth noting? And how much more have you been investing behind the neuro franchise overall given such strong growth that you've been seeing there?

Thank you for your question regarding Skyrizi and the competition. We are very satisfied with the overall performance, particularly in head-to-head trials, and our approach to dosing, convenience, and safety. The profile of Skyrizi is impressive in the IBD space, as we've mentioned several times. Your observation aligns with our view on the market’s development over time. I've mentioned before that the launches of the 2023 products, starting with Skyrizi and now TREMFYA, are quite new, capturing only a small percentage of patient share. We observed similar trends in psoriasis around 2018 and 2019, which later evolved to show that 60% of patients fell into the IL-23 category. Therefore, there is significant potential for growth when considering the profiles of these medications. We are confident that Skyrizi will perform well compared to its peers in the IL-23 category, but we will cautiously factor in share capture from competitors like TREMFYA. This context is critical. Turning to the neuro business, you are correct that we are seeing strong growth across all segments, mainly driven by volume and promotion. In the migraine sector, we lead in all three segments: we are number one in acute treatments with Ubrelvy, number one in prevention with QULIPTA, and we also have a strong position in chronic migraine treatments with BOTOX Therapeutic. There is no cannibalization among these products; they are all experiencing significant growth. Our substantial share of voice is effectively driving these results. Additionally, comments regarding VYALEV and Vraylar have also been made. Scott can provide more details about the mix of prices versus volume this quarter.

Sure. It's a great question. As Jeff mentioned, the volume is really driving this business. Our two largest brands, Vraylar and Botox Therapeutics, are both experiencing double-digit growth. We did see a slight price benefit from Vraylar, particularly in light of the Part D redesign impact, which has provided some price favorability. Vraylar has shown consistent double-digit volume growth throughout the year and in every quarter. We are observing this trend across the board. Regarding the gross net side, especially in the oral CGRP category with Ubrelvy and QULIPTA, we are closely managing co-pays to ensure we achieve the right gross to net, and we are pleased with our progress there. Overall, this is a volume-driven business in a volume-driven therapeutic area.

In terms of future investment, we currently have significant funding in the therapeutic area, but recognize the need for additional investment. For instance, we are increasing our investment in the U.S. for VYALEV. We expect tavapadon, which I mentioned earlier, to be a very important product as it is an oral medication that will be used before VYALEV. Therefore, we are planning to expand our sales force accordingly. Both Roopal and I pointed out the study comparing it to topiramate, which comprises 40% to 50% of all generics in the preventative space. We will also evaluate if additional representation could help QULIPTA gain momentum in our long-term plan. That process is already in motion. On a broader scale, we are committed to investing in the neuroscience growth rates we are experiencing.

This is Rob. I mean I think it's an important question because we are obviously going to fully invest in neuroscience. It's our second largest therapeutic area. It's the fastest growing in our portfolio. In fact, we expect to be the largest neuroscience company in the industry next year. We clearly have very strong positions in psych and migraine and emerging leadership position in Parkinson's with VYALEV and tavapadon, as Jeff mentioned. And we also have an opportunity to drive advancement in Alzheimer's treatment through the Aliada platform. You've seen us over the course of the last several years, invest in external innovation. We've highlighted the Gedeon Richter discovery collaboration in psych, the Gilgamesh opportunity that we entered into last year in mood disorders. I mentioned Aliada, very excited about that next-generation A-beta antibody in Alzheimer's, again, with a unique shuttle platform. And then as I discussed earlier today, the siRNA opportunity with ADARx will play a role in neuroscience as well. And so we are fully investing in neuroscience. We look forward to maintaining our leadership position there. It's obviously performing exceptionally well. You saw across the board. Every brand exceeded expectations in neuroscience this quarter, and we're going to keep fueling that engine.

Thanks, Gary. Operator, we have time for one final question.

Your next question comes from Asad Haider with Piper Sandler.

Congrats on yet another solid set of results. I think most of my questions have been answered at this point. Just one bigger picture question on the oncology franchise, maybe for Roopal. You've mentioned that you're watching the PD-1 VEGF class. Just curious if you have any updated thoughts on the broader landscape, how AbbVie is positioned? And given there's been a lot of BD activity there, what would it take for AbbVie to make a move here?

Yes, we're monitoring that class. There are several assets revealing data over time that we're interested in. We're particularly focused on how these can partner well with our internal ADC platform. We believe that the mechanism of this class could create an opportunity. Our approach to ADCs involves identifying a good target with high tumor expression compared to healthy tissue, which allows for potential patient selection using biomarkers when appropriate. This helps us optimize benefit-risk and enhance tolerability. With our linker technology and emerging topo warhead, we are observing very little spill, meaning low rates of alopecia, stomatitis, and diarrhea—issues commonly associated with chemotherapy and some other ADCs. Safety and tolerability are critical to our strategy, and if we identify a partner asset that can be combined in various indications, we would definitely be interested.

That concludes today's conference call. If you'd like to listen to a replay of the call, please visit our website at investors.abbvie.com. Thanks again for joining us.

Thank you, and that concludes today's conference. You may all disconnect at this time.