Very typically, those tend to be sustainable and then start morphing. And then actually, it only works in one direction, which is to disappoint your customers and your patients. So, we want to keep that sustained sort of approach in a disciplined way. That’s why you’re seeing the trajectory that you’re seeing. And it’s not, again, like boosted by kind of artificial instruments or anything that was make that look the way it looks. So, those are fundamental differences in terms of — and the second thing is that with this sort of disciplined approach and of course, our pricing coming into play, you would expect then the type of — the velocity at which we’re getting our coverage to ultimately be the throttle or the rate limiter on kind of how we take off in the market.
So, I get the question a lot, hey, are you going to see an inflection all of a sudden based on getting coverage? The short answer is no, because with coverage, it takes time, obviously, for those patients to work their way back into the offices. They’re not all sort of waiting to rush in the second we get coverage. So, I would anticipate the trajectory to kind of continue to grow and build steadily and importantly, the type of access that we have, which is hopefully as easy as possible to position such that it’s, again, as easy to or sort of second nature to write our product. That’s what I believe we’ll continue our sustained growth. So those are some of the sort of key differences, I would say, with respect to kind of how we’re doing things.
And we intend to sort of keep those offers that we have in the market. So steady, sustainable, predictable, I think these are very important for the credibility of both the company, as well as the physician, who ends up kind of articulating this to a patient, because coming back three weeks later and saying, well, I thought it was this and it’s not that. That’s something that I think is it’s a great deal of frustration and the offices and at the patient level, that’s not what we’re doing.
Scott Burrows: Yes. Ken, good to hear from. The only thing I would add, I think, is beyond the access piece that Ken talked about. We talked about product profile. And I think it’s critical that early clinical experience with the product be consistent with what the doctor and the patient have been told, right? That the efficacy needs to be consistent with the data and the tolerability and safety needs to be consistent with the data. And I would say that what we have heard and I think what you and some of the analysts have also heard from your doctor tech is that ZORYVE is matching up to those expectations in terms of both efficacy and tolerability. And we think that, that’s really building a solid foundation. You know from your many years in the field, when doctors are disappointed or patients are disappointed with their experience with a product that can very quickly turn the sentiment on a product, and we’ve seen any number of examples of that in the past.
So, we think it’s critical that the product is delivering on the promise, and that’s what we’re hearing from our customers.
Ken Cacciatore: Great. Thank you, so much.
Operator: Thank you. And our next question is coming from the line of Greg Fraser with Truist. Your line is open.
Greg Fraser: God afternoon, folks. Thanks for taking the questions and congrats on progress. The conversion analogs that you discussed are notable not just for the uptake of the new differentiated class, but also for overall market growth, see the potential for significant volume growth for the topical psoriasis market is or even other nonsteroidals and traction, or do you think the dynamics for the psoriasis market will be more about conversion from steroids and not necessarily significant growth in possible Rxs?
