argenx SE

with the presentation for today's webcast. Before we begin on slide two, I'd like to remind you that forward-looking statements may be presented during this call. These may include statements about our future expectations, clinical developments, regulatory timelines, the potential success of our product candidates, financial projections, and upcoming milestones. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these statements. Our GenX is not under any obligation to update statements regarding the future or to conform those statements in relation to actual results unless required by law. I'm joined on the call today by Tim Van Haramiren, Chief Executive Officer, Carl Gubitz, Chief Financial Officer, and Karen Massey, Chief Operating Officer. Luke Trojan, our Chief Medical Officer, will be available during Q&A. I'll now turn the call to Tim.

Thank you, Beth, and welcome, everyone. I'll begin on slide number three. At the start of the year, we set a bold growth agenda anchored in our long-term roadmap for value creation, Vision 2030. Today, FlipGuard is delivering meaningful impact in two blockbuster indications with MG and CIDP. Our pre-filled syringe is now approved in most major markets, fueling new patient and prescriber adoption. We've also made significant pipeline progress and will enter 2026 with three phase three assets. At the same time, we are investing in our next wave of growth with four new molecules in phase one development by year end and a vibrant immunology innovation program driving future opportunities. Slide four, today I'm joining you from AANEM in San Francisco where we are engaging with the neurology community and sharing new data that reinforce our commitment to continuous innovation in rare neuromuscular diseases. I would like to briefly highlight several key data sets presented this week that underscore our leadership in GMG. ThriftGuard has set a high bar in GMG, driving rapid, deep, and sustained responses. Our gold standard for patient impact is for patients to achieve minimum symptom expression, or MSC, New data from the ADAPT sub-Q study showed that up to 60% of patients reached MSC, with 83% maintaining it for at least eight weeks, highlighting the durability of RevGard responses. We also know that steroid reduction is recognized as a critical outcome for both patients and prescribers. Building on earlier data showing meaningful steroid reductions with RevGard at six months, We now see this sustained through 18 months, with over 55% of safeguard patients reducing steroids to below 5 mg per day. We also present the data from the ADAPT-serum study, which met its primary endpoint, showing significant improvement in MGADL at week 4 compared to placebo. Importantly, we observed increasingly pronounced and clinically meaningful improvements in both MJADL and QMG scores across subsequent treatment cycles, in the overall population, and across all patient subgroups. These positive results support our plan to file for a label expansion that includes all three seronegative subgroups, MUSC positive, LRP4 positive, and triple seronegative. This is a landmark moment in advancing our scientific understanding of MG as the results indicate that pathogenic IgG autoantibodies drive disease regardless of antibody status. Additionally, we continue to showcase the strength of our adhered data in CIDP while introducing new HEOR insights that highlight the severe disease burden, long diagnostic journey, and the urgent need for innovation for these patients. Slide five. We now have three first-in-class molecules in Phase III development, abgartigamot, mpacitrubart, and Nargenix 119, each representing a true pipeline in a product opportunity. We continue to maximize the FCRN opportunity by advancing abgartigamot in severe IgG-mediated autoimmune diseases. while building the future of this target with the next generation of molecules. As we grow our understanding of F-CNN biology, we're building up our capabilities to address patient needs in therapeutic areas beyond neurology. We're also reinforcing our leadership in neurology with M-PASI-PROBART, now in phase three development for MMN and CIDP. With its selective approach, blocking C2 at the intersection of the classical and lectin pathways, and POSIPROBART is uniquely positioned to address a broad range of autoimmune diseases. Lastly, ARGENIX 119, our musk agonist, has now advanced to Phase III in CMS. It is designed to restore neuromuscular junction function, opening the door to indications like ALS and SMA, and underscoring our commitment to pioneering new biology in high unmet need indications. Pipeline and the product molecules are designed with built-in optionality, giving us the flexibility to prioritize indications and allocate resources to programs where we can deliver the greatest patient impact. In line with this strategy, we've made three disciplined development decisions. First, we stopped development of mpaciprobar in dermatomyositis due to operational challenges with study enrollment. That said, DM remains an area of commitment for us. This is a population that has seen little innovation, an unmet need further validated by the strong pace of DM enrollment in our Alkevia study with Avgartigemot. Second, we decided not to advance Avgartigemot into a registration study in lupus nephritis based on the results of the Phase II data. Epgard-Digimod was well tolerated and safety in line with established profile. Third, we are rolling out our next Epgard-Digimod indication, which is Graves' disease. This expands our reach into thyroid-driven autoimmunity and allows us to move directly into Phase III in a disease where there is a high need for a new treatment option. We expect to initiate the registration studies early next year. These are well-informed decisions. to ensure we focus our time and capital on indications where we can deliver the most value. We're also thinking in terms of long-term growth horizons for our core assets, which means that even though we aren't moving forward in certain indications today, we are a data-based company and we'll be ready to revisit our decisions as new evidence emerges. Slide six, the progress we've made positions us for five registration readouts next year. Each reflects our disciplined approach to indication selection, a clear biology rationale, trial designs anchored in robust clinical endpoints, and strong commercial potential to address an unmet patient need. OcularMG will be the first of these in 2026. We've established a strong biologic rationale supported by encouraging ocular domain data from the ADAPT study and real-world case reports. The ocular study will assess the MGII, ocular score, and if successful, could expand our label to include MGFA Class I patients. Myositis and TED studies extend our reach into rheumatology and endocrinology. With myositis, the Phase II portion of the Registrational Alkevia Study demonstrated meaningful improvement in muscle strength and physical function using TIS, which we will evaluate over 52 weeks into phase three. In TED, we're stimulating TSHR autoantibodies drive disease. We leveraged peer data to advance directly into phase three. Across both indications, we see a clear opportunity for VivGuard to deliver differentiated efficacy and safety. MMN will be our first registration readout for mPASI-PROBART. With IVIG as the only available therapy today, there is a significant opportunity to disrupt this market with a novel treatment. In consultation with the regulatory agencies, we've changed the primary endpoint to grip strength, which should capture meaningful functional improvement for patients. Lastly, in ITP, which is already approved in Japan, we designed an efficient confirmatory trial to enable regulatory submission in the U.S. and EU. Translational data continue to show that Avgard Digimod reduces plated destruction and supports plated production and maturation. Slide seven. As part of Vision 2030 and in support of our ambitious goals, we're making investments across our business to ensure long-term sustainable growth. We're actively scaling our operations in the U.S., including an expanded collaboration with Fujifilm through a new manufacturing facility in North Carolina. This move strengthens our global supply chain and supports our manufactured in a region for the region strategy, ensuring we can meet growing demand for safeguard and future pipeline therapies. At the same time, we're investing our pipeline innovation engine doubling down on our pursuit of novel biology because this playbook is working. We remain on track to have four new pipeline assets in phase one by year end, with more expected to advance from our 20 active IIP programs, each representing a potential breakthrough in immunology. With that, I will now turn the call over to Karl.

Thank you, Tim. Slide eight. The third quarter 2025 financial results are detailed in this morning's press release. We are proud to report an outstanding quarter, reflecting exceptional execution and sustained momentum in our business. In the third quarter, we reported total product net sales of $1.13 billion, marking a historic milestone for Argenix as we surpassed for the first time $1 billion in safeguard sales in a single quarter. We achieved growth of 19% or $178 million in product net sales when comparing to the previous quarter of this year, and 96% of $554 million in growth when comparing free Q on a year-over-year basis. If you look at the breakdown by region, Product net sales were $964 million in the US, $60 million in Japan, $94 million across our rest of the world markets, including our partner markets, and $9 million for product supply to Xilab in China. The product net sales in the US specifically grew by 20% quarter over quarter, reflecting the impact of our investments in the PFS launch earlier this year. PFS is now firmly established as a growth driver in your markets, supporting our continued momentum in GMG and CIDP. The growth to net adjustments in Q3 and the net pricing in the US are in line with the prior quarter. Next slide. Total operating expenses in the third quarter are $805 million, representing a 5% increase compared to the second quarter. Our R&D expenses increased by 9%, or $28 million, and our SG&A expenses by 4%, or $11 million. Building on our solid revenue performance, we continue to invest in our growth opportunities. Therefore, expect our expenses to continue to grow in the single digits for the rest of the year. This will result in your combined R&D and SG&A expenses to land just north of $2.5 billion at between $2.6 billion and $2.7 billion. Cost of sales of a quarter is $109 million. Our year-to-date gross margin remains consistent at 11%. Our operating profit for the quarter is $346 million and the quarterly financial income is $43 million, which results in profit before tax of $386 million. The year-to-date effective tax rate is 13%. After tax, the profit for the quarter is $344 million and $759 million on a year-to-date basis. Our cash balance at the end of the quarter, represented by cash, cash equivalents, and current financial assets, is $4.3 billion, which represents a nearly $1 billion increase in cash since the beginning of the year. I will now turn the call over to Karen, who will provide details on the commercial front.

Thanks, Carl. Let's go to slide 10. As we close the year, it's inspiring to reflect on how far we've come since VivGuard's first approval four years ago, reaching more than 15,000 patients globally across three indications and three product presentations. We're transforming patient outcomes, redefining what patients can demand from their treatments, and pioneering an entirely new class of medicine with our first-in-class FCRN blocker. This quarter is a continuation of delivering that transformative impact. Today, I'm excited to share how our commercial strategy continues to turn innovation into access and impact for patients, and how we plan to sustain our growth momentum into 2026. Slide 11. Once again, the team has delivered an outstanding quarter, reflecting growth in all indications across all markets. The pre-filled syringe is performing exactly as expected, driving increased VivGuard demand among patients and prescribers who embrace a more flexible treatment option. More than half of patients starting on PFS are new to VivGuard, with the rest switching from Hytrulo vial or IV. Since the launch of PFS for self-injection, over 260 prescribers have written their first ever VivGuard prescription, expanding our prescriber base and setting the stage for continued patient growth. We've also strengthened payer access, securing additional policies to enable more patients to initiate treatment. Growth outside the US is strong, with the PFS approved in most major markets. I'm excited to now share how we're executing on our strategy to strengthen our MG leadership and build the momentum to establish an equally strong foothold in the CIDP treatment landscape. Slide 12. In MG, We have consistently delivered new patient growth for 15 quarters while executing on our strategy to unlock the full 60,000 patient opportunity, advancing two label expansion studies in seronegative and ocular MG, and driving earlier adoption of VivGuard to expand the biologics market by an additional 25,000 patients. Today, we're the number one prescribed and fastest growing biologic in MG. Where we see the biggest opportunity to maintain this leadership is to reach patients earlier in the treatment paradigm. We're already seeing this shift take place, with the percentage of patients coming from oral therapies increasing year over year, now at 70%. The PFS is fueling this momentum, opening doors to new segments of younger, more active patients, and our strong safety and efficacy remain the foundation of physician confidence, driving earlier prescribing decisions. As Tim highlighted, we're excited to be moving closer to potentially expanding our label to include seronegative GMG patients, following positive top line results. The unmet need here is significant, especially for triple seronegative patients who experience diagnostic challenges and currently have no approved therapies. Ocular MG is next. Patients often struggle with symptoms that make everyday activities, like working or driving, nearly impossible. Many are heavily reliant on steroids in the absence of treatment options. These programs reflect our commitment to address underserved populations and redefine care in MG, setting a higher bar for what patients can expect from treatment. Slide 13. In CIDP, we continue to deliver innovation that translates into patient impact. We're seeing consistent growth in both patient starts and prescriber engagement. driven by physician trust in the safety profile of Vivgard Hytrulo and its ability to deliver meaningful functional improvement. We're on track to grow towards our 12,000 addressable market of patients not well controlled on current therapy. We continue to hear stories from patients about their positive experience to date. The pre-filled syringe is driving additional demand as patients opt for the convenience of self-injection. and our activation efforts are empowering patients to ask their neurologists about Vivgard Hytrulo. Here's the story of one of those patients. Sasha is a mother of four in her 30s. She was hospitalized for over three months earlier this year, given her symptom progression. She shared the frustration that came with CIDP, completely dependent on her spouse for even the simplest daily activities. After starting Vivgard Hytrulo, and later switching to the pre-filled syringe, she said, I can live my life. She's walking her children to the school bus, something she deeply missed. And thanks to the flexibility of the PFS, she's thrilled to plan a 10-day cruise without worrying about having to be home for an injection. While this is just one patient experience, these stories give us confidence to expand our reach and serve more patients over time. We're now gearing up for five phase three readouts next year, actively engaging with patients and physicians to ensure that if the data are positive and approved, we'll be ready to expand into these markets and deliver broader patient impact. As an example, we're strengthening our rheumatology presence through deeper engagement and increased visibility at major medical conferences with our clinical data. Our focus remains on finishing this year strongly while laying the foundation for multiple future launches. With that, I will now turn the call back to Tim.

At the heart of our success is our commitment to transforming patient outcomes. With multiple pathways to realize Vision 2030, we're not just positioned for sustained growth, we are building a legacy of long-term value for patients and shareholders. We have the strategy of the signs and the momentum behind us. But most importantly, we have the passion and purpose to redefine what's possible in immunology. With that operated, we'll open the call up to questions.

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, simply press star one again. We ask that you please limit yourself to one question only. Your first question comes from the line of Rajan Sharma from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Hi, thanks for taking the question. Just one clarification actually just on the formulation. It obviously seems that the PFS is driving the growth, but could you just confirm that all of the other two formulations are still growing underlying in both CIDP and NMG? And then just on the pipeline, I know it's a little bit further out for you at the minute, but I'd be interested to get your perspectives on Sjogren's disease We saw some phase three data from Novartis' inalumab yesterday. I'd be keen to get your thoughts on that and how you think Vivgard could potentially differentiate and what represents clinically meaningful signal. Thank you.

Yes. Thanks for the question. Maybe I can take the first one on the PFS and Tim, if you want to comment on Sjogren's. So you're right. Pre-filled syringe is the major driver of growth this quarter. And that actually continues the trend that we've seen over time since HyTRULO launched or since we launched the subcutaneous version. Having said that, the IV does continue to be an important contributor to the business and to the results that we saw this quarter. There is definitely a segment of patients and physicians that prefer the IV option. So the fact that VivGuard has all three presentations and they're all contributing to our performance is important. for both, obviously for MG, whereas for CIDP, the focus is on Hytrulo as the approved presentation. Kim, do you want to comment on Sjogren's?

No, thank you, Karen, and thank you for the question. So I think it's important and great news for patients, Sjogren's patients, to see the Novartis data, which clearly showed a statistically significant win in Sjogren's. When we look at the efficacy, we believe a two-point improvement is considered clinically meaningful. So there's definitely room for improvement. We have strong conviction, of course, in Gratigamot, based on our own Phase II data and peer data in Phase II. This is a precision tool, which we believe is going straight after the circulating immune complexes, instead of a more broad, general B-cell suppression. So the data need to speak, and the trial is well underway. Thank you for the question.

Sure. Next question comes from a line of Tazin Ahmad from Bank of America. Your line is open.

Hi, guys. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. I wanted to get some color about how you were thinking about the CIDP launch. Specifically, our survey work indicates a high level of excitement from physicians to want to move FGARD into frontline therapy ahead of IVIT. I wanted to hear what your feedback from the Salesforce is and what efforts would be needed in addition to what you are already detailing in order to make UpGuard the first-line option for patients in CIDP. Thanks.

Yeah, thanks for the question, Christine. And we're hearing very positive feedback from prescribers about the CIDP launch as well. And the feedback that we're hearing is that the real-world experience for CIDP patients reflects what we see in the clinical trials and importantly around efficacy and safety and then obviously we have the convenience you'll recall that in our clinical trial and in our label we have the approved indication uh for uh for all patients and so what we're seeing at the moment is that the early experience is from ivig switch patients so 85 of our patients are coming from ivig switch but we are seeing some some of the patients that are starting naive, where they haven't started with IVIG, they're not switching. And we're having just like in the clinical trials, we're seeing good real world experience with that. So we see that we're at the beginning of the growth curve for CIDP, we see continued momentum, we see continued expansion of the prescriber base. And I think that over time, we'll start to see more penetration in the market across all patient segments. Thanks for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Derek Aquila from Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning, and congrats on the progress. Just as the narrative shifts to Visgard's pivotal readouts in 26, I mean, can you give us a sense of the revenue potential for those indications and how they may compare to MG and CIDP? And if I can speak in a second, I guess what diligence got you excited about pursuing Graves with Visgard? I know there's been some debate about the unmet need there. Thanks.

Thank you, Derek, and thank you for the question. What we have been saying publicly is that revenue potential-wise, each of these Phase III indications roughly represent an MG-like opportunity, and we will be giving more detailed information when we come closer to the market. You know that Graves has always been on our indication list. I think there's a clear biology rationale. It's established how you do the clinical trials, and we have been digging deeper into the medical needs. Plus, it is true that it is a subset of patients doing well on the cheap available medication. There's a substantial subset of patients which are not doing well. And again, from that point of view, it may resemble MG, but a subset of patients is in bad need of an alternative medication because there's not much left once you feel the cheap available medication today. Thanks for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Alex Thompson from Stiefel. Your line is open.

Hey, great. Congrats on the quarter. Thanks for taking our question. I guess on the impassive-pre-BART discontinuation in DM, I wonder if you could speak about sort of the trial issues, the enrollment issues you had there. Was that due to the IV presentation and how that compared to the myositis trial with FGAR-Tigamod? And maybe you could also comment on the CIDP impassive-pre-BART enrollment as well and if that's being affected. Thanks.

Alex, thank you for the question. We have the benefit of having Luke with us, our colleague and chief medical officer. So, Luke, why don't you take the question on the discontinuation of DM and the excitement which we have about Alkivia?

Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Tim, and thanks for the question. Yeah, so mostly this was a POC trial, IS2 trial that we were running, of course, in a highly competitive enrollment environment. And, of course, it didn't help that a C5 read out negatively. And we set a Bihar high for what we want to see. So our inclusion criteria are pretty robust to make sure that we can have a readout that would be predictable for phase three. And the enrollment just stumbled on that. And then we, of course, have to make decisions within our portfolio with all the work we have. what we keep trying or what we say, okay, DM is an important indication, hence Alkevia, during which DM enrolled pretty well. But right now, for the C2, we felt we had to reprioritize.

And then on your question on CIDP enrollment, we just started those in Posse-Proubart trials, so still too early to say on how enrollment is projecting there.

Thank you, Alex.

Your next question comes from a line of Yatin Sanaya from Guggenheim. Your line is open.

Thank you for taking my question. Just a quick one for me. With regard to the thyroid IDC studies, could you just talk about the expectation in this indication? Are you thinking about the potential positioning? And then, you know, I think also just talk about, you know, is there a way to capture some of the test patient population with great study that you might be wanting now. Thank you.

Thank you, Yatin. For T&D, we decided not to disclose too much about positioning. I think we first need to wait for the data to speak. We think there is a convincing proof of concept out there from a peer molecule, and the jury is out to know how this mechanism of action is going to differentiate itself from the available mechanisms of action. It's fundamentally different biology, fundamentally different mode of action, but the data need to speak for themselves. I think there is ample of room for improvement, both on the efficacy side and the safety side, and you know we're running this trial as well with the pre-filled syringe. Ted and Grace are basically presentations of the same spectrum, the same disease biology, underlying disease biology. So with venturing into Grace, which we announced today, we are actually increasing our efforts in the thyroid space. Thank you for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Yaron Werber from TD Cowan. Your line is open.

Great. Thanks so much, and congrats. Really nice quarter. I have a couple of questions. Maybe the first one, any chance to get an update on 121, the IGA sweeping platform, and then 213, the long-acting VHH form of escortitumod? And then secondly, maybe when we look at sales, sales essentially have now, quarterly sales more or less doubled since about a year ago, as you noted, when you launched also CIDP and obviously PFS is now launched. I'm just trying to get a sense, can you, how much of the growth is driven by CIDP versus GMG? Thank you.

Yeah, Karim, why don't you start with a commercial question on, you know, the relative growth drivers, their impact, and I will take the pipeline question.

Yeah, absolutely. Happy to. Yes, so you're right. We thought when you zoom out nearly 100% growth year over year, as you said, and what we see in the underlying fundamentals of the business is strong growth across both MG and CIDP, both contributing to the growth that we're seeing for the quarter and over the long term. So if you look at MG, In particular, I think it's important to note we're the number one brand of biologic at this point, and we're growing faster than the market. And that market is expanding quickly with biologics being used earlier in the treatment paradigm. And then, of course, in CIDP, just a year out from launch, We're seeing expansion in our market share there as well, and I spoke earlier about the increased penetration into that market. So I would say what you can expect moving forward is continued growth in both MG and CIDP and contribution from across the different markets and geographies as well.

Thank you, Karen. And then, Jeroen, on your question on the pipeline, which I really appreciate, both Argenix 121 and 213 are swiftly progressing through the Phase I studies. Remember in the dose escalation, single dose, multiple dose, we are of course first and foremost interested in safety and tolerability, but these are also molecules which are going to unveil their potential through their PD effect. So you know that the ambition level for Argenix 213 is to move to monthly dosing with an equivalent PD effect as VivGuard and no compromise on safety. And for Argenix 121, the IgA removal sweeper, the objective is to have a very fast and very deep IgA reduction. So these phase one trials will disclose a lot about the potential of these molecules. They're on track, and I would say stay tuned for the first data disclosures soon. Thank you.

As a reminder, we ask that you please limit yourself to one question only. Your next question comes from the line of Danielle Brill from Truist Securities. Your line is open.

Hi, guys. Good morning. Congrats on the quarter, and thanks for the question. maybe I'll ask a question about the seronegative opportunity based on our conversation yesterday. Can you talk about your confidence in the opportunity from a commercial standpoint and the approval based on the subgroup data that you presented? And I'm also curious if you could share any MSE data findings given the importance of that endpoint to prescribers. Thank you.

Thank you, Danielle. And we have the benefit of having Luke on the phone. So Luke, Maybe you show some color, you share some color on, you know, the path into submission, and then how, from where you sit, you know, the likelihood for an approval. And then maybe, Karen, you comment on the importance from a commercial point of view.

Yeah, and Daniel, thanks for the question. So we're very excited by the outcome of the CELOM study because we invested a lot in running the biggest trial in CELOM negatives. with a rather innovative design, including diagnostic adjudication. And they really, the overall results really enforces VivGuard's potential to really move the dial in this underserved population, as Karen already said. So, we met at the primary endpoint, which by design was on the overall population with a clinically meaningful and highly robust statistical significance reduction and JDL score. And we also, as we showed at AANM with Chip Howard presenting, showed that over consecutive cycles, this impact, these benefits, accrued deeper and deeper. Now, this was seen across the three subgroups. So the MUSC, which coincidentally we have one of the biggest MUSC data sets here, triple seronegatives, and then LRP4. And across these three, the benefit moves towards the same direction. And that for us is the basis that we have quite some conviction in the benefits we are providing to these patients. But of course, ultimately, it's going to be a review decision by the agency. But we feel pretty confident that we can have a great discussion on the real benefit that we're bringing to this underserved population.

Thank you. Look, Danielle, on your MSC question, there's a ton of data to unpack, you know, so the long-term follow-up, the deep dive into these patients, there will be much more data sets disclosed going forward into the future. So please stay tuned. And Karen, why don't you comment on the significance from a commercial point of view?

Yeah, happy to. And I think this is a significant opportunity from a commercial perspective, and we're certainly very pleased to see such strong data from the SIRON study. So as you know, we're the leaders in the MG market, and our strategy is to expand that leadership with the broadest label possible. So serone or seronegative opportunity is one angle for that. The other is ocular MG, and we know that we have the data readouts coming next year for that. So we're well on our path of executing our strategy of expanding our market leadership. And the opportunity that we see in seronegative with the 11,000 patients is very high. One of the indicators that we think is important is how fast this clinical trial enrolled across all three of the subtypes. And I think that really demonstrates the unmet need and the enthusiasm about VivGuard in these subtypes. So I'm looking forward to the approval if we get the approval. And I know the team is looking forward to being able to bring transformative impact to patients in seronegative patients as well.

Your next question comes from a line of Akash Tewari from Jefferies. Your line is open.

Hi, this is Amy. I'm for Akash. Thanks so much and congrats on the quarter. Um, just a quick question on my side is curious to see what, uh, your bar for success is, uh, across the three subsets. Um, and, uh, how, uh, how you, uh, are planning, thinking about integrating the, um, new steroid tapering protocol while still mitigating placebo risk.

Thank you, Amy, and thank you for joining us on the call today. So, of course, the first thing we want to achieve in this basket trial is to achieve statistically significant separation from placebo. It is generally understood in the community that the total improvement score of 20 represents a clinically meaningful benefit. You may recall the Phase II data which we presented where we did the sensitivity analysis looking at TIS of 20, but also TIS of 40 and even 60, where you just see an increasing effect of VivGuard, which is very exciting. So that's how you should frame or look at success in the clinical trial. Thank you for your question.

Your next question comes from a line of Richard Vosser from J.P. Morgan. Your line is open.

Hi, thanks for taking my questions. Maybe you could talk a little bit more around the rationale for the change at endpoint for the impassioned trial for EMPA and MMN and give us an idea of what you're looking for around the grip strength endpoint. Thanks very much.

Thank you, Richard. Thank you for joining us. And great question. Luke, this is a great question for you, right?

Yeah, thanks for that question. So we made that change in close consultation with the agencies who on that endpoint had a precedent and felt that this could indeed be an indicator of a meaningful outcome. And so that's why we made that switch. We had strong data on this endpoint, by the way, from our phase two trial where there was accruing benefit over time on this measure. So we feel pretty confident that with this switch, our probability to show the benefit of EMPA is more or less unchanged from the prior endpoint, the MMN ROPS, on which we also keep doing the work, which is going to be a key secondary, which will provide further insights in the dimensions of benefit.

Thank you. Net, I think this is a great advantage for us because The alternative was MMN-ROTS, you know, which was still going through an important validation step. But now we see CBER and CDER using the same endpoint in a specific indication for IVIG in the past, and now we've got going forward. So we're welcoming that harmonization. Thanks for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Samantha Semenko from Citi. Your line is open.

Good morning, and thanks very much for taking the question. I wonder, following the lupus nephritis data that you've seen, is there anything that you can take from that data set to help inform additional indication selection for F-gritigamot or even 213 going forward? And then just relatedly, how are you thinking about additional indication expansion for EMPA? And do you have any plans for subcutaneous formulation development there, similar to your playbook that you had for VipCart? Thank you.

Yeah, Samantha, thank you for the question. From a playbook point of view, it is indeed the intention to leverage our sub-Q platform across all indications. But maybe, Luc, you want to comment on the lupus nephritis data?

Yeah, yeah. And thanks for that question. So we're still fully digesting it. But just from the top line evaluation, it was clear that right now there isn't a path forward to a registration study. And given that we want to be transparent about these things, we put it in here, but we're still trying to fully understand the data, which, to your point, may inform further decisions on a path forward, potentially with another asset in the portfolio.

Your next question comes from a line of Myles Minter from William Blair. Your line is open.

Hi, congrats on the quarter. My question's back on the ianolimab data that we just saw and placebo responses in Sjogren's disease. I'm just wondering whether that five and a half, five point change from baseline in ESDA, is that within your expectations for your ongoing unity study or does seeing that data change your expectations and potentially powering assumptions for that trial? Thanks very much.

Thank you, Miles, and that's a great question. In chagrins, I think we badly need better endpoints. That's why in the Phase 2 proof of concept study, we explored the effect of the drug across an entire spectrum of endpoints, also some of the new endpoints which are coming. But unfortunately, today, the regulators still force you to use clonidine because the CRES and STAR endpoints haven't been fully validated yet. I think the placebo effect which you see in this study is actually quite consistent with the placebo effects which we have seen in historical trials. is the ballpark which we expected when we were designing the clinical trial and powering the clinical trial. So thank you for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Shawn Lehman from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Hi, everyone. Congrats on the quarter. This is Morgan on for Shawn. We have two questions. So first, just wanted to get your thoughts on J&J announcing the head-to-head for Amavi versus VivGuard and GMG. And then second, I know you provided guidance on OpEx for the rest of the year, but given all the pipeline indications and trials you have going on, wanted to know if you could provide any guidance on OpEx and the potential lifts over the next 12 months or so. Thank you.

Philip, do you want to first comment on that study from J&J, please?

Yeah, yeah, thanks, Dean. Thanks for the question. I want to start by saying with adrogenics, our goal is always to prioritize evidence generation that will really add significant value to the patient and the community. And if we look at this design of this head-to-head trial, I'm afraid it will not provide that much new information that benefits patients because of the primary endpoints chosen and the timing of the readouts. We already know that when you stop dosing Vivgard or any for that matter, that IgGs will return to baseline. That is not novel. So this study will just prove different PD effect of four doses of Vivgard versus continuous dosing. And I don't think that that really adds. And it's also not in line with how Vivgard is actually used in the real world today. And at A&M, for example, we have poster number 12, for those who are interested, to show the long-term data on subcuts. That shows that, you know, with a regimen that really triggers new treatment when the start of deterioration happens, that you can keep people well below the significant difference of minus two points. So, to me, that therefore creates this question how much added value will this study bring and understanding. And overall, our perspective on competitive landscape hasn't really changed for this. We welcome competition because it's good for patients, and we get to better outcomes ultimately for that patient community. But we have not seen really meaningful differentiation being offered here. And so we continue to be confident in the bar we have set. The accumulated data shown at A&M with all the data out there across both pediatrics, long-term data, the seronegatives are really in line with our mission to present data that really add value.

Yeah, thank you, Luc. And I want to remind the audience that for the long-term follow-up in the sub-Q study, we now reach 60% MSC in our patients. 85% of these patients have sustained MSC. of eight weeks or longer. I think that's what matters to patients most.

Thank you for the question. Morgan, thank you for your question on operating expenses. Just to repeat what I said earlier, this year we will end between $2.6 and $2.7 million. Our capital allocation priorities is clear. We're investing in growth. We're not going to talk about the operating expenses and guidance for next year now, but what we will say is that the increases you saw on Q3, you can expect that to continue going forward. Thank you for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Jacob McHale from KBC Securities. Your line is open.

Hi there, and thanks for taking my question. With 4.3 billion on your balance sheet, how are you thinking about external innovation in the future? I believe you did an early-stage deal earlier this year, but should we expect more of those going forward? And are there any technologies that you think would be a good fit with your internal efforts?

Yeah, Jacob, and thank you for the question, and thanks for joining us today. Just as a quick reminder, all innovation at Argenic starts with a collaboration with external worlds. So at the core of each pipeline asset is is a very strong fabric of collaborators. It is true that, you know, with the increasing cash balance, our aperture for novel biology, which we're hunting for, is opening up. We're no longer just looking in academic labs, but we're also involved in a number of constructive discussions with young biotech companies, typically in other places where you find exciting biology. So we're looking for the same biology. The hunting ground just, you know, increased thanks to the balance sheet. So stay tuned. In our innovation mission, more of the biology will be coming in. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Luca Issi from RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Hi. Thanks, Tim, for taking our question. This is Cassie. I'm for Luca. Congrats on the robust core. And we have a question on VidGuard for GMG. We've been hearing from a few KOLs that patients are receiving a drug using shorter off cycles compared to the label and that is because these physicians are worried that these patients relapse towards the end of the off cycle so they prefer to restart the next cycle sooner rather than later is that consistent with their understanding and if so this is an important tailwind that is partially offsetting your growth to not headwind any color they're much appreciated and if it's okay we have a quick follow-up on seronegative mg So, Luke, any rationalization around why triple seronegative patients are not as responsive? Thanks so much.

Yeah, and Katie, thank you for the questions. So, first of all, in the ADAPT trial, we adapted the cyclical dosing of the drug to the individual need of the patient, and that's also what the label says. So, the label is not prescriptive in, you know, how you use the cycles. You read those based on, you know, clinical judgments. So it is possible that there is, you know, a subset of patients which needs the drug, you know, more frequently. There's also a tail of patients which needs the dose much less frequently. And there's the whole individualization concept behind VivCard. So your information is correct. Actually, we presented these data in the poster where you see the total distribution of patients with an average cycle of 5.2 per year. But you know a number of patients needing it more frequently. and a long tail of patients needing it less frequently. The seronegative question is intriguing, right, Luc? Why don't you pick up this one?

Yeah, yeah, and it's important to realize that triple seronegatives often have a longer diagnostic course and therefore present often also with a more severe disease, which is actually what we have observed in ADAP-serum. And therefore, and talking through, of course, experts in the field, Our hypothesis is that the initial signal may be lower because repair mechanisms may to kick in and so forth. But what is really encouraging for us is that in the subsequent cycles, they really get to meaningful benefits. And in that sense, that story is not too much different from what we've seen in non-serial negatives. And so we find that encouraging. We, of course, will continue to look into the data, as was already said, around can we get to MSE also in these patients, given their longer disease journey. But overall, we feel the totality of the data fully supports a robust benefit here.

Thank you again. Thank you, Katie.

Your next question comes from a line of Thomas Smith from Lyric Partners. Your line is open.

Hey guys, good morning. Thanks for taking the questions and let me add my congrats on the strong quarter. Just on Graves, we recently saw some long-term follow-up data from a competitor at CRM suggesting potential to drive long-term disease remission in this disease. I was just wondering if you could comment specifically on that data set and how important the potential disease modification was in your decision here to pursue Graves with VivGuard. And then you mentioned some excitement around the market potential. I was just wondering if you could maybe expand on that and share some of your initial assessment around the potentially addressable market here. Thanks so much.

I will start with taking the answer. Maybe, Karin, you can shed some qualitative color on our excitement around, you know, the size of this opportunity. It is correct that, you know, there are data out there from a peer in the FCRN space. We share the passion for FCRN with our peer group. Whilst it is interesting, we have to be very careful because this was a very small sample. So I think it warrants further investigation in a large, properly controlled clinical trial. So stay tuned for more data coming out of, you know, more advanced clinical trial work. And maybe, Karen, a few words on excitement around grades?

Yeah, happy to. I mean, whenever we select an indication, we look through three lenses, the biology, can we develop the indication, and we always look at the commercial opportunity through the lens of what is the real unmet patient need in this indication, and can we bring transformative outcomes forward? And so when we looked at the GRAVES indication, what we saw was that there's a large prevalence of the disease and there is a subset of patients that has a clear unmet need that we think they've got, based on the proof of biology study, based on the convenience of our subcutaneous dosing, that we think we could fulfill that need. It also creates that franchise, if you will, opportunity, given the connection to TED that Tim talked about earlier. So we see that there's a significant commercial opportunity here and look forward to seeing the clinical data readout. Thanks for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Douglas Sale from HC Wainwright. Your line is open.

Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. Just maybe sticking to the subject of Graves' disease, I'm just curious, just You know, obviously, it is a spectrum, you know, along with TED. And so, just given the start of this study, I mean, are you thinking about targeting a particular time point in that progression? And do you think it's realistic or possible to potentially show that you're able to, you know, sort of modify the course of disease in terms of progression to TED?

Thank you for the question. We're not going to comment in this call specifically about the trial design. The trial will come live, you know, relatively soon, and we will be presenting, you know, trial design, inclusion, exclusion criteria, et cetera, in the appropriate conferences. So stay tuned on the potential disease modification. It's an interesting hypothesis. I think we need more data to come to a firm conclusion there. But thank you for the question.

Your next question comes from a line of Victor Falk from BNP Paribas. Your line is open.

Hey, thanks so much for taking my question. Actually, a quick follow-up on the peer assets that one of the analysts was mentioning before. That's exactly the one you've actually used to leverage their Facebook data to go straight to PED. a few years ago. So I was wondering if that asset is going to report some phase three data in the not so distant future. So I was just wondering whether this data set was a relevant proxy for safeguards out of success in TED or if you have any comments to be made. Thanks so much.

Yeah, I think it's hard for us, Victor, to comment on the timeline of clinical trials of third parties. I think we're best off asking the question to them. The way we look at this type of phase two work is, you know, it is a proof of biology. I mean, it is an FCRN antagonist. It is firmly establishing the role of FCRN and autoantibodies in the disease. And we know these diseases are autoantibody driven. I would be very careful jumping to conclusions because as we know in the FCRN class, not all FCRNs are made equal. I think VivGuard is a unique FC fragment It's uniquely engineered based on a unique understanding of the biology. So I would not just cross-compare between molecules in the same class. We have already seen in other indications that actually it's just not appropriate to do. So strong proof of biology. Stay tuned for the Argenix data, I would say. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Jian Deng from UBS. Your line is open.

Hi, thank you for taking my question. So I have a question on VivGuard Phase II data in myositis, please. So just wondering, for the Phase II data, there were about 23% injection-side erythema. So just wondering if you could share any comment on that and any strategies to mitigate that. And so in general, just wondering how serious do you think that is? And in terms of physician feedback, given in a small subset of patients, you know, they might have interstitial lung disease. So just wondering what's your mitigation strategy there. And if I may also squeeze in very quickly, Roidman recently announced the positive phase three data for their JAK-6 inhibitor, brepositinib, in dermatomyositis. I mean, of course, you are running the trial in a much broader general myositis overall. So just wondering what's your comment on the competitive landscape, please. Thank you.

Yeah, there's two questions in one, right? But that's not a problem. Look, yes, we have seen the data in DM. This is, I think, a large market, huge medical need. There will be multiple molecules, you know, which will be playing in this marketplace. And we're welcoming this molecule. It's going to help us shape and build that market. It will not be the solution for each patient. I think you will need a portfolio of therapies to adequately deal with these patients. They're very complex patients. Back to the erythema. It's, you know, what you do about nothing, I would say. These are very mild erythemas. It's typically your first administration where it can happen and then it disappears. This is nothing new. We have reported that as well, you know, in our MG and CADP patients. So we know the phenomenon. It's not unusual or atypical. And I think it's mild. It's transient. And it's certainly not stopping us, you know, in commercialization of this product and other indications. To the contrary. Thank you for the questions.

Your next question comes from the line of Charles Pittman-King from Barclays. Your line is open.

Hi, guys. Thanks so much for taking my question. I've got one just on the patient numbers. I know you've not provided us with an update today on kind of the total number of patients tried on therapy. But I'm just wondering kind of what the next milestones are that you could be announcing. I mean, can we assume from today that you've not kind of hit 20,000 across all indications, or say 5,000 for CIDP, just given the kind of prior, you know, 15,000 total ex-China and 2,500 in guidance that you gave us to Q? And also just related to that, I wonder if you could give us some commentary on just the quarterly patient dynamics, Given you now got MG-CIDP and PFS launched, when should we expect kind of patient ads to peak ahead of the next indication approval? Thanks very much.

Thanks, Charles. Yeah, we did not provide a patient number this quarter. The last one we provided still stands, which was from 2Q. We did a similar, you know, communication rhythm with MG in that we provide patient numbers as we cross certain thresholds. We're not going to share what those thresholds are, but I think it's important to know that we have seen consistent growth and that the revenue in this situation really speaks for itself. And Karen, do you want to talk about the patient growth?

Yeah, absolutely. Happy to talk about the patient growth. I'm pleased for the question because I'm really excited about the continued momentum that we see across all indications. in terms of patient growth this quarter. And I think when you zoom out, I mean, certainly for MG, it's been 15 quarters of consistent momentum in terms of patient growth as we bring more innovation to patients. And most recently, obviously, the PFS has contributed to accelerating that growth. I think what's really important to note is that with pre-filled syringe, 50% of the patients are new to VivGuard, and that's across both indications. And don't forget the 260 prescribers since pre-filled syringe launch two quarters ago are new to VivGuard. These prescribers had never written before pre-filled syringe launch. So what you can see is both patient growth very consistently across the quarter with momentum as well as prescriber growth consistently. And that prescriber growth is important because it opens up new pockets of patients in both MG and CIDP and indicates that we're at the beginning of the growth curve for both indications. Thanks for the question.

And your final question today comes from the line of Colleen Cousy from Baird. Your line is open.

Hey, this is Nick on for Colleen. Congrats on the quarter and thanks for taking our question. If you could comment on the progress you made in the ex-US launches, whether you think that could be a meaningful top line growth driver for the next year? or whether you think focus will be more so on deepening penetration in the U.S. and what you view as the eventual market opportunity for ex-U.S. relative to the opportunity in the U.S. Thank you.

Yes, thanks for the question. What you will have seen is that we have growth across all geographies or all markets. And what we're pleased to see, certainly if I go through those markets, in Japan we've launched the IDP. We recently got the PFS approval. And we're pleased to see continued demand growth for both MG and CIDP. So Japan is a very important growth driver for us, and we see that continuing in the future with the PFS launch. If we turn our attention to the other major markets in Europe, in Canada, what we see is that in MG, as you'd expect, it takes a little more time for those markets to come online as we negotiate pricing and reimbursement agreements. We have a narrow price band, and we have good pricing and reimbursement agreements in place. And what we are starting to see is those revenue contributions for those HTA markets increasing. We recently received the approval for CIDP. That's launched in Germany, and we expect that there will be further launches for CIDP in additional markets in the upcoming months and years. So we expect that there will continue to be growth ex-U.S., But, of course, the U.S. will continue to be a strong growth driver for us as well. Thanks for the question.

And with that, that does conclude today's conference call. Thank you for your participation, and you may now disconnect.