Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the LENZ Therapeutics' Third Quarter 2024 Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following prepared remarks from the management, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. As a reminder, this call is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Dan Chevallard, Chief Financial Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good afternoon, and thank you to everyone for joining us today to discuss LENZ’s third quarter 2024 financial results and recent highlights. My name is Dan Chevallard, Chief Financial Officer of LENZ Therapeutics. We are joined today by Eef Schimmelpennink, our President and Chief Executive Officer; and Shawn Olsson, our Chief Commercial Officer, as well as Dr. Marc Odrich, our Chief Medical Officer will join us for the question-and-answer session. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that this call will contain forward-looking statements regarding LENZ's future expectations, plans, prospects, corporate strategy, regulatory and commercial plans and expectations, cash runway projections, and performance. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors and risks, including those discussed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and which can also be found on our website. In addition, any forward-looking statements represent only our views as of the date of this webcast and should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date. We specifically disclaim any obligations to update such statements. The company encourages you to consult the risk factors contained in our SEC filings for additional detail, including in our third quarter 2024 Form 10-Q, which was filed this morning. With that, I will now turn the call over to Eef.

Thank you, Dan, and good afternoon everyone. The third quarter of 2024 featured several significant corporate accomplishments. These achievements demonstrate the consistent execution by the LENZ team as we gain momentum towards the potential approval and launch of LNZ100. I want to summarize our recent milestones and mark an important transition for LENZ as we shift from a late-stage clinical development biopharmaceutical company to a pre-commercial entity, focusing on what we anticipate in 2025. This period has been crucial for our progress, highlighted by the FDA's acceptance of our NDA for LNZ100 to treat presbyopia, along with a PDUFA target action date set for August 8th, 2025. To revisit the problem we aim to address, presbyopia is the loss of near vision affecting nearly everyone over 45. As the eye’s crystalline lens hardens with age, its ability to focus on near objects diminishes, leading to blurred vision. While presbyopia develops gradually, individuals often notice an abrupt impact on daily life starting in their mid-40s, when reading glasses or other aids become essential. To tackle the daily challenges of presbyopes, we are developing the first and only aceclidine-based once-daily eye drop. In our Phase 3 CLARITY trials, it has been shown to improve near vision throughout the entire workday without requiring reading glasses. We are thrilled about the potential of LNZ100, which we believe could be the best in its class. The profile of LNZ100 showcases a rapid response, with 71% of participants achieving three lines or more of near vision improvement at 30 minutes and again at 3 hours. An extraordinary long-lasting response was observed, with 40% maintaining this improvement at least 10 hours after administration. Impressively, 95% of participants experienced at least two lines of near vision improvement, an important metric for presbyopes. Notably, 69% of participants still reported this improvement at the end of the day, ten hours after dosing. We also observed a statistically significant one-line improvement in distance vision across the board. Safety-wise, LNZ100 was well-tolerated, with no serious adverse events related to treatment reported over more than 30,000 treatment days in our trials. The majority of adverse events were mild and transient, with some headaches appearing to lessen with continued use of LNZ100. Turning to our recent regulatory milestone, we were pleased to receive our Day 74 letter, which signifies FDA's official acknowledgment of our NDA for LNZ100, along with the PDUFA target action date of August 8th, 2025. As I noted in our second quarter call, our NDA reflects a comprehensive development program that integrated valuable feedback from the FDA. We believe we have compiled strong clinical, manufacturing, and quality data. We look forward to collaborating with the agency during their review of our submission, which we believe could lead to FDA approval in August, and a potential U.S. launch as soon as the fourth quarter of 2025. Before we move to commercial discussions, I want to highlight the promising results from Corxel, our development and commercial licensing partner in China. We were very pleased with the top-line data from their Phase 3 study, which showed strong p-values of less than 0.0001. It is crucial to underline that these results align closely with those from the CLARITY study, despite being conducted by a different company in another country, with a predominantly different ethnic patient population. This consistency underlines LNZ100's potential as a global therapy, particularly in providing access to an estimated 400 million presbyopes in China. This partnership offers an opportunity to create significant shareholder value. Given that the global rights to LNZ100 outside China remain unpartnered, we see further partnership opportunities that could enhance shareholder returns. As I mentioned earlier, these recent milestones indicate a significant transition for LENZ as we evolve from a late-stage clinical company into a pre-commercial organization. Now, I would like to share some important findings from a recent market research survey of about 430 eye care professionals, primarily comprising 80% optometrists and 20% ophthalmologists. We believe the results will provide compelling insights into the treatment of presbyopia with LNZ100, pending approval. I will now pass the call to Shawn Olsson, our Chief Commercial Officer, to discuss the results of this analysis.

Thank you, Eef, and good morning, everyone. The commercial potential for an effective presbyopia treatment is one of the largest opportunities in eye care. Presbyopia affects about 128 million people in the U.S., which is nearly four times more than those with dry eye, and exceeds the combined total of those with dry eye, childhood myopia, macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and glaucoma. As we work towards our PDUFA date of August 8th next year, we want to share insights gained from eye care professionals through primary market research, which confirms our prior understanding. Our survey of eye care professionals indicated that most patients they see are presbyopic, and the recommendation for a retinal eye exam is already a standard part of their eye care exam process. Based on feedback from 426 professionals, the average provider sees 300 to 400 patients a month, with 61% reported as presbyopes. Additionally, 80% to 87% of the annual eye exams include a retinal exam to assess retinal pathology. We believe the FDA will recommend such exams, which will fit seamlessly into the existing exam procedure without being a burden to prescribe. We also wanted to assess if prior experience with LNZ100 influenced eye care professionals’ interest and impressions. They reviewed the Phase 3 safety and efficacy data for LNZ100, including its improvement rates from our CLARITY study and the adverse event profile showing only mild ocular events with no serious treatment-related adverse events across over 30,000 patient treatment days. After reviewing the data, 78% agreed that LNZ100 is an attractive treatment for presbyopia and feels well-tolerated and safe. Looking ahead to the adoption of LNZ100, 83% and 82% of surveyed professionals expressed likelihood to sample and prescribe LNZ100, respectively, confirming excitement for a non-pilocarpine eye drop solution for presbyopia. As noted in previous calls, the first eye drop treatment for presbyopia was approved in 2021, highlighting strong consumer demand evidenced by over 5,000 new paid scripts weekly. However, long-term use of the pilocarpine product did not meet consumer performance expectations, and other low-dose strategies are not expected to overcome challenges in consumer perception or eye care professional preference for pupil-selective options. We believe there is still a significant opportunity for an eye drop that meets consumer needs—a once-daily drop that works throughout the majority of the workday for presbyopes. The market requires an ideal presbyopia eye drop, and we are optimistic about the potential of aceclidine-based LNZ100. Our Phase 3 CLARITY study found that 90% of participants noted improvement in near vision, and 75% indicated they would continue using LNZ100 post-study, with 81% planning to use it four to seven days a week. With broad inclusion criteria, we believe this positions LNZ100 well to capture a significant part of the $3 billion-plus market opportunity. To support the anticipated launch following potential FDA approval, LENZ has fully staffed its commercial leadership team with expertise in various areas, including marketing and sales. We have also appointed our Regional Sales Directors for the East and West regions reporting to our Vice President of Sales. LNZ100 is also building its U.S. commercial readiness, completing third-party logistics contracting in preparation for a potential launch as early as the fourth quarter of 2025. In February 2024, LENZ launched its Eye Am Selective campaign to inform and engage eye care professionals about future presbyopia solutions, involving over 50 key opinion leaders. As we approach commercialization, our strategy focuses on three pillars: getting doctors to recommend our product, encouraging consumers to request it by name, and ensuring easy access for patients. This includes developing consumer sampling and commercial access through multiple channels, including retail pharmacies and home delivery options. Before concluding, I want to mention our presence at key medical conferences to share our data, including recent and upcoming presentations at notable events like Eyecelerator at AAO 2024, the American Academy of Optometry, and OIS in San Diego. We look forward to sharing more updates and progress in the coming quarters as we approach potential approval and launch. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Dan Chevallard, our CFO, who will discuss our financial results.

Thank you, Shawn. As both Eef and Shawn have highlighted, the third quarter and recent period has been very productive. In early July, we were very pleased to have completed a $30 million PIPE financing with Ridgeback, bringing a strong and well-respected investor into our shareholder base and further strengthening our balance sheet. To that end, we ended the third quarter 2024 with approximately $217.2 million in cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, which as we have guided previously, is anticipated to fund the company's cash runway to post-launch positive operating cash flow. Turning now to our third quarter results. Our operating expenses and resulting cash burn for the third quarter were once again substantially in line with our plan. Total operating expenses for Q3 2024 were approximately $12.9 million compared to $19.9 million for the same period in 2023. Our Q3 2024 cash burn, net of interest income was approximately $9 million. Sequentially, our total operating expenses decreased quarter-over-quarter by approximately 10% from $14.4 million in the second quarter of 2024. On previous earnings calls, we highlighted that we would anticipate a decline in our research and development expenses due to the conclusion of our positive Phase 3 CLARITY study while shifting our research and development focus and spend towards pre-approval manufacturing activities, which we have seen in the third quarter. Total R&D expenses decreased to $6.5 million in Q3 2024 compared to $17 million for the same period in 2023. Sequentially, research and development expenses decreased quarter-over-quarter by approximately 7% from $6.9 million in the second quarter of this year. Total SG&A expenses increased to $6.5 million in Q3 2024 compared to $2.9 million for the same period in 2023. This increase was driven primarily by increases in commercial headcount and pre-commercial planning activities. Sequentially, SG&A decreased quarter-over-quarter by approximately 12% from $7.4 million in the second quarter 2024, driven primarily by decreases in non-commercial G&A administrative expenses, including outside legal services and other corporate expenses. We expect our SG&A expenses or our sales and marketing expenses to be more specific to begin to ramp from here as we approach a mid-2025 approval for LNZ100. As we think about the year prior to launch and heading into the potential year of launch, we believe our sales and marketing spend is well aligned to deliver on our commercial plans. Importantly, our allocation of capital to sales and marketing, including our absolute dollar sales and marketing spend and sales and marketing spend as a percentage of total operating expenses all line up well to benchmark comparative analyses we have performed. Finally, our net loss per share, both basic and diluted, was $0.38 per share in the third quarter 2024 on a net loss of $10.2 million compared to a net loss per share of $9.62 per share in the third quarter 2023 on a net loss of $18.9 million. As was noted on previous earnings calls, please keep in mind that our net loss per share figures consider only weighted average common shares outstanding, which were considerably different in 2023. Q3 2024 net loss per share was calculated on approximately 27.2 million weighted average common shares outstanding compared to Q3 of last year when as a then-private company with multiple classes of preferred and common stock outstanding, net loss per share was calculated on approximately 2 million weighted average common shares outstanding. We ended Q3 2024 with approximately 27.5 million total common shares outstanding. That concludes my comments on our Q3 financial results. And with that, I'd like to turn the call back over to Eef for final remarks.

Thanks Dan. As you can see, the third quarter and recent period has been a very productive time, and we feel the team continues to build momentum into the end of the year. It goes without saying that it is an exciting time at LENZ. We have continued to execute in all facets of our organization. We remain highly confident that we are well on our way to deliver the first and only aceclidine-based eye drop for the improvement in near vision in people with presbyopia. We look forward to this next phase as a pre-commercial company as we prepare for a potential approval and commercialization of LNZ100 and believe we are well-positioned to deliver a once-daily, safe, and rapidly acting treatment to 128 million individuals living with presbyopia in the United States. With that, I'd like to open up the call for questions.

Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. Your first question comes from the line of Yigal Nochomovitz with Citi. Please go ahead.

Hi guys. Thank you very much for taking the questions. I had a few here. So, first off, you mentioned, I believe, the survey, there was 80% optometrists, 20% ophthalmologists. I'm just curious if the conclusions of the survey were consistent amongst those two subgroups? And then the second question, obviously, with this very, very large market, over 100 million potential patients, I'm curious what level of investment in the social media access. I think you mentioned influencers are you expecting for the launch? And then thirdly, just could you remind us as far as the manufacturing of the product, where is it manufactured? Is it within the United States? Or is it ex-U.S.? And do you have multiple suppliers? Thank you.

Thanks Yigal. Great questions. Let me kick off with the 80/20 and the manufacturing, and then I'll hand it over to Shawn for the investments. So the 80/20 split between optometrists and ophthalmologists is obviously by design. We see that if you look at the VUITY scripts, that 80/20 split is how the VUITY scripts came about, and we expect that to be reflected for our commercial plan as well. That's why we ended up with 80/20. And the feedback across those two groups is very consistent. So, you don't see any changes between those two groups. Then on manufacturing, we are fully set up to produce at commercial scale. Actually, our Phase 3 trial was produced at that same commercial scale ready to support the launch as is. Manufacturing setup is partly U.S., partly ex-U.S., all European-based. So, European and U.S. manufacturers, both for drug products as well as drug substances, all with ample capacity that we will continue to add to and build redundancy to as we launch.

And turning to the interest from social and influencers to LNZ100. So, we see the potential of LNZ100 in this large untapped market, right, that has the potential to be north of $3 billion. And because of that, we will put the financials behind it from a direct-to-consumer strategy that would be commensurate with a product of that potential. What we saw with VUITY was when they turned on their direct-to-consumer campaign, it nearly doubled their scripts from 3,000 new scripts per week to up to 6,000 new scripts per week. And therefore, that supports our strategy behind a direct-to-consumer campaign. We are evaluating both influencer campaigns as well as a celebrity spokesperson. And we'll continue to evaluate that as we get closer to launch. What we see is when you're selecting influencers and celebrities, you do want to do that fairly close to launch just because they do tend to go in and out of favor over time.

Okay. Thank you.

Yes. Two questions. One is, can you remind us what the incentive is for the optometrist has to recommend the product? And then second of all, thinking about the VUITY launch, help us with expectations for how to think about your launch for the ramp in prescriptions and sales? I mean, should we be expecting it to do as well or not as well or better? Or just help us kind of set the expectations right now. Thank you.

This is Shawn Olsson, Chief Commercial Officer. Eye care professionals who treat presbyopia are really looking for an ideal solution for presbyopia. So our eye drop provides the opportunity for more patients to be treated beyond those patients that are buying reading glasses off the shelves. The incentives for eye care professionals are clear. They want to be able to provide a solution that works effectively and consistently for their patients. Ultimately, the product did not work, but they did drive 3,000 new scripts per week in the beginning, and then they increased that to 5,000 new scripts per week after direct-to-consumer. Obviously, we are not the size of Allergan, but we're going to put the potential marketing power behind this product to have a successful launch. I think anything in that realm would be good.

And just to maybe add on that a little bit, Marc. So, if you think about the timing of that launch before we talk about revenue ramp, with our PDUFA date now obviously being set for August 8th next year, we've tightened our guidance as to when we expect to launch to the fourth quarter of next year. That's the logical and optimal time that we expect it will take to get those products out the door. Early in that quarter, we'll start with samples. It is a product that lends itself obviously extremely well for sampling with that very rapid onset. So remember that our clinical trial was truly a day one endpoint on that same day one. So first product, first time that a patient actually uses the product within 30 days, we hit those very high efficacy results that we've shared before. So, we look at that Q4 truly as a rollout quarter. We'll start with heavy sampling, and that will lead to that transition where patients are going to start filling scripts.

Great. Hi, everybody. Thanks for taking my questions. Congrats on the progress here. So, within the ECP survey, you queried physicians on how often they perform retinal exams. And Shawn, I think you mentioned expectations around requirement for retinal exam. So wondering where those expectations stem from relative to the safety profile you observed in comparison to VUITY? And maybe more generally, how the language around retinal risk might compare to VUITY? Thanks. And I have a follow-up.

I'll take that one. So our expectation is that our label will be very similar to that of VUITY, which has a general recommendation, not a requirement, but a general recommendation for an eye exam when using a presbyopia eye drop. And you could argue that, if you look at our safety data and knowing that aceclidine is very different from pilocarpine, it is actually pupil selective, does not stimulate the ciliary body, and we know that the overstimulation of the ciliary body is what's often connected to the retinal side effects. So we believe that our data shows and MOA shows that we don't have that impact. At the same time, we believe that the FDA will not go as far as to not have that same general, again, recommendation on our label. We actually believe that that's a good thing. One of the questions earlier was what's in it for eye care professionals. I think that eye exam is one; as we know, that's actually a cash pay for most patients if you do a non-dilated eye exam. So that's a positive for eye care professionals and also a positive for patients to just make sure they have their eyes checked out on an annual basis. As we stated or as we found in the survey, it is standard practice. So your annual standard eye exam almost always includes a retina exam. So it's not something that needs to get done in addition. It's not something new, something that all if not most eye care professionals already do. So again, we feel that it's not a hurdle but actually a positive in there.

Great. That's really helpful. Maybe my follow-up, so I guess maybe if you have any updated thinking on ex-US, ex-China opportunities or where that stands, whether you pursue that on your own, look for partnerships, and any sort of gating factors you see there to pursuing that?

Yes. Great question. What we can definitely say is that following our results and frankly now seeing Corxel repeat that ex-US, there's definitely a lot of interest in markets beyond the US and China. We are phasing those discussions in an appropriate way. Obviously, our focus is to make sure that we get to the market in the US in the best way possible. But you can imagine that those discussions are ongoing. Timing of which is a bit more uncertain, as those discussions usually take a little bit of time, and we'll keep the market updated as we progress there.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just two for us. You speak to the recent Phase 3 study readout in China? What's the timeline for approval and how big do you model the opportunity beyond the 400,000 addressable patient population that you've mentioned? And then the second question, maybe if you could speak to commercial launch readiness ahead of the August 2025 PDUFA date. At the time of launch, how many other approved eye drop treatments for presbyopia do you expect on the market? And if you could frame how you expect LNZ100 to be positioned among those competitors? Thank you.

Sure. This is Dan Chevallard. So I'll take the majority of that question and perhaps Marc Odrich can speak to the data if you wanted clarity around that and how we think about it. But how we think about the economics and modeling of the opportunity. First of all, there are $15 million in development milestones that are outstanding, that are in the agreement as well as $80 million in commercial milestones that are to be obtained based upon net sales in the region. In addition to that, royalties in the 5% to 15% range on net sales in China. So those are the economic terms that are in the agreement. The overall projections and revenue, we're not guiding there at this time. And as far as timeline for their approval, we would guide you to keep an eye on their website, where they'll be providing updates on their regulatory guidance. We will not be guiding on their behalf. The first part of your question was about the data specifically from Corxel. So if Marc would like to add any comments, go ahead.

Yes. Thank you, Dan. The data really was very validating. Overall, incredibly similar, very strong data and really no surprises whatsoever. So it's good to see that in a somewhat different world, different population, we had the same result, very clinically similar and relevant. I really don't have any more to say than that.

And then turning to the commercial launch readiness, we're very well positioned from our commercial launch readiness here at LENZ. So as we shared, our commercial leadership team is in place. We've now hired both of our regional directors for our sales team reporting to our Vice President, and we'll continue to build out that sales organization as we progress to the potential approval and PDUFA date next year. Other things that will continue to progress is our commercial operations. We highlighted that we have contracted with our third-party logistics supplier. We'll continue our wholesaler negotiations, again, all working towards that potential approval date. In terms of competition, really we see ourselves as the next product to be approved and it's a presbyopia eye drop with our PDUFA data out there. And really in terms of competition, as the only aceclidine-based eye drop, we see our product as a potential category of one and really the best in class potential as we look towards our potential approval.

To provide some additional insight, VUITY remains available on the market. However, Allergan or AbbVie ceased promoting it roughly nine to twelve months after its launch, despite a strong initial reception and promising early uptake from patients and doctors. The feedback indicated that the product did not meet the desired criteria, as patients are looking for something that acts quickly. The ideal presbyopia treatment should work almost instantaneously after application and ideally be a once-a-day solution, minimizing the hassle of applying drops multiple times during the workday while also being effective for the entire duration of the day. Unfortunately, VUITY did not fulfill these requirements. Recently, another product received approval and will be launching soon. It has a similar clinical profile, being a twice-a-day treatment that may work for some patients but only for a limited period. While this competitor will be entering the market alongside us, we do not anticipate any significantly different results compared to VUITY.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Lachlan Hanbury-Brown with William Blair. Please go ahead.

Okay. Thanks for taking the question and congrats on the progress this quarter. I know you've been running education awareness campaigns with doctors for a while now. But I was wondering sort of how that will escalate or change as you get into launch over the next 10 months? And then somewhat related, that's just one of the three pillars that you outlined to the launch. Wondering what or how much if anything you can do on the other two pillars prior to an approval? Or do they sort of require the approval so you have the brand name and the product to work on access?

Great. Thanks, Lachlan. So I'll take the very first part of the question on what we're currently doing and then Shawn will provide more color on our three key elements of the commercial strategy and what we can do prior to launch, which is actually quite a bit, but we have assembled now a medical sales liaisons team. So obviously, as we all know, that team can be and is out there currently talking to eye care professionals, really sharing the MOA of the product. So how is aceclidine different than pilocarpine? And that's what we continue to hear over and over again that people are not enthusiastic about another pilocarpine product given their experience with pilocarpine and the fact that it's not pupil-selective. But on the contrary, they are very excited about the aceclidine profile. So we educate our MSL team educates doctors on the MOA, on the profile. Then we obviously talk about our clinical data. That team, again, in a medical-to-medical discussion can talk about aceclidine and its clinical data. And thirdly, we'll start to talk about patient populations that initially would be the most attractive to use or to get on the product. Again, that's a medical-to-medical discussion, the one that only the MSL team can have, and that's completely firewall off from the rest of the organization, and Shawn will talk to you about what we can do there prior to approval.

Yes. So as we continue to progress towards that potential approval, our unbranded campaign will continue to accelerate. So currently, the team actually this week is at the American Academy of Optometry at the convention with our unbranded booth and continuing to share that story on those three key pillars. You can expect that we'll be continuing to be present at upcoming conventions as well as continue to grow our presentation opportunities at those conventions as we announced earlier on the call. When you think of those three pillars, that really aligns to the doctors to recommend us and the pre-work we can do on the unbranded side. The patients request us by name, the second pillar and the access, the third pillar. Really just diving a little bit more on the access side. Again, this will be less forward in terms of what people see externally. But on the back-end side, as we continue to highlight on these calls, we're putting a lot of that infrastructure in place well ahead of launch. So that way, when the product is available, very quickly, we can get the product into the consumers' hands so they can actually try it and so the eye care professionals can get comfortable with it. Really, those are the two that we'll focus on ahead of approval, the doctors to recommend us, as well as the access for patients to request us by name. Again, this is something where we want to make sure the doctors have some time with the product before we turn on direct-to-consumer advertising.

Hi. Thanks. Good morning. So in terms of your key targeted presbyopes that you'll be going after when you launch, are you still thinking about certain groups like contact lens wearers, people that had refractive surgery, or people that go to med spas? So how are you thinking about hitting those different groups once you activate the DTC? And then just back to the sampling with aggressive sampling at launch, how long do you think it will take for that transition to usage to occur? So how much is that going to play into the initial revenue ramp? How long will the sampling go before people start using it? Thanks.

Great. So a couple of comments. So looking at those key targets for presbyopia, we commissioned a large market research survey to look at the consumers most interested. I think what's great to see is there's broad interest across the full population of presbyopes. But at the same time, we do want to promote and go directly to groups that over-index on interest for eye drops for presbyopia. As we previously shared, those are people that wear contact lenses, people who have had refractive surgery, and those that have been to a med spa in the past 12 months. So those will be the more primary targets of our direct-to-consumer campaign. And what we'll do is we've partnered and continue to partner with agencies that work on how to promote directly to those core groups. So they look at different data that exists on their buying trends, on the websites they visit. So it will be a very digitally focused way on how we target those. We'll also help target those buying our messaging to doctors. As you see in our unbranded campaign, we're already helping doctors to understand which patients are most interested. Each of one of those groups are north of 10 million people. So those are all very valuable groups that have a lot of people and highlight the potential of an eye drop for presbyopia. In terms of sampling, it's very important to talk about the sampling of this product because it's a little different than some other products. So with this product in terms of sampling, it is a five-day pack. So if you think about our product, it comes in those preservative-free single-dose vials. So with this sample, they're truly getting a five-day supply to use the product. That's very different than, let's say, products where they come in the multi-dose vial where it could be almost a month of supply. So I think that's very important. I think the other important thing here too is these samples will be given to the consumer at the optometrist and ophthalmologist location. So it's not going through your retail pharmacy, right? They will actually receive those samples at the optometrist. They can immediately try it for five days. That's very similar to how contacts work actually, where you get a five-day supply. And then from there, we'll move right into the actual prescription. So we don't see this one having that same effect that other samples do when it's a one-month supply or picked up at a retail pharmacy.

Okay. Great. And then just one more follow-up. Just on the hiring of the sales force. So just confirming that you're not going to do that until after you have the approval? Will you have some contingency offers out there? And then just maybe the size and structure of the sales force, how you're thinking about it? Thanks.

Yes. So just to clarify on the sales force. So the sales force, we are already beginning to put that team in place. So we've already hired our Vice President of Sales. We've hired our two regional directors. We'll continue to build that out ahead of the PDUFA date. So it won't be brought on after PDUFA. They will be brought on before PDUFA. And what we've shared is that our sales force team will be roughly 100 reps calling on approximately 15,000 eye care professionals that actually represent over 85% of all the beauty scripts.

Okay. Okay. All right. Thanks a lot.

Hi. Great. Thank you guys and congrats on the progress towards the potential approval and launch, definitely exciting. We just had one follow-up on the Chinese market. Can you remind us if China had the same prescription experience with VUITY with avoidance of pilocarpine? Or are there greater receptivity in that market for a novel mechanism? Thanks a lot.

Thanks, Matt. So VUITY was not launched anywhere beyond the U.S. So it wasn't therefore VUITY also not launched in China. So it's really an open market there. Product pilocarpine obviously is a product that is known for its glaucoma use. So there's definitely a great opportunity to highlight as our partner will do, just like we do here, the fact that aceclidine is very different from pilocarpine. It has that pupil-selective mechanism. It has that very clean safety profile, at least shown in trials. And obviously, importantly, it works. So very different from pilocarpine, but VUITY was never launched in China.

Thank you guys and congrats again.

Thank you.

That concludes our question-and-answer session, as I am showing no further questions at this time. With that, I will hand the call back over to Eef Schimmelpennink, CEO for closing remarks.

Thank you, Tricia, and thanks everyone for dialing in today. Great to connect with you. And for everyone dialing in, have a great rest of your day. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.