Good morning, and welcome to the Liquidea Corporation Full Year 2025 Financial Results and Corporate Update Conference Call. My name is Josh, and I will be your operator today. All participants are currently in listen-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Instructions for joining the queue will be provided at that time. Please note that today's call is being recorded. I'll now turn the call over to Jason Adair, Chief Business Officer.

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. It's my pleasure to welcome you to our full year 2025 Financial Results and Corporate Update Call. Joining me today are Dr. Roger Jess, Chief Executive Officer, Michael Cassetta, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Dr. Rajiv Sagar, Chief Medical Officer, Scott Mumaw, Chief Commercial Officer, and Rusty Schundler, our General Counsel. Before we begin, please note that today's discussion will include forward-looking statements, including statements regarding future results, product performance, and ongoing clinical or commercial activities. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially. For further information, please refer to our filings with the SEC, available on our website. Please also note that our earnings release and our commentary includes non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most comparable GAAP measures can be found in our earnings release. With that, I'll turn the call

over to Roger. Roger? Thanks, Jason, and good morning, everyone. As we look back on 2025 and forward into 2026, what stands out is the rapid establishment of our preferred product profile paired with precise execution. Last year demonstrated that liquidity could launch, scale, and reach profitability quickly within only 120 days of launch, in fact. Most importantly, we demonstrated that physicians were willing to rapidly change range prescribing behavior when presented with a new differentiated option in utopia. The benefits of its product profile, peak lung delivery, low effort device, and wide dose range are taking hold in clinical practice and help place utopia as one of the top specialty drug launches over the past five years across all therapeutic categories. This did not happen by chance, but with purpose, as the category defining the SENT study data clearly set a new data-driven standard for therapeutic success. The momentum of 2025 has clearly carried into 2026. As of February 28, we have received more than 3,600 unique patient referrals and shipped therapy for more than 2,900 patients since launch, maintaining our robust trajectory. While others have observed stagnation from supposed seasonality, that has not been our initial experience as we continue on the same toward trajectory without decline, which would suggest that our percent market share is rising and that we are capturing a disproportionate number of new patient starts for inhaled prostacyclins as the best-in-class option. This steady forward momentum is being achieved across PAH and PHILD, with new patient prescriptions roughly equal now between the two indications. Patient starts remain at 75% naive to 25% transitions from other prostacyclins importantly breadth and depth are also improving in a measurable way we have increased total prescribers to around 860 as centers gain confidence and usage expands in the community a key indicator of that depth is that roughly 25 percent of physicians have already referred five or more patients which is exactly the pattern you want to see when a therapy evolves in becoming the standard of choice rather than an initial trial if 2025 was the start of the full commercial phase 2026 begins the full clinical exploration of what may be possible with utopia and l606 our development strategy is built on principles we have understood for a long time with prostacyclin exposure drives efficacy tolerability drives durability and convenience drives compliance each of these elements is critical to the totality of therapeutic experience and speaks to the high bar that eutrepia has quickly established around safety efficacy and convenience this year we will look to further cement this best-in-class product profile via the initiation of multiple new studies including studies that will transition patients from oral and inhaled process psychom therapies and a study with of new combinations like adjunctive studies with satracept that we hope will further advance the changing standard of care further we will work to initiate new studies to support expansion into additional disease areas such as systemic sclerosis associated raynaud's phenomenon and ph copd where high unmet but addressable need remains and of course we will look to move the therapeutic needle even further via the advancement of our next generation l606 pivotal study with a study initiated in multiple territories and enrollment expected to begin in the following quarters. Importantly, this disciplined expansion of critical evidence will be funded by cash flow from operations and will help grow the value of the franchise and the company. With that, I will turn it over to Mike.

Thank you, Roger, and good morning, everyone. Our financial results are a direct reflection of two things, sustained patient growth and retention, and disciplined execution. Over the last nine months, as the referral and start curves have moved higher, so have revenue, margin contribution, and cash generation. For the full year 2025, Eutrepia generated $148.3 million in net product sales, including $90.1 million in the fourth quarter, representing 74% growth in net product sales over the third quarter .25. The fourth quarter also marked our second consecutive quarter of increasing profitability with not only non-GAAP adjusted EBITDA of $27.3 million, but also $14.6 million of net income. We ended the year with approximately $190.7 million in cash and cash equivalents, having generated $33 million of positive cash flow in the fourth quarter alone. Liquidia is now operating as a cash generating growth engine. That is not aspirational. It is visible in the quarterly numbers and on the balance sheet. Roger, back to you.

Thanks, Mike. We're confident in 2026 and the years ahead as we focus on building a durable franchise with increasing patient preference and a clear path towards at least a billion-dollar franchise in 2027 with increasing growth in the years beyond. With that, operator,

please open the line for questions. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star 1-1 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 1-1 again. One moment for questions. Our first question comes from Ryan Deschner with Raymond James. You may proceed.

Thanks for the question, and congratulations on the, you know, impressive continued launch so far for you, Trepia. I'm curious, you know, given the greater than 2,900 patient starts your reporting today, where do you think this puts you in terms of current market share, And how are you thinking about continued growth in the first half of 2026? I'm going to have a follow-up.

Yeah, thanks, Ryan. I appreciate you joining the call this morning. So it's hard to give, you know, an accurate percent market share from a patient number standpoint, given the competitor doesn't disclose their numbers. So what we have done is talk about – we've done an analysis based on revenue that maybe, Mike, if you don't mind going through that speaks to this question.

Yeah, thanks, Roger. And thanks, Ryan, for the question. You know, to give everyone an idea, you know, inhaled for profitable revenue for Q4 was approximately $550 million. And as Roger said, despite what our competitors have talked about with seasonality in Q4 in their business and their corresponding decrease in revenue from Q3, that's still an increase of 5% revenue from Q3 of 2025. You know, the fact that we had an 80% increase in revenue quarter over quarter means that we're accounted for more than 100% of market growth in Q4. And again, as Roger said, that represents a disproportionate share of new patient starts, along with a fair share of switches from Tybaso. You know, in terms of what that share is, you know, in Q3, we had about, from a revenue point of view, 10% of market revenue, that increased to 17% in Q4. So we're seeing a significant increase quarter over quarter. As Roger mentioned, the 2,900 patients starts in just nine months since launch. That is through February 28th. So we're seeing that continued momentum that we've seen in Q4 in the first two-thirds of Q1 of 2026 and feel very excited and, you know, bullish on our ability to continue a successful launch.

Thanks, Mike. And Ryan, just to add, you know, I don't – it's been very consistent in terms of trajectory, and we don't see any impediment going forward this year with regard to any change in that trajectory. You know, as we mentioned in the prepared remarks, you know, the depth of prescriptions is increasing. We're working on improving, you know, the duration and durability so that scripts stack upon scripts so that the revenue growth remains. And I believe you had another question, Ryan?

Yeah, thanks for that. With the new outcomes data from a competitor that came out recently, what was your take on the potential impact of a new addition of the oral process cyclone receptor agonist mix on eutropia launch?

Yeah, I mean, it's a good question. And, you know, first of all, congratulate, you know, therapeutics on a successful trial with a ip1 selective uh and agonist um i think for for us it really doesn't have any impact at all um if you look at it it's it's more like uptrawi than not i mean they're both in the nanomolar range i don't i think potency wise they're generally similar their target binding profile is highly selective just to the ip1 agonist and i think the results are similar. You're seeing an effect long-term over years in clinical worsening with a very muted effect on sentimentology, which primarily, if you look at six-minute walk distance, which they didn't disclose, they said it was significant, but my guess is it's muted. And as you know, with Uptravi, they had no statistical significance or clinical significantly change in six-minute walk distance. You know, in these patients, when you're talking about a first edition of Prostocyclone, the patients are symptomatic and looking for improvement. So, you know, I don't think, like, the oral therapies just aren't going to give that bang for the buck. What they are going to bang is the GI. And if you look at the AE profile that was shown, you could see, you know, a high degree of GI side effects, diarrhea, emesis, and nausea. So, you know, I think it's more of the same and all the results that Mike just talked about in terms of our launch trajectory and success are in the presence of Uptravi being in the market. So it's really, to me, it's really an interchange between how Relenopeg will compete with Uptravi in the marketplace once it's launched. So, you know, not that concerning. I think also if you look at their box in Whiskerplot, while they did have success across a lot of different subgroups, one thing that was not differentiated was those. So it doesn't seem like there's an ability to dose to better outcome there. So what you get is what you see is what you get based on probably close to the initial start dose. So, again, more of the same, and I don't think it will be impactful in any way in terms of how we view our business. Thanks for the question.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Julian Harrison with BTIG. You may proceed.

Hi. Congrats on the progress, and thank you for taking the questions. Roger, I'm sure you're very familiar with soft mist inhalers. Can you help us better understand the differentiation potentially of Eutrepia, maybe L606 as well, relative to a soft mist inhaler that was recently announced by another company in the space? And then as a follow-up, regarding the PAH versus PHLD split of patients on Eutrepia, should we still be thinking about that on approximately a three-to-one basis? How do you see that maybe evolving over time?

Yes, I'll answer the – and maybe ask Scott to help me with the second question first. So, we've moved to pretty equal split now between PAH and PHILD. You know, there's clearly more white space opportunity in PHILD. And I think as we – one of the things we're doing is we're going to grow our sales force significantly by a third. So, we're going to have a larger share of voice. And the purpose of that larger share of voice is to get into the community, particularly into the PHILD space, to continue to penetrate that market, drive awareness, and either drive starts or drive referrals. So, you know, I think over time that should become an increasing value proposition. But in PAH, don't forget, you know, we have not only the inhaled market opportunity, but we're also going after the oral and parental opportunity. So, on aggregate revenue numbers, they may appear similar in terms of the business opportunity, but in pure patient numbers, I think PHLD has the opportunity to be more successful. Scott, do you have any other questions or any other responses that you'd like to add?

No, I would completely just agree with everything Roger said. It's been interesting to see PH get off to a fast start. But as we mentioned, PHILD has come on strong in, you know, about half. Where it's going to go from here, you know, I think PHILD, we know PHILD is definitely the bigger opportunity long term, as Roger called it, the white space. But there's still a load of opportunity in PAH. So, you know, where it'll settle out eventually, I think PHILD definitely will be bigger. But there's a lot of growth in both buckets right now to continue in the near term.

Yeah, great. So, again, Julian, you know, there's multi-billion dollar opportunities in each indication. So, we're excited about the opportunity that Eutropia and then subsequently L606 will have in these markets. With regard to the SMI, I know it's a seminal question for everybody and sort of front of mind because there were some pretty hyperbolic comments made about it. But what I would say is I think their commentary in general was it sounded very much to me that it was validating of utopia because it sounds like they're trying to develop a product that has the product profile of utopia. So, and what is that? It's an easy-to-use, low-resistance device with high portability. There's mitigation of cough, but for us, it's specifically done view of the print formulation of engineered particles in the lower end of the restful range. And then dosing flexibility due to that tolerance, which then parlays, as we've clearly shown in the ASCENT study, that we can rapidly and aggressively dose patients to two or four times the PATH standard with absolutely no exacerbation in cough in a population of PHILD patients who have a baseline cough and a high predilection for exacerbation of cough when they take inhalation therapy. So, you know, Eutrepia is porting an ideal product profile. What Mike described is we're clearly getting a lot, if not most, of the NRX share, and our TRX share is catching up over time. And the SMI, to me, is just a repurposed opportunity. So, if you go back to the 793 patent that has a priority date of 2006 and look at example one in particular, it talks about there a single-dose acute administration of troposinol using an SMI, and in that same patent, there's a single acute dose with the ultrasonic nebulizers That is Tyveso nebulized, Tyveso as we know it today. And what that showed is that in PAH patients with a single dose, low dose, the cough was prevalent, and it described the MMAD or the median diameter of those particles to be in the 4 to 5 micron range. So nothing different. So you're giving Tyveso a solution. You're not doing anything to improve its tolerability or penetration to the lower airway. you're just using a different way to present an aerosolized mist. So it doesn't really matter if you use a soft mist inhaler. Yes, that's probably better from a portability standpoint, but that will be it. It will still present itself clinically in terms of how it behaves as Pibaso nebulized. So, you know, we don't really view it as competitive. I think, you know, you'd have to ask the competitor to explain the comments they made around tolerability. They've said they still have to do bioequivalence. So whatever data they have, my guess is it's just single-dose acute studies in normal volunteers, which is a very bad proxy for what may happen in patients with a high predilection of cough. And the truth to that statement is, remember, when they launched Tyvazo DPI, they had no data in patients. It was done on bioequivalents in PHILD, and you've seen the issues they've had through the National Jewish State in particular with the DPI and PHILD, and now it seems like they've capitulated and feel that DPIs are now not useful, at least their DPI, and they're trying to pivot to another methodology. but I don't see that methodology as providing any forward-looking benefit. So, that's kind of like my quick view on it. I know, Rajiv, you have some broader statements around perspective because this has been tried before in other markets. And if I could, I'd ask you to speak to those instances, if you will.

Thanks, Rajiv. So, I think just – I just want to highlight some key points here. I think the signature of the SMI was primarily derived from the Spireva respirat, and that was done at a time when the CFC propellants were being removed, and also there was a patent issue from that company, and they compared it to Spireva Hand Healer, which is the dry powder formulation. And at that time, the hand inhaler was the highest resistance device ever to be developed in patients with asthma and COPD, which, you know, is tens of millions of patients. The only device that has a higher resistance than the hand inhaler to date is actually the Tevyesa DPI device that's used in PH and PHLD. But what's really interesting is with all the studies done, comparing the softness inhaler to a dry powder inhaler using the same formulation and disregard was theotropium. The SMI has never been shown to change the clinical efficacy, the pharmacokinetics, and most importantly, has never been shown to improve or modify safety and or tolerability, inclusive of the concerns for cough. So I just want to highlight as what Roger spoke to that SMI does not port any substantial benefit besides the portability itself.

All right. Thank you, Rajiv. Operator, next question, please.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Amy Lee with Jeffries. You may proceed.

Hey. Thanks so much for taking your question, and congrats on the momentum. So, when we look at your path to the $1 billion revenue target in 2027 that you laid out, Our math suggests that implies sustained patient as from here. So is that the right way to think about the trajectory? And more importantly, what gives you confidence in maintaining your current pace in the next couple of years? How much visibility do you have into the patient funnel and where the patient's coming from? And then how – and are you still confident in that number in light of kind of the potential emerging competitive dynamics like SMI?

So I'll ask Mike to speak to some of how we get there, at least from a revenue calculation standpoint. But as we just said, Amy, we don't see any influence from the SLI. I think, again, it's going to be Tyveso in perhaps a more portable format from using jet nozzles to create aerosolized particles. But as I said, they're going to be polydispersed. They're going to cause cough. They're going to have titration issues. So I don't really see that impacting us in any other way. And as you're noting in the competitors' revenue, that the nebulized business is decreasing, mostly because we're beginning to take that share away. So I think more of that will continue to happen. Mike, do you want to talk about kind of how we see ourselves continuing to climb the mountain towards a greater – at least a billion dollars in revenue in 2027?

Yeah, Amy, thanks for the question. I mean, if you just look at, you know, start with what I talked about earlier, you know, the market for the quarter was over $500 billion, which means it's about a two, it's already on it. The inhaled to profitable market is already a $2 billion market. You then talk about, you know, we've, our, our share of that revenue has increased considerably quarter over quarter. We believe that will continue as well. Then you look at the opportunity that we talked about in PAH with the $2 billion oral opportunity, where we believe that there will be significant opportunity for us to gain significant share from that. So that's another $2 billion opportunity just within PAH that we see. And then as Scott and Roger had said earlier, we're just scratching the surface in PHILD. We're enhancing our sales force. We're getting more penetration. We're getting further into the community. So when you look at the overall opportunity, a current $2 billion market opportunity in Hale-Troposnol, plus the oral opportunity, plus the enhanced white space in PHILD, we feel very bullish in our ability to continue on this trajectory and continue on this path to get us to what, you know, as Roger had said at JPM, a billion-dollar, Eutropia being a billion-dollar product in 2027.

Yeah, I think the other thing, Amy, too, great response, Mike, is, look, we're doing directed studies that we're going to transition patients from the competitive age, either oral or inhaled, and show the benefits of moving those patients to direct tolerability and efficacy. So, you know, all of these things just will continue to build a portfolio and a suite of evidence and data-driven proof that eutrophia is the best-in-class and first-in-choice product. Operator, next question, please.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Serge Belanger with Needham. You may proceed.

First question on the legal front, any new updates or developments that you can share with us? And then secondly, regarding payer access, I think you reported another 85% prescription to patient CERT conversion. Just curious how that number varies across the Medicare and commercial segment and, I guess, what additional coverage work is required. I know you had coverage from three major commercial payers, but what additional payers need to come online over the remainder of 2026? Thank you.

Hey, good morning, Serge. Thanks for the question. So I'll take the legal and then I'll pass it to Mike for payer. So, really nothing new from what we said at J.P. Morgan's search. So, you know, just a reminder for those who may be newer to the story that the oral hearing was in June. Post-trial briefings were completed in August. So, we're now approaching nine months from trial and seven months from the post-trial briefing. So, we do think we're in the sweet spot for when an opinion should and could be rendered. But, obviously, it's been taken longer than we all expected. So, we can't really probabilitize on when it actually will come down. What I would say is, you know, we remain very confident in the arguments that we made, and we strongly believe that we should win, and the case should read out favorably to us. We acknowledge there's a lot of potential options here or outcomes, but regardless of what happens, we're prepared for any and all outcomes. So really nothing new to state today other than we remain confident in our position and look forward to hearing from the judge in due time. So, Mike, if you'll talk to PayerAccess, please.

Yeah, Serge, great to hear from you. I think, you know, where we are with Payer and PullThrough is just another example of how we've executed on this launch. You know, Scott and his team have done a magical job. The fact that we've maintained 85% plus of PullThrough from really the very early stages of the launch is just simply staggering. And we continue on that pace. We've also said from the beginning of launch was our goal was to make sure that patients have choice, have a choice if they want to use Eutrepia. And what we can say is we've achieved that. And we continue to work through our pull through, making sure that we provide a suite of services to patients to make sure that if they want Eutrepia, they can get it. And I think that's evident in that pull through percentage. And we don't see any, you know, any change in that coming. And our goal will always be to improve that as we move forward. But I really think we're already in a best-in-class state being at 85-plus percent pull-through percentage.

Operator, next question.

Thank you. Our next question goes from Ben Burnett with Wells Fargo. You may proceed.

Hey, thanks very much, and congrats on all the progress. I just wanted to see if I could get a little bit of color on some of the launch dynamics into the first quarter. anything you can say kind of around inventory, stocking trends, or kind of the refill rate that

you're seeing? Yeah, Mike, if you wouldn't mind commenting on that. Yeah, Ben, thanks for the

question. You know, as we said in our press release, and Roger reiterated already, we've already had a strong, you know, January and February when it comes to both new patient starts and referrals were staying on the exact same trajectory we were on in q4 um you know we've often gotten questions from from analysts and and from comments from our competitors about seasonality um we've seen nothing but increases across the board and and as we showed today we continue to see those increases so um you know as we've always said um you know as roger had said we are still very confident as we move through the rest of Q1 into Q2 and are on our path to be a billion-dollar product in 2027. Now, as it relates to inventory and stocking, I think we're now at the point of the launch nine months in where we've really normalized, and I don't expect there to be any significant swings now. Especially distributors can make decisions at end of quarters that we don't have influence But at the end of the day, we are tracking well. Our demand is extremely strong. And as a result, we feel very confident in the revenue as we move forward. That's extremely helpful.

And I guess just also regarding the systemic sclerosis RP program, I thought that was interesting. Can you maybe walk us through kind of the evidence in support of Trapostonella and kind of what your path forward is there?

Yeah, I'd love to. So, Rajiv, if you wouldn't mind talking about the Raynaud's program?

Yeah, sure. Thanks for the question. So, obviously, you know, systemic sclerosis is a rare condition overall, and obviously by the nature of their actual topic of systemic means they have multiple disorders affecting multiple organ dysfunctions, inclusive of the most deadly, which is PAH and PHLD. And despite that, their single most complaints of what drives their quality of life is the problem that occurs with Raynaud's phenomenon, which occurs in at least, you know, and it's debatable, but somewhere between 90% to 95% of all patients with cystic sclerosis or scleroderma. The reason why we think we have good rationale is that actually many of the drugs that have been approved for pulmonary hypertension have been studied, specifically on the end complication of Raynaud's phenomenon, which is known as digital ulcers, inclusive of prostacyclins. In fact, in the European and the U.S. guidelines for the management of renal phenomenon, aldoprost and or flowlan is used as salvage therapy in the event that patients are recalcitrant to treatments such as calcium channel blockers and or even PD5 inhibitors, which is used off-label. So that just shows that the prostacycline class in and of itself is able to prevent worsening ischemic episodes, therefore potentially leading to avoiding issues of gangrene and or amputation of these digits that's affecting these patients. One of the challenges oral truprocinol was studied in condition, again, to try to modify the digital ulcers. The problem with that was the trial was fraught with tolerability issues and patients coming off because of the intolerability of oral triprosinol, again, highlighting that if we can provide eutrophia for these patients, we know that the tolerability profile of the inhaled triprosinol is significantly improved. We also know from our data that we can dose to a significantly high level, ensuring that we obtain appropriate pharmacokinetic profile to modify the disease. And so, you know, we look forward to initiating, you know, our Phase 2A program in systemic sclerosis RP here near the end of the year.

Great. Thank you, Rajesh. Next question, Operator?

Thank you. Our next question goes from Jason Gerberry with Bank of America. You may proceed.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Two for me, just first on PAH, wanted to just get your view on sort of the role for an inhaled in the PAH setting. It's a bit confusing. And so, on the one hand, you know, your competitor flag that maybe inhalation approaches are going to see a diminished role in PAH. And then when we talk to KOLs, what they're saying is they're not putting new starts on Uptravi, but yet when we look at IQVIA data, the Uptravi NRX look pretty stable. So there's a lot of conflicting data points in this, and it's a dynamic space. You know, Winn-Rivera is now getting used more in newly diagnosed PAH. So how do you see this dynamic where the role of, say, oral versus inhaled prostacyclines in PAH? And then my second question for Mike, just when I look at fourth quarter numbers, It looks like really good revenue recognition per patient to take the average 3Q number versus the 4Q number over sales or under sales, I should say. So, when we look ahead to 2026, it doesn't seem like that there's going to be a huge gross to net adjustment in the numbers relative to the patients and the revenue capture, but wanted to get your perspective there.

Yeah, thanks for the question, Jason. So I'll speak to the PAH issue in terms of oral versus inhaled. And I think the field is moving, the paradigm is shifting to where patients aren't going to be willing to accept off-target effects any longer. And because the burden of those off-target effects can be as bad as the burden of the disease in terms of impact on daily living. So the orals, clearly, if you look at the frequency of AEs related to the GI toxicities, they're significant, and they occur daily. They occur over hours in the day. And then if you don't – and if you then pair that with minimal symptomatic benefit to the disease, that benefit to risk exchange is not a good negotiation for the patient. So, I think going forward, particularly as we continue to evolve data around the ability of utopia to dose titrate, drive effect, and really eradicate off-target effects to the GI or from parental issues related to septicemia and septicine site pain and irritation, they're really there's that nobody would be willing to make a trade-off because now you can get the symptomatic benefits without sacrificing your daily living through these off-target effects. So, you know, I do think, and our competitors said it when they spoke about their SMIs, like they're, you know, people are tired now of off-target effects and they're, you know, people, what you want to see is a better benefit to risk profile, which Eutropia provides, and then it is a four times a day therapy, so that would be the only sort of negative there. we're going to negate that negative with L606. So the importance of that study is it will achieve in a different way through mycosomal encapsulation all the benefits of utropia. But now we'll do it in a twice-a-day format, and it will also minimize peak to trough excursions so that trough benefit is steady to the peak benefit. So, you know, what we're trying to do at this company is really improve patient outcome, have patients feel better. remove these off-target effects and then get them to a point in time where they can take an easy portable therapy without risk. So I think we're well on our way to doing that. I think clearly eutropia has become the preferred inhaled and as we continue to sort of cannibalize share from orals, you'll see more and more of that. So again, very excited across the board and I think that's it for the pH to oral. So maybe, Mike, if you'll talk about the fourth quarter dynamics.

Yeah, Jason, thanks for the questions. So as we look at our growth to net from 2025 to 2026, as we had said in previous quarters, working on access in the back half of the year, we had some new-to-market blocks that had existed on the commercial front. These were slowly removed. The result of that is going to be twofold. One, we will pay more rebates on more of our business as we move forward in 2026, but that will be offset by having more patients having access. So, you know, so what I would say is, you know, as we have kept saying, we are extremely confident in our trajectory as we move into 26 and into 27. But what I would say is maybe there'll be a very small incremental increase in our growth to net. But that is, you know, it goes to our goal of making sure patients have choice and patients have access. So we will have achieved that goal, and I think we will sit at a place where we're very comfortable and can still achieve our goals in 2026 and, as we've said, being a billion-dollar product in 2027.

Thanks, Mike. Aubrey, I think it's time for one more question.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Gaurav Mani with Lifestyle Capital. You may proceed.

Hey, good morning, everyone. Congrats on the great print and continued strong launch of Eutrepea. Just two for me, if that's okay. Can the team give some color on that, you know, one in four process cyclin transition patients and kind of what bucket of process cyclin therapy, i.e. oral versus inhaled, these patients are coming from? And then secondly, on the new exploratory Eutrepea trials, can you just describe how these are expected, or if they are, I guess, to be label-enhancing.

Yeah. So maybe I'll ask Scott to talk about sort of how the transition market, kind of the demographics of that, and then Rajiv, he'll speak to the benefits of the trials that we're doing.

Sure. So as we've said, you alluded to, we've said that 75% of the patients are neuter prostacyclin and then 25% are switch. Obviously, in PHID, that's, you know, there aren't other options. So those switches are coming from inhaled. In PAH, what we said is that about 30% of the 25% in PAH are coming from the orals. And then the bulk of those are coming, the rest of those are coming from inhaled. Now, we are starting to see more patients transition off of perineurals onto eutrophia. I don't think that's going to necessarily become material in terms of the switches, But it is interesting and shows that in the future we'll probably kind of encroach on the perineural space. But, you know, when I'm out there in the market, I can tell you that the enthusiasm around using eutropia instead of the oral prostacyclins, for all the reasons Roger elucidated earlier, is only growing. And so we think that, you know, whether they're switching the patient off of an oral prostacyclin or they're using it instead, using eutropia instead of an oral prostacycline, I think, you know, again, I think there's a big opportunity for that force.

All right. Thank you, Scott. So, Rajiv, if you'll speak to the trials, please.

Yeah, thanks for the question. So, you know, listen, I firmly believe we're entering into a decade and beyond of an inhaled renaissance here in PAHN and PHLD. And I think eutropia is leading the charge today, and L606 is going to definitely lead it tomorrow. In that regard, the trials that we are purposely conducting is defining how to switch from the role of Prostanoid to Eutropia. I think we highlighted a few things on this call. Number one, it is very clear that practitioners across the board are very interested in delivering the most tolerable drug. I think this has been highlighted by the addition of Cetaracept to the armamentarium, which which has, I think, completely negated and limited the utility of parenteral therapies at this time. We have several large anecdotal cases of eutropia being used acutely in the hospital. And to combine that also with Cetatricept to maximize the benefit of that combination. In regards to oral prosenoids, we plan to switch studies from Celexipeg to eutropia. It would detail to the practitioners how to do that effectively and safely. And also, again, the advantage of eutropia is that we can dose two to four times that typically what is used traditionally by Tyveso. In those studies, we'll also highlight some of the hemodynamic capacity of eutropia, which I think would be very exciting. In regards to label enhancing, I think we reserve the right to always present our data to the agency for consideration for label discussions in that regard. And then finally, I think we've highlighted, just to highlight again, the citaterocept study. The purpose of the study is to transition patients that are on citaterocept in combination with either forms of prostanoid inclusive of parenteral and oral and transition those off those therapies safely and effectively to eutropia. So, those are the studies that we are keenly working across to initiate this year.

Thank you, Rajiv. Very well said, both from you and Scott. So, I'll close by just saying, as you can hear, liquidity is all in for our patients and trying to provide better and better opportunities, both now and in the future. And we look forward to speaking with everyone again in May when we update you on our Q1.

thank you everyone thank you this concludes the conference thank you for your participation you may not disconnect