Viking Therapeutics, Inc.

Welcome to the Viking Therapeutics fourth quarter and full year 2022 financial results conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following management's prepared remarks, we will hold a question and answer session. To ask a question at that time, please press the star key followed by 1 on your touch-tone phone. If anyone has difficulty hearing the conference, please press star zero for operator assistance. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded today, February 8th, 2023. I would now like to turn the conference over to Vikings Manager of Investor Relations, Stephanie Diaz. Please go ahead.

Hello, and thank you all for participating in today's call. Joining me today is Brian Lian, Vikings President and CEO, and Greg Zanti, Vikings CFO. Before we begin, I'd like to caution that comments made during this conference call today, February 8th, 2023, will contain forward-looking statements under the Safe Harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements about Viking's expectations regarding its development activities, timelines, and milestones. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and inversely and reported results should not be considered as an indication of future performance. These forward-looking statements speak only as of today's date, and the company undertakes no obligation to revise or update any statement made to date. I encourage you to review all of the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission concerning these and other matters. I'll now turn the call over to Brian Lamb for his initial comments.

Thanks, Stephanie, and good afternoon to everyone dialed in by phone or listening on the webcast. Today, we'll review our financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2022 and provide an update on recent progress with our clinical programs and operations. 2022 was an exciting year for Viking as we expanded our development pipeline and advanced each of our three clinical programs. With respect to VK2809, our lead drug candidate for the treatment of NASH and fibrosis, we recently announced completion of enrollment in our Phase IIb voyage trial and we expect to announce top-line data from this study in the second quarter of 2023. In addition, the Phase I trial evaluating our newest program, the dual GLP-1 and GIP receptor agonist, VK2735, for the potential treatment of metabolic disorders, is continuing. We expect to report the initial data from this trial later this quarter. And finally, the Phase IB clinical trial evaluating VK0214 for the treatment of X-linked adrenal leukodystrophy also continues to enroll, and we expect to complete this study later this year. Our clinical advancements have significantly strengthened Viking's position as a leader in the development of novel, class-leading therapeutics for the treatment of metabolic disorders, and we look forward to reporting data from each of these three clinical programs this year. I'll provide further details on our operations and development activities after we review our fourth quarter and full year 2022 financial results. For that, I'll turn the call over to Greg Zanti, Vikings Chief Financial Officer.

Thanks, Brian. In conjunction with my comments, I'd like to recommend that participants refer to Vikings Form 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which we expect to file shortly. I'll now go over our results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31st, 2022, beginning with the results for the quarter. Our research and development expenses for the three-month ended December 31st, 2022, were $16.2 million compared to $9.8 million for the same period in 2021. The increase was primarily due to increased expenses related to preclinical studies, manufacturing for the company's drug candidates, clinical studies, stock-based compensation, and salaries and benefits, partially offset by decreased expenses related to third-party consultants. Our general and administrative expenses for the three-month end of December 31, 2022 were $4.1 million compared to $2.7 million for the same period in 2021. The increase was primarily due to increased expenses related to legal services, stock-based compensation, and salaries and benefits, partially offset by decreased expenses related to third-party consultants. For the three months ended December 31, 2022, Viking reported a net loss of $19.6 million, or $0.26 per share, compared to a net loss of $12.4 million, or $0.16 per share, in the corresponding period of 2021. The increase in net loss and net loss per share for the three months ended December 31, 2022, was primarily due to the increase in research and development and general and administrative expenses noted previously, compared to the same period of 2021. I'll now go over results for the 2022 full fiscal year. Our research and development expenses for the year ending December 31, 2022 were $54.2 million compared to $45 million for the same period in 2021. The increase was primarily due to increased expenses related to manufacturing for the company's drug candidates, preclinical studies, salaries and benefits, and stock-based compensation, partially offset by decreased expenses related to third-party consultants and clinical studies. Our general and administrative expenses for the year ending December 31st, 2022 were $16.1 million compared to $10.7 million for the same period in 2021. The increase was primarily due to increased expenses related to legal services, stock-based compensation, salaries and benefits, and insurance, partially upset by decreased expenses related to professional services and third-party consultants. For the year ending December 31st, 2022, Viking reported a net loss of $68.9 million, or $0.90 per share, compared to a net loss of $55 million, or $0.71 per share, in the corresponding period in 2021. The increase in net loss and net loss per share for the year ended December 31, 2022, was primarily due to the increase in research and development and general administrative expenses noted previously. Turning to the balance sheet, at December 31, 2022, Viking held cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments totaling $155 million compared to $202 million as of December 31, 2021. This concludes my financial review, and I'll now turn the call back over to Brian.

Thanks, Greg. 2022 was an exciting year for Viking as we expanded our development footprint and made continued progress with our existing clinical programs. Over the past 12 months, Viking not only advanced its two existing clinical programs, but building on our expertise in metabolic disorders, we announced the addition of a new internally developed clinical program with VK2735. I'll now provide an overview of our progress with each of these three programs, beginning with our lead compound, VK2809 for NASH and fibrosis. VK2809 is an orally available small molecule agonist of the thyroid hormone receptor, that is selective for liver tissue as well as the beta isoform of the receptor. We believe activation of the thyroid hormone beta receptor provides unique therapeutic benefits for patients with NASH, and that the data to date point to VK2809 as a best-in-class therapeutic for this indication. Data from the company's prior 12-week Phase IIa trial in patients with hypercholesterolemia and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease support the promise of VK2809. This trial successfully achieved both its primary and secondary endpoints and demonstrating significant reductions in liver fat and plasma lipids. Further, the trial demonstrated that cohorts treated with VK2809 experienced up to 60% mean relative reductions in liver fat content, and that 88% of patients receiving VK2809 experienced at least a 30% relative reduction of liver fat content. Importantly, the reductions in liver fat were durable, with the majority of patients remaining responders four weeks after completion of dosing. This study also demonstrated the promising safety and tolerability profile of VK2809. No serious adverse events were reported, and the rate of GI disturbances such as nausea and diarrhea was lower among VK2809-treated patients when compared to patients treated with placebo. Perhaps one of the most distinguishing features of VK2809 is its unique effect on plasma lipids, including LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and atherogenic proteins. all of which have been correlated with cardiovascular risk. Various studies evaluating other NASH development programs have demonstrated elevation of these lipids following treatment. By comparison, patients in Viking's 12-week Phase IIa study experienced robust reductions in these plasma lipids, suggesting that VK2809 may offer a cardioprotective benefit. For all of these reasons, we believe VK2809's broad lipid-lowering properties, combined with its safety, excellent tolerability, significant liver fat reduction, and oral route of administration establish it as a leading drug candidate for the treatment of NASH. Following successful completion of our Phase 2A trial, Viking initiated the VOYAGE study, a Phase 2B trial designed to evaluate VK2809 in patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and fibrosis. VOYAGE is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center international trial designed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of VK2809 in patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and fibrosis. The target population includes patients with at least 8% liver fat content as measured by magnetic resonance imaging, proton density fat fraction, as well as F2 and F3 fibrosis. Up to 25% of patients may have F1 fibrosis, provided that they also possess at least one additional risk factor. The primary endpoint of the VOYAGE study will evaluate the change in liver fat content from baseline to week 12 in patients treated with VK2809 as compared to patients receiving placebo. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of histologic changes by hepatic biopsy after 52 weeks of treatment. Earlier this quarter, we announced completion of enrollments in VOYAGE, and we look forward to sharing top-line results, including the trial's primary endpoint, during the second quarter of this year. I'll now provide an update on our newest clinical candidate, VK2735, for the potential treatment of various metabolic disorders such as obesity, NASH, and certain rare diseases. VK2735 arose from our internal research, leveraging our in-house metabolic expertise to design and evaluate new compounds with promising therapeutic potential. This compound is a dual agonist of the glucagon-like peptide 1, or GLP-1 receptor, and the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, or GIP receptor. Initial data from this program presented at the annual meeting of the Obesity Society in 2021 demonstrated that GIP receptor activity improved upon the metabolic effects achieved through activation of the GLP-1 receptor alone. Specific findings included improvements observed in weight loss, glucose control, and insulin sensitivity among diet-induced obese mice following treatment with Viking compounds as compared to a GLP-1 monowagonist when administered at the same dose for the same period of time. In addition, the observed reductions in liver fat content were generally larger among animals treated with R compounds relative to the liver fat reductions observed among animals treated with a GLP-1 monowagonist. In 2022, Viking announced the initiation of a Phase 1 clinical trial of VK2735. This trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-ascending, and multiple-ascending dose study. The single-ascending dose portion of the study is designed to enroll healthy adults, while the multiple-ascending dose portion is designed to enroll healthy adults with a minimum body mass index of 30 kilograms per meter squared. Primary objectives of the study include an evaluation of safety and tolerability of single and multiple doses of VK2735 delivered subcutaneously, as well as the identification of doses suitable for further clinical development. The trial will also evaluate the pharmacokinetics of VK2735 following single and multiple doses. Exploratory pharmacodynamic assessments include evaluations of changes in body weight and liver fat content, after four weeks of once-weekly administration. This study is ongoing, and we expect to report initial results later this quarter. Our third clinical candidate is VKO214, which is currently being evaluated in a Phase Ib clinical trial in patients with X-linked adrenal leukodystrophy, or XALD. VKO214 is Viking's second orally available small molecule thyroid hormone receptor beta agonist in clinical development. XALD is a rare and often fatal metabolic disorder caused by genetic mutations that impact the function of a peroxisomal transporter of very long-chain fatty acids. As a result of the mutations, transporter function is impaired, and patients are unable to efficiently metabolize very long-chain fatty acids. The resulting accumulation of these compounds is believed to contribute to the onset and progression of clinical signs and symptoms in patients with XALD. In a prior 14-day Phase I study, in more than 100 healthy volunteers, VK0214 demonstrated dose-dependent exposures, no evidence of accumulation, and a half-life consistent with anticipated once-daily dosing. Subjects who received VK0214 experienced reductions in LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein A. This study also demonstrated VK0214's encouraging safety and tolerability. No serious adverse events were reported. and no treatment or dose-related signals were observed for GI side effects, vital signs, or cardiovascular measures. Following completion of the Phase I study, Viking initiated the Phase Ib study of VK0214 in patients with the adrenomyeloneuropathy, or AMN, form of XALD. AMN is the most common form of XALD, affecting approximately 50% of those with the disease. The Phase Ib trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study in adult male patients with AMN. The primary objectives of the study are to evaluate the safety and tolerability of VK0214 administered orally once daily for 28 days. The study also includes an evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of VK0214 in AMN patients, as well as an exploratory assessment of changes in plasma levels of very long-chain fatty acids. Depending on blinded review of preliminary data, additional dosing cohorts may be pursued. This study continues to enroll, and we expect to report the initial results later this year. Turning to financials, our balance sheet remains strong, and as Greg discussed, we completed the year with approximately $155 million in cash. We currently anticipate that our overall R&D expenses in 2023 will be approximately in line with our 2022 R&D expenses. We believe our current cash resources provide sufficient runway to advance each of our clinical programs into later stage development. In closing, I wish to emphasize the significant transformation that has taken place at Viking over the past couple of years, which accelerated in 2022. Building on our initial success with our lead program, VK2809, Viking has evolved from a company with a single clinical program to a company advancing three distinct clinical candidates for a range of metabolic indications. In 2023, we expect to report clinical data from each of these three programs. With respect to VK2809 for the treatment of nascent fibrosis, We have now completed enrollment in our Phase 2B voyage trial, and we expect to report initial data in the second quarter. Our Phase 1 study evaluating the dual GLP-1 GIP agonist, VK2735, is ongoing, and we expect to report the initial data from this study later this quarter. And our Phase 1B trial evaluating VK0214 in XALD patients continues to enroll, and we expect to report data from this trial later this year. This concludes our prepared comments for today. Thanks again for joining us, and we'll now open the call for questions.

Operator?

We will now begin the question and answer session.

To ask a question, you may press star, then 1 on your telephone keypad. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the key. To withdraw your question, please press star, then 2.

At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. And our first question will come from June Lee of Truist.

Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks for taking our questions and for the updates. According to clinicaltrials.gov, the targeted enrollment for the Healthy Volunteer Study for 2735 is 80 subjects across six cohorts in Part A and five cohorts in Part B. Have you now exceeded your target enrollment or maybe add more cohorts? I'm just asking because the estimated completion date is stated as December. Thank you.

Oh, hey, June. Thanks for the question. No, we haven't. added any additional cohorts. It's just a little slower than we'd like, but there's nothing. We haven't prolonged anything.

And you're still enrolling, or have you now completed enrollment for the Healthy Bonds Thursday?

Oh, we haven't said. What we've said is we'll have the results this quarter, but you've got to keep in mind, you know, that the trial is 28 days of treatment, and then there's a I believe, 60-day follow-up window. So it's a long window there.

And one last question. Are you enrolling both male and female for the multi-dose portion, or is it just men?

You know, it's both.

Got it. Great. Thank you. Yeah, thanks, June.

The next question comes from Stephen Seedhouse of Raymond James.

Please go ahead.

Yeah, good afternoon. Thanks so much for taking the questions. Just wanted to ask a couple first on 2735. So the decisions on dose escalation based on the SRC meetings, you know, I guess they're looking at safety and laboratory data. I just wanted to confirm, is that laboratory data that goes into the dose escalation decision just all safety or would it include something like serum triglycerides to assess pharmacodynamic activity?

No, it's pretty much safety-driven determination. They have PK as well, but it's pretty much safety and not really any pharmacodynamic measures on efficacy.

Okay, and just to parlay off June's question, so did you end up fully enrolling five cohorts in the MAD portion, or was it less than five cohorts ultimately? Okay.

Well, we haven't said exactly how many have been, and it's ongoing now. So, yeah, we just haven't disclosed that, Steve.

Okay, maybe on the pharmacology of that molecule, I'm curious, you know, there's a lot of folks digging in, including us, on relative activity across these two, you know, receptor targets. Can you comment on, if you look at the GLP-1 activity in isolation, and compare that to native GLP-1 activity, are you more or less or equipotent versus the native peptide, specifically on GLP-1? I'm just trying to isolate that variable.

Yeah, yeah. No, that's a good question. I think most of these compounds, not just ours, but most of them are less potent on GLP-1. I think the The one we looked most at on that receptor was semaglutide, and we're pretty similar to semaglutide. I don't recall the numbers off the top of my head, but we're pretty darn close on that.

Okay, yeah, and terzapatidase as well, so that's interesting. Okay, and then just on TR-beta, you know, obviously lots of focus on that mechanism these days. we've been getting questions again lately on just the dose selection in the voyage study. So I was hoping you could just articulate, you know, what, what key aspect or aspects of the therapeutic window for this mechanism, you know, are you trying to optimize by testing a series of doses, including lower doses than in the prior phase two a study?

Yeah. Yeah. So the, the prior 12 week phase two study, when we looked at the, the all of the data, the efficacy data, the changes in lipids, those kinds of things. There were three cohorts, five megs a day, 10 megs every other day, and 10 megs daily. And we looked at all the data. They all looked pretty similar. And so it suggested that we were sort of on the far right of the dose response curve. Maybe that's incorrect, but that's certainly what it looked like to us. And so we felt that we had room to come down in dose, and we know that the FDA always likes to have a handle on what the minimally effective dose is. And so we looked back at prior studies, and what it looked like was that one milligram dose, you know, when you look at the phase one data, it starts to look like it's affecting lipids. And so we thought that that would probably be the minimally effective dose. And we then dosed up from there, to include a top dose of 10 mg every other day, which was overlapping with the 12-week study. And that, you know, we thought that was largely equal to the 5 mg daily and the 10 mg daily. So, and we just spread it out between those. But that was kind of the rationale.

All right. Thanks, Brian. Thanks for the questions. Thanks, Steve.

The next question comes from Joe Pantginnis of HC Wainwright.

Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking the question. Brian, I don't think it's too early to ask this question, but as you look towards a potential phase three for 2809, obviously the clinical trial community has been gaining in their understanding and traction with TR-beta on two different fronts with two different assets. So I guess, you know, with the other asset being a little more mature, you know, how would you consider or what kinds of things are you considering to handle regarding, say, competition for patients to enroll into your pivotal study?

Oh, well, I think that there are enough patients out there to enroll phase three studies, even if there is an approved agent with the same mechanism. And we've seen that, you know, in the diabetes space in the past with, you know, multiple approved GLP-1s, there are still trials enrolling GLP-1 agonists and Plenty of other indications that share those characteristics. So, I mean, NASH is hard to enroll under any circumstances, but I don't think competition will be, you know, a significant problem there. It's just they're hard studies to enroll anyway.

Sure. Very helpful. Thank you.

Thanks, Joe.

The next question comes from Jay Olson of Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Oh, hey, this is Cho on the line for Jay. Thanks for taking the question and congrats on the progress. Maybe a couple from us first on 2809. I think in the 528 study you show the GI toxicity or GI adverse events were actually lower in the treatment groups. So can you maybe just remind us if this is something related to the deeper targeting property of 2809 and how should we expect the GI tolerability to play out in the Voyage study? And maybe related to that, do you see a path forward to combine 2809 with maybe oral GLP-1 in the future? And I have a follow-up for 2735. Thanks.

Yeah, to answer the second question first, yeah, I think that 2809 could be combined with a variety of different compounds. And oral GLP-1s could be one of those. With respect to the GI tolerability, we just haven't seen anything like that in any of the prior studies. And I don't know that it's necessarily because it's liver targeted or just something we haven't seen.

OK, thanks. And for 2735, maybe just following a previous question, I know there's like a few of those cohorts were initiated maybe in the second half last year. So just wondering for the upcoming without, should we expect to see data from all cohorts or only some of the cohorts? Thanks.

Yeah, we hope to have the data from all of the cohorts. It's been, I know it's been slower than everybody would like, including us. The holidays kind of broke that up a little bit as well. And then we had a couple of cohorts that got split. And since it's a phase one unit, you know, It's not necessarily available to have patients come in the next day if they miss a day. So that has just dragged out some of the cohorts, but we do believe we'll have the data this quarter from all the cohorts.

Okay, thanks again.

I'm sorry to take more questions. Thanks.

The next question comes from Andy Heisch of William Blair.

Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking our questions. So obviously there's a lot of movement in the NASH space recently. Just curious about your thinking in terms of, you know, the correlation between liver fat reduction or the magnitude of that and, you know, leading to fibrosis from a histological perspective.

Yeah, thanks, Andy. I think it's a fairly well-established correlation between reduction in liver fat and improvement in overall histology, including fibrosis. And that's been shown in pharmacological studies, but also in weight loss studies. But there are exceptions. There are some mechanisms that have been shown to reduce liver fat and haven't resulted in other histologic improvements, and I don't know why that is. But most of them would appear to show that when you reduce liver fat, particularly above 30% relative reduction, you have higher odds of success on NASH resolution and fibrosis improvement. Got it.

That's helpful. Going on to the 2735 program, maybe as a whole, looking at your in-house compounds, As you anticipate the readout from the base, you know, one sad math study and also indication selection, I'm just curious about kind of the potential to advance other assets, right? There's, I forgot, maybe like half a dozen or so development candidates that you presented. And I'm curious if there's, Any sort of special, unique characteristics that might be good for a specific indication? You know, same thing for 2735. Anything that you saw there that would position you well for, you know, potentially rare disease versus other, you know, bigger metabolic diseases? Thanks.

Yeah, that's a good question, Andy. We've looked at a whole bunch of these, and we continue to explore different peptides. have sort of a scoring system that we've used, and that has helped guide us to make some decisions on which compounds to prioritize. And that's kind of the early part of the discovery work. And then we look at the in vivo data, PK, and efficacy models to help prioritize. As far as the indications to select, I think just globally, when you look at the opportunities for the mechanism, it's NASH, diabetes, obesity, and then a couple of smaller indications. And we would like to view the opportunities kind of like we look at with the thyroid beta agonist, where we've got 2809 and a bigger opportunity, NASH, and then VKO214 and the orphan indication. I think if we were able to parallel that with the dual agonists and we had something in a large indication and a different molecule in a smaller indication, that would be ideal. And I think we'll be pursuing that as we move forward.

Great. Thanks for answering all of our questions. Thanks, Andy.

The next question comes from Yale Jen of Laidlaw & Co.

Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, and thanks for taking the questions. In terms of 2735, we understand that obviously after the data release, you will make some additional decisions and pending on that outcome. But nevertheless, would you give me a top sort of 10,000 view of what you possibly anticipate to do after the data release in this quarter? And thanks.

Yeah, thanks, Yale. Well, we would hope to pursue an IND in the U.S. following completion of this study. And so we would hope to pursue that, you know, sometime by around the mid-year time point. And then, you know, proceed from there. And we'll have more information and details around the plans for Phase 2 once we release the Phase 1 data.

Okay, great. Thanks. I appreciate it. Thanks, Jill.

The next question comes from Scott Henry of Roth Capital. Please go ahead.

Thank you and good afternoon. Just a couple questions. First, spending in the quarter was a little higher than earlier in the year. How should we think about spending in 2023 relative to 2022 and perhaps, you know, the cadence throughout the year as far as the quarters?

Hey, Scott. I think we did make the comment, Brian did in the earlier comments, that our R&D expenses will be pretty consistent. We expect in 23 versus 22 in total for the year. So, you know, I think Those drive most of our spending, the R&D expenses do. So I guess we could think about our spending lining up pretty closely with our R&D expenditure. So we look at that pretty consistently, I think.

Okay, and consistent through the year as well? Any trends we should factor in?

No, I'd say pretty evenly throughout the year, just looking at the plans ahead. So, yep, I would say pretty evenly.

Okay, great. That's helpful. Brian, sort of a big picture question, clearly the valuation of the company has changed over the last three months. Does that impact your strategy with some of these assets going forward, just in terms of development, perhaps how long you keep them and the options that are available to you?

Hey, Scott. Not really. We've always said that when we look at some of these large indications like NASH, it would be preferable to have a larger party involved in phase three and beyond. And that's still our preference. I think as the market cap changes, you might have more opportunities to do things yourselves, but that doesn't change our preference to have a you know, a partner involved in later stage studies.

Okay, great. And, you know, final question, just with regards to 2735, obviously obesity is a very hot indication right now and it's a significant market. Is there anything in your safety profile or your expected safety profile that would make it better or worse than similar agents out there? I mean, diabetes is certainly in a more straightforward market, but obesity, just wondering how it compares to other similar class agents.

Yeah, I think on tolerability, it's a challenge to differentiate. If you modulate the GLP-1 receptor, because it's hard to extricate efficacy from nausea with that mechanism. And so I think the plus is that clinicians and patients both are aware of that. Titration seems to help, and it's generally transient. It happens early, and if you can get through the first month or two of dosing, then you're probably past most of those tolerability issues. And I think there is a receptivity to, or at least acceptance of, you know, tolerability issues if you are confident that you're going to lose weight. And that's the, you know, the big differentiating feature of these agents is they just induce profound weight loss. So I think it's hard to separate on tolerability when you have this mechanism, but I think it's okay given the familiarity and most patients will accept it if they know they're going to lose weight.

Okay, thank you for taking the questions. Thanks, Scott.

The next question comes from Justin Zelen of BTIG.

Please go ahead.

Hey, guys, thanks for taking the question, and congrats on the progress. I'll add a question on 2735. So obviously, you know, you're going to be looking at safety, tolerability, PKA, and PD here. You know, do you think that you'll be able to see some signs of efficacy in four weeks here, or do you think you'll probably need to look at a longer time period on drugs to start seeing some weight loss?

Hey, Justin, that's a great question. I think 28 days is really hard to see weight loss in. We're going to be looking most at, you know, tolerability, PK, you know, informing us for what sort of regimen we take forward into a phase two study. When we look at the potential pharmacodynamic measures, you know, body weight is of greatest interest to people. And I think the hurdle we're really looking at there is if we can show efficacy that looks similar to a GLP-1 monoagonist I think that would be pretty exciting, and generally that's in the sub-2% range, 1% to 2% over 28 days. We feel that that would be exciting because we know that we're hitting GIP, and we know in the animals we see a clear separation from GLP-1 monowagonists, and we believe that that's going to augment the activity of GLP-1, but we just don't know whether or not that's going to be fully – observed or observable in a treatment course as short as 28 days. So, we're trying to be pretty conservative on the expectations for efficacy there since it's such a short study.

Great. That makes sense to me. Thanks for taking the question.

Thanks, Justin.

The next question comes from Naz Rahman of Maxim Group.

Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question, and I have a few, but I'll focus on O214, kind of shift the air a little bit. With the data expected later this year, could you just kind of walk us through what you're sort of hoping to see in the study or what you're looking for?

Yeah, with this study, we're going to be looking, it's a Phase Ib study, so we'll look at safety and tolerability in PK in the patient population. We saw a really encouraging tolerability and pharmacodynamic effects in a shorter study in healthy volunteers, but they didn't have adrenoleukodystrophy. So we'll look at PK and see if there are any differences. And on the pharmacodynamic side, we'll look at changes in very long-chain fatty acids, which are believed to contribute to the course of disease in these patients. Those would be the main areas of focus.

Just, could you remind us, are you looking at any, like, notable biomarkers in these patients?

Yeah, well, I think very long-chain fatty acids would be the key biomarker that we'd be looking at there, yeah.

Okay, got it. On the study line, could you also remind us if you plan on enrolling the third cohort in the study?

Oh, the third dosing cohort? Well, we have three cohorts now. It's placebo and then 20 and 40. And when we... have enough data to make a decision, we may or may not add a higher dose cohort.

Got it. And when you release the data, are you going to release the data from the cohort separately, or are you just going to wait until you have data from all three cohorts to release it at once?

It's a parallel design, so we would release all of the data together.

Okay, got it. Thanks for answering my questions.

Thanks, Nas.

This concludes our question and answer session.

I would like to turn the conference back over to Stephanie Diaz for any closing remarks.

Thank you again for your participation and continued support of Viking Therapeutics. We look forward to updating you again in the coming months. Have a great afternoon.

The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation, and you may now disconnect.