Marc Goodman: Hi, good morning. Two questions. First, what’s your sense of how many patients are actually on oxybate this past quarter, just in total between all the companies involved? And second of all, can you just give us an update on the litigation that’s still outstanding? Thank you.
Gregory Divis: Yes. Richard, do you want to answer the first one to the cost of our ability.
Richard Kim: Sure. Yes. It’s a great question, Mark. The data is becoming a little more fragmented across the different oxybates as we go forward right now. So I can’t say we have a perfect answer for you today. But what we can say is we definitely see growth in segments that were really not there prior to LUMRYZ coming in the marketplace. A couple of notable ones are in patients who had previously discontinued twice in the oxybate who are now on LUMRYZ. And also that we have people — HCPs writing for LUMRYZ who had never written for an oxybate previously as well. So we are definitely piecing those numbers together through our claims and reports from other oxybate companies. And our overall view is the market is growing. It’s just hard for us to give you an exact number at this stage, but we’re definitely working on that.
Gregory Divis: Yes. And regarding the litigation, I’ll just describe it this way, kind of generally, right? There’s a couple of near-term hearings upcoming. The APA hearing in terms of the suit against FDA is scheduled for this Friday at 2:00 p.m. in the D.C. Federal Court. As noted previously, we intervened alongside FDA and the Department of Justice. And we’ll make our own arguments in support of the government this Friday. So that’s the APA status. In terms of the Delaware patent litigation, obviously, we had the ruling a couple of months back on — from the jury and the royalties and whatnot. The next stop there is a hearing on June 4th. And that’s along this process in Delaware. So we’ll be glad to get those two hearings behind us and continue to move forward with our launch and outside of those comments, there probably isn’t much else to say right now in terms of what’s near term on the litigation.
Marc Goodman: Thanks.
Richard Kim: Thanks Marc.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Ash Verma with UBS.
Ashwani Verma: Hi, thanks for taking our questions. Sorry, I’m joining a little bit late, so maybe if something is repeated, let me know. On this first question, like, can you clarify like on this 1Q pricing or inventory dynamics of what you saw with LUMRYZ? It seems the patient adds were pretty encouraging, but the revenue came in a little bit lighter versus how the patient numbers are. And then secondly, so Jas noted on the first quarter call that there are some of these patients that came off Xyrem because it’s not in formularies. And for those patients who are in transition, do you think LUMRYZ can be an attractive option now. How much of these patients do you think you stand to benefit from during this year? Thanks.
Gregory Divis: Thanks, Ash. Tom, can you take pricing and inventory? And maybe, Richard, you can take the other comment.
Thomas McHugh: Yes, hi, Ash. I’d say that pricing inventory came in as we expected it to. I commented on earlier question that average net revenue per patient, we’re currently annualizing to about $120,000 per year. The inventory in the channel has consistently been at about a month, and that’s going back to when we first launched. So really no surprises there relative to revenue.
Richard Kim: Yes. And as far as the changes in formulary, yes, there clearly were several changes in formulary in many cases where the branded toys, sodium oxybate and/or the AG were no longer being covered. So those patients have definitely been a focal point for us, and they’ve been going on for a while. So we definitely see that as a unique opportunity going forward here with some of the payers as well for LUMRYZ.
Ashwani Verma: Got it. Thank you.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Oren Livnat with H.C. Wainwright.
Oren Livnat: Thanks for taking the question. I just want to build on others. We’ve heard from piecing together Jas and yours commentary today, it does seem clear that you are seeing market growth now that you’re driving some market growth from where the market was before you entered. And I’m just wondering going forward, now you’re at a 50-50 mix, where do you see that playing out in mix as you go forward? Because I’m seeing Xyrem is highly eroded now, right? And a lot of those patients have moved to both the AG and the highway Bo and your product. Do you need to take patients away from Xywav to meet your targets? Or are you feeling like through this year, your comfort versus estimates rest on your opportunities in other buckets?
Gregory Divis: Richard, do you have any — maybe opening comments on it?
Richard Kim: Yes. It’s a great perspective. So first, we’re just very pleased to sort of see continued demand for all three patient segments, the switches, the previously discontinued and Naives. Going forward, we anticipate to still have robust representation from all three segments. And as we talked before, so yes, there was a little bit of an increase in naive patients. But the proposition for switch patients is as strong as it’s ever been. If they’ve been on a twice not least sodium oxybate twice nightly mixed salt version. So we do anticipate demand coming from all three patient segments going forward. The composition may switch a little bit over time here, but we do definitely anticipate all three segments being represented for the rest of this year.
Oren Livnat: Okay. And I was hoping, I don’t off the call, so I apologize if I misheard, but I thought I heard you say 700 patient starts in the quarter. I wasn’t — if I heard correctly, I don’t believe that’s a metric you’ve given us in the past. Is that — does that mean new patients initiated on paid therapy? And do we know what that $700 million on top of what before, I’m trying to see if we can piece together a patient on therapy number of [indiscernible]?
Gregory Divis: Richard, do you want to clarify?
