Ami Fadia: Hi, good morning. Congrats on all the progress. I had a couple of questions just around LUMRYZ. Can you sort of quantify what are the net number of patients on treatment currently. And with regards to net price, how has that progressed in first quarter and as you comment on confidence in being able to achieve or potentially beat where the consensus stands today, what are the assumptions you’re making with regards to net price evolution through the course of the year?
Gregory Divis: Richard, do you want to take the first? And Tom, the second?
Richard Kim: Yes. Sure. I mean — yes, thanks, Ami, right now, we’re really clearly focused on our early launch metrics. There’s a lot of dynamics that are going on here. And at this stage at a time, we really believe that RYZUP enrollment in patients who have initiated therapy are really the right view to look at things. We’re going to continue to look at these metrics. And in the future, we will be transitioning to other metrics like patients who are actually on therapy at this time as well. There’s a lot of dynamics at this stage of the launch, but we do tend to shift to that in the future.
Thomas McHugh: Yes. Ami, it’s Tom. So with respect to the second part of your question on net pricing, we’ve consistently pointed to an expectation that on average, patients will generate about $120,000 of net revenue per year. I will share with you, we’re at that point now. The expectation has always been that when we have more patients continuing on therapy. As Richard just noted, the new patients coming in would represent the tipping point, as I’ve called in the past. The other thing that can effect net pricing, one of them is certainly compliance. It’s in where every patient took every — the dose every day of the year and net revenue goes up, of course. But that’s certainly one of the variables. And the other is the gross to net themselves, which as we commented earlier, there were some — we’re not unique in that regard.
Gross in that is a percentage of net revenues — percentage of revenue go up during Q1, that tends to settle down over the course of the rest of the year.
Gregory Divis: Yes. The only comment I’ll add, Amy, if I may. The only comment I’ll add generally on metrics and KPIs. I think we’ve got our eyes set that as the launch continues to mature a little bit, and some of these variables get a little bit more mature that really drive and ultimately result in kind of net average patients or net exit patients on therapy that we will transition to that during the course of this year. What our intention is to do that and have an overlapping quarter where we continue with the same metrics and add in patients on therapy. And then ultimately, I think where we’ll net out over time is just patients on therapy.
Ami Fadia: Got it. If I may ask one more question. As I think about the total number of patient adds to RYZUP over the last couple of quarters, it seems that you’re continuing to see growth in average monthly patient adds per quarter over the last three quarters for which we have the data. Can you just talk about sort of the momentum as you see progressing through the course of the year? I’m sort of seeing kind of an increase by 100 new patient adds per quarter in addition to sort of the previous quarter. And I’m just sort of trying to understand how should we be modeling that trend as we go through 2024?
Gregory Divis: Richard, do you want to comment?
Richard Kim: Yes. It’s a great observation. I think, Ami, first, we’re just very pleased with the strong and steady positive growth we’ve seen with LUMRYZ and really just the feedback that we’ve heard from offices. Over the last couple of quarters, we’ve sort of been commenting sort of on the sort of net sort of over 900 patient ads into price up. It’s hard to predict exactly where this is to going forward. But we’re only reporting on our third quarter a full launch. And we think steady positive growth is a good and positive thing. So that trend of those 900-ish ads every quarter we’d like to continue that trend at a minimum going forward.
Ami Fadia: Thank you.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of David Amsellem with Piper Sanger.
David Amsellem: Just have a couple of questions. So — and I apologize if I missed these, if you mentioned these details. Can you talk to the percentage of LUMRYZ patients who have actually been on Xywav, that’s number one. Number two, can you talk to the lag time between enrollment and RYZUP and initiation of therapy and how that lag time differs between patients who have access and patients who don’t have access or don’t have good access. So that’s the second question. And then the last question is on idiopathic hypersomnia. Is it fair to assume that that’s going to be a randomized withdrawal design similar to the registration study that Jazz were in for Xywav? Thank you.
Gregory Divis: Thanks, David. Richard, maybe you can take the first two.
Richard Kim: Yes, sure. No problem. Thanks, David. So as far as the percentage of the Xywav patients. So the majority of our uptick launch through date right now, the majority of our enrollments and patients initiated are patients who have switched from twice in oxybates and the majority of those are Xywav patients. So if you take more than 50% of overall enrollment, and more than 50% of those, it’s somewhere north of 25% to 30% of the patients who have switched from Xywav. And if you look overall as far as the lag time or the timing to get that initiation through RYZUP for the enrollment into a patient started. To your point, it is very different for the two groups, those who are covered in essence, meet all the prior authorization criteria.
Those are averaging still right about 30 days, about a month for us to get those initiated. And those without coverage are much longer are being measured in months. Several we can still get through in a shorter period of time. The range is quite large. But if you don’t have a coverage policy, those when stuff we take as — those timelines are measured in months and definitely not in weeks. Greg, I guess, I’ll turn it over back to you for IH.
Gregory Divis: Yes. I think Dave, we haven’t said explicitly with the trial design as yet. That will become public certainly over the summer as it gets posted on clinicaltrials.gov and whatnot. But what I will say is that there’s been a handful of companies who have done studies in this area with full support of FDA. We’ll obviously engaged with FDA on this process. And I think it’s fair to say that those proxies are good proxies for how our trial will — what our trial design look like as we go forward.
David Amsellem: That’s very helpful. Thank you.
Gregory Divis: Thanks.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Marc Goodman with Leerink Partners.
