Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Exelixis Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results Conference Call. My name is Tawanda and I'll be your operator for today. As a reminder, this call is being recorded for replay purposes. I would now like to turn the call over to your host for today, Ms. Susan Hubbard, Executive Vice President of Public Affairs and Investor Relations. You may begin.

Thank you, Tawanda, and thank you all for joining us for the Exelixis second quarter 2024 financial results conference call. Joining me on today's call are Mike Morrissey, our President and CEO; Chris Senner, our Chief Financial Officer; P.J. Haley, our Executive Vice President of Commercial; Amy Peterson, our Chief Medical Officer; and Dana Aftab, our Chief Scientific Officer, who together will review our progress for the second quarter 2024 ended June 30, 2024. During the call today, we will refer to financial measures not calculated according to generally accepted accounting principles. Please refer to today's press release, which is posted on our website for an explanation of our reasons for using such non-GAAP measures as well as tables deriving these measures from our GAAP results. During the course of this presentation, we will be making forward-looking statements regarding future events and the future performance of the company. This includes statements about possible developments regarding discovery, product development, regulatory, commercial, financial and strategic matters. Actual events or results could, of course, differ materially. We refer you to the documents we file from time-to-time with the SEC, which under the heading Risk Factors identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed by the company verbally and in writing today, including without limitation, risks and uncertainties related to product commercial success, market competition, regulatory review and approval processes, conducting clinical trials, compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, our dependence on collaboration partners and the level of costs associated with discovery, product development, business development and commercialization activities. And with that, I will turn the call over to Mike.

All right. Thank you, Susan, and thanks to everyone for joining us on the call today. Exelixis had a very busy and productive second quarter across literally all components of our business, especially in commercial, regulatory and development, and we're thrilled with our momentum that's driving us into the second-half of 2024. We continue to execute on key priorities for important future value drivers in discovery, development and commercial and remain steadfast in our focus to improve the standard of care for patients with cancer. We have a lot to cover today, so let's jump right into it with key highlights for the quarter, including; first, strong financial performance with top and bottom-line growth, driven by the strength of the cabozantinib franchise globally. Momentum in the cabozantinib business continued in the second quarter of 2024 with growth in demand and revenue both quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year. CABOMETYX maintained its status as the leading TKI for RCC in the U.S. with second-quarter 2024 Cabo franchise net product revenues growing 16% quarter-over-quarter, compared to first quarter 2024 and 7% year-over-year, compared to second quarter 2023. Global cabozantinib franchise net product revenues generated by Exelixis and its partners grew to $618 million in the second quarter of 2024. The $150 million commercial milestone we earned from Ipsen in the second quarter is emblematic of the continued strength of the Cabo franchise on a worldwide basis. The robust net product revenue and total revenue for the quarter, along with continued expense discipline drove our net income growth as well. As Chris will highlight later in the call, we had a very good second quarter and look forward to continuing the momentum in the second half of the year. Second, building off the strength of Cabo's leadership position in RCC, we're excited about the opportunity for…

Thanks, Mike. For the second quarter 2024, the company reported total revenues of approximately $637.2 million, which included cabozantinib franchise net product revenues of $437.6 million. CABOMETYX net product revenues were $433.3 million and included approximately $6.6 million in clinical trial sales. Gross to net for the cabozantinib franchise in the second quarter of 2024 was 27.6%, which is lower than the gross-to-net we experienced in the first quarter of 2024 and is generally in line with our expectations. This decrease in gross-to-net deductions in the second quarter 2024 is primarily related to lower Medicare Part D, Co-pay assistance, and 340B expenses. Our CABOMETYX trade inventory decreased by approximately 300 units, when compared to the first quarter 2024 to approximately 2 point weeks on hand. As a reminder, clinical trial sales have historically been choppy between quarters and we expect this to continue in future quarters. Total revenues also included approximately $195 million of license revenues for the second quarter 2024. The largest contributor to our license revenues is the $150 million commercial sales milestone we recognized in the second quarter as a result of Ipsen's achievement of $600 million in cumulative net sales of cabozantinib in its related licensed territory over four consecutive quarters. Additionally, we recognized approximately $41 million of license revenues from the royalties we earned from Ipsen and Takeda on their sales of cabozantinib in their territories. Our total operating expenses, excluding restructuring charges for the second quarter of 2024 were approximately $361 million, compared to $363 million in the first quarter of 2024. The sequential decrease in these operating expenses was primarily driven by lower licensing and clinical trial costs, offset by higher commercial and general, and administrative expenses in the second quarter of 2024. The provision for income taxes for the second quarter of…

Thanks, Chris. I'm happy to share our progress across our pipeline with you all today, starting with Cabozantinib and an exciting status update on our filing activities with the Phase III CABINET study in neuroendocrine tumors, or NET. As Mike mentioned, we are pleased to report that Exelixis' filing for a supplementary NDA for Cabozantinib in pancreatic or extrapancreatic neuroendocrine tumors has been accepted by the FDA with a target PDUFA date of April 3, 2025. The FDA also granted orphan drug designation to Cabozantinib in pancreatic NET. As a reminder, the Phase III CABINET study evaluated Cabozantinib 60 milligrams daily versus placebo in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic pancreatic or extrapancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, which I will refer to as pNET or epNET, respectively. By way of background, NET sometimes referred to as carcinoid tumors are a diverse group of malignancies that arise from neuroendocrine cells of various organs. While previously thought to be fairly uncommon, there has been a marked increase in the incidents over the past 20-years. And in 2024, approximately 15,000 people in the U.S. will be diagnosed with this tumor type. Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors develop most commonly about 55% of the time in the GI tract, followed by lung at approximately 25% and the pancreas just under 10%. They may also arise from other tissues like prostate, breast, thymus and skin. To-date, FDA-approved therapies have been directed at stimulating somatostatin receptors and inhibiting angiogenesis. Somatostatin analogs were first approved for the treatment of symptoms related to functional tumors and subsequently to delay disease progression. More recently, somatostatin analogs have been used to deliver radioligand or therapy to somatostatin receptor-expressing tumor cells. Lutetium Lu 177 Dotatate or LUTATHERA is an SSTR targeting beta-emitting radioligand indicated for use in somatostatin expressing gastro-entero-pancreatic NETs. That is tumors…

Thanks, Amy, and good afternoon, everyone. Today, I'm giving a brief update on our progress in the second quarter of 2024 toward our goals for preparing for IND filings and for advancing new compounds to development candidate status. On the IND front, we've continued to make good progress on all of our pre-IND programs and we remain on track to file up to three this year. As you saw in the press release, we filed the IND for XB010 in the second quarter and the Phase I trial is now underway. XB010 is a 5T4 targeted antibody-drug conjugate that carries the cytotoxic anti-tubulin payload, monomethyl auristatin-E and uses SMARTag linker payload technology, which results in a more stable and homogeneous ADC compared to earlier generation technologies. XB010 is the first custom ADC that our internal teams designed and built with participation by our collaboration partners and brought to the clinic. And the principal investigators of the Phase I study are quite enthusiastic about the potential for this molecule to address significant unmet need for patients with tumors that express 5T4. So we look forward to efficient execution of this study. The second IND to file this year is for XL-495, our small molecule inhibitor of PKMYT1. Inhibition of PKMYT1 is synthetically lethal in the context of increased cyclin E-levels, which occurs across a wide range of tumors. We're progressing toward IND filing and acceptance by the FDA for the XL-495 in the very near future. So we look forward to getting that Phase I study underway soon. The third IND we expect to file this year will be for XB628, our bispecific antibody that targets PD-L1 along with NKG2A and displays NK cell engager activity in preclinical models. Our IND-enabling activities for XB628 are progressing on schedule to support filing the IND later this year. I'm also pleased to give a brief update on XB371, our tissue factor targeting ADC that utilizes SMARTag technology to conjugate a topoisomerase inhibitor payload to the antibody. We continue to be enthusiastic about the potential for XB371 to differentiate from tisotumab vedotin in the clinic, primarily because of the topoisomerase inhibitor payload, which is a completely different mechanism of action and could give us reach into indications like colorectal cancer that express tissue factor, but are typically insensitive to microtubule inhibitors. GLP Tox and other IND enabling activities for XP371 are well underway and we expect to file the IND in 2025. In terms of new development candidates, we expect to achieve our goal of at least two this year with some exciting new programs, including a small molecule inhibitor targeting PLK4 and a novel antibody-drug conjugate program. And with that, I'll turn the call over to PJ.

Thank you, Dana. The second quarter of 2024 was a strong quarter as the team continued to execute at a high level, which has resulted in CABOMETYX continuing to be the number one prescribed TKI in RCC. Additionally, CABOMETYX in combination with Nivolumab has achieved its highest market share to date and remains the number one TKI IO combination in first-line renal cell carcinoma. With regards to prescriptions, CABOMETYX TRx volume grew 6% year-over-year in Q2 2024 relative to Q2 2023. Furthermore, the business remained strong both in terms of demand and new patient starts, both of which were at an all-time high for CABOMETYX in the second quarter. CABOMETYX continued to perform well from both a marketplace and competitive perspective. CABOMETYX again led the TKI market basket with TRX share increasing to 41%. As we have discussed previously, the first-line RCC market is extremely competitive. And Q2 was the seventh full quarter in which CABOMETYX plus nivolumab remained the number-one prescribed TKI plus IO combination in first-line RCC. In Q2, CABOMETYX plus nivolumab reached its highest share ever in first-line RCC. This share increase drove higher new patient starts and demand for CABOMETYX. In particular, we are seeing strong growth in the community oncology setting. Furthermore, long-term data from the CheckMate 9ER study now with a minimum four years follow-up was presented at ASCO GU this year and continues to reinforce the leadership position that CABOMETYX has in the RCC marketplace. Beyond first-line RCC, CABOMETYX is performing well in other segments, including second-line RCC, second-line HCC, and second-line DTC. Looking forward, the commercial team is excited about the positive results from the CABINET trial in neuroendocrine tumors, particularly now that we have a PDUFA date. Neuroendocrine tumors comprise a large and heterogeneous patient population. As patients become metastatic and…

All right. Thanks, P.J. I'd like to close our call today by reflecting on an event we recently held that serves as an important reminder about why we are dedicated to the work we're doing at Exelixis every single day. We have the honor of hosting kidney cancer patients and advocates, Laura Esfeller and Katie Coleman for a special panel discussion, where they shared insights about their kidney cancer journey and the significant ripple effect of the connections and information shared from peer-to-peer support and efficacy can have on people impacted by a devastating cancer diagnosis. There powerful stories of hardship, resiliency and an unwavering dedication to advocate for fellow patients, reinforces our individual and collective commitment to the patients we serve and reminds all of us that together, we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of people affected by cancer. So with that, I want to thank the entire Exelixis team for their efforts to support our discovery, development and commercial activities. We had a very strong first half of 2024 and are on track for this year to be a critical one for our science and the patients we strive to serve now and in the future. The Exel team is highly motivated to exceed expectations in our mission to help cancer patients recover stronger and live longer. We look forward to updating you on our progress in the future. Thank you for your continued support and interest in Exelixis. And we're now happy to open the call for questions.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Michael Schmidt with Guggenheim Securities. Your line is open.

Hi, this is Paul on for Michael. Thanks for taking our questions. Just for Cabo and thinking about expectations for possible labeling in NET. Looking at the CABINET study, patients have seen around two to three median lines, including somatostatin analogs and other treatments. How are you thinking about how the label might reflect prior lines of therapy in terms of second-line versus third-line plus? And any other thoughts about the label that you could share would be super helpful. Thank you.

Thanks, Paul, for the question. I can't really share much in terms of the label. We're deep in the response to the agency. We're very excited about the fact that they've accepted the filing and are marching towards an approval date of April 3 and 2025. We think that this study allows a fairly broad label for NET pancreatic, extrapancreatic, prior SSTR, yes or no, functional yes or no. How that actually pans out in words will remain to be seen.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Gregory Renza with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Hi. This is [Indiscernible] on for Greg. On the business development opportunities and collaborations that is exploring, does that include the potential acquisition of late-stage assets that fit with the DUGI portfolio that was indicated in the previous quarter? Any color on the collaboration would be helpful. Thank you.

Yes. Thanks for the question. It's Mike. Yes, look, as we mentioned last quarter, we're very interested in looking at late stage assets in the GUGI space. Obviously, I can't go into details right now about that, but it's certainly a prime area of focus for us. Anything we can do to add late-stage compounds to our portfolio would be, I think it will benefit for potentially patients, shareholders, and the company. So that's where our focus is right now and stay tuned as things evolve throughout the second half of the year.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Asthika Goonewardene with Truist. Your line is open.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Just want to say congrats on the progress and the beat on travel sales quarter. So I have another question for you. It's unfortunate that contact did not hit on OS, where hopefully it still gets approved. And if it does, what is the level of confidence that not having ORS will not be detrimental to uptake. And if I can squeeze a quick one, a quick side question in here, can you just give us a little bit more color on the update on the recruitment to STELLAR-305. I know you said site activation is going well, but there's just quite a lot of other clinical trials underway in the study. I just want to get a little bit more color from you if you can provide on how patient enrollment is going? Thanks.

Yes. Thanks, Asthika. PJ take that first question on travel commercial for prostate potentially?

Yes. Thanks for the question. We're really excited about the data. And I think there's a significant unmet need out there as we've talked about previously. We certainly wouldn't want to get ahead of ourselves in talking about potential uptake in the market, et cetera. But like I said, we're excited about that data right now. As I mentioned in my remarks, we're really excited about and focused on the near-term neuroendrocrine tumor launch, which is really our top priority in addition to maintaining our current in-line business. So our focus is there at the moment.

Great. Amy?

Sure. Thanks for the question, Asthika. I'll answer first a little bit more high color on CONTACT-02, very excited. The study was positive. We hit on PFS. We hit no matter different ways that you assess PFS and subgroups. PFS has been the basis of approval even in this setting in prostate cancer, there's precedent. We believe that what this offers is something to patients who really have high unmet need. For example, patients with liver mets and we presented the subgroup at ASCO GU. These patients really don't have much in terms of available effective therapies to them. When we pulse the external community on their excitement about the data, they actually are very excited to potentially have something that they can reach for relatively easily. It's not chemo, the tolerability profile of Cabo and Atezo. They're comparing it to chemo, not to second NHT, and they're actually very excited about the potential to have this in their armamentarium. We'll see how things go with regard to our filing. As far as an update on 305, we're aware of the lead, but I can't really say much more than that.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jay Olson with Oppenheimer. Your line is open.

Hey, thank you for providing the update and congrats on all the progress. For the new 311 study of Zanza in first-line net, can you talk about how you're weighing the use of single-agent Zanza versus combination approach? And would you consider running a head-to-head trial of Zanza versus Cabo? Thank you.

Thanks, Jay. Great questions. So at this point in time, we're focusing on the Zanza head-to-head versus Everolimus, which we think is a reasonable therapy to offer patients in this line. We have to maintain Equipoise whenever we design the study so that the physician is okay talking about each option that they have we are interested in combinations. However, at this point in time, it's a little bit early days. We would have to assess the safety, tolerability of any combination before we could initiate a Phase III study. We believe that this is the first of probably multiple trials that will run in this space. So stay tuned. We'll look at combinations as well.

Thank you. Please standby for the next question. Our next question comes from the line of Yaron Werber with TD Cowen. Your line is open.

Hey, guys, this is Joyce on for Yaron. Thanks for taking our question. On CONTACT-02, I was just wondering if you will be performing subgroup analyses in patients by high-risk factors similar to what you did for PFS, for example, in liver-met patients. And whether you hope to learn from anything there on the OS separation and what drove the overall OS to not be statistically significant? Thanks.

Yes. Hi. Thanks for the question. So we're looking forward to sharing the data. We did provide subgroup analyses at GU ASCO, both according to PFS and according to OS, which we would intend to update. We're very interested in what subgroups may benefit the most from this combination as well as potential subgroups that may not have as much benefit, right? It's all about risk-benefit when a physician is deciding who to treat. And so we'll -- we look forward to providing an update. Stay tuned for when that happens and looking forward to have more discussion on this in the future.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Andy Hsieh with William Blair. Your line is open.

Okay. Thanks for taking our questions. So maybe a quick one for me. Just curious about your reaction on the standard review. I was shocked about the FDA's decision to not give you breakthrough when I read the press release. Secondarily, I'm curious about kind of the overlap and potential for cannibalization. I'm just looking at the STELLAR-311 study and also the CABINET study population. There is an example before with NETTER-1 that the FDA gave them a really broad label. I'm just curious about the broad label and its potential implication to the STELLAR-311 study. Thank you.

Hey, Andy, it's Mike. I'll take those. So look, we're thrilled to have, as always, any SNDA or NDA accepted and a PDUFA date out there. It allows us to focus the team in terms of both the review and then any kind of additional launch readiness that we have to do. So I think both Amy and PJ did a great job of framing that. So we're thrilled to be where we're at right now with Cabo and NETs, and certainly very excited about moving Zanza forward in that direction too. In terms of future markets when 311 reads out, if that's positive, we're very confident we can navigate the opportunities we have there. Obviously, a lot depends on data and labels and those kinds of things that we just don't have right now. So stay tuned. Obviously, as things go forward, we'll be able to talk about that more. But we're kind of at the starting block right now with our ability to start navigating NETs. And we think as everyone talked about today, this is a really, really important area for us to dive into. And we've been successful in renal. And I think with the right level of focus and discipline and hard work, we could hopefully make the same thing happen with NETs too.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Silvan Tuerkcan with Citizens JMP. Your line is open.

Hey, good afternoon and congrats on the top-line BTF, and thanks for taking my question. My first question is more strategic. And can you just speak on your -- the M&A strategy and maybe the urgency versus the new $500 million stock buyback that you just authorized? Just how do you think about the two? Does that mean the M&A strategy is maybe more long-term? Or you don't have something that crosshairs as of this very moment? And then my second question is just about the discontinuation about XB002. And if you could just remind me that has no real cross whatsoever to your other ADCs, right? Because they are different probably different toxins constructs and from a different collaboration. Thank you.

Yes. Thanks for the question. I think I'll take them both just to keep things kind of straightforward here. So look, in terms of BD, you know, we're focused on finding assets that we have a high degree of conviction in relative to, again, the way we view things through the Cabo lens in terms of development, regulatory, commercial, what it means to be successful clinically and commercially. So the conviction that we have in late-stage assets is the most important thing. We have obviously a very successful molecule in Cabo. We're generating lots of free cash. We think we can -- we can do both in terms of having the dry powder to keep buying back shares as we've announced today and doing the appropriate level of BD, if we have the conviction in the asset. So what's rate limiting is that conviction. It's not really how we're going to pay for it, okay? So it's a very important part of our story. We're not desperate. We're not going to go out and do a silly deal. We have to have that fundamental belief that whatever we do in terms of transactions will lead to value for patients and shareholders. That's the main driver. In terms of XB002, yes, as you said, and Dana, I think refer to this really well, 371 continues as well as XB010, which just entered into the clinic and other assets in there -- in that class of molecules. So we're excited about our ADC approaches. We've got a lot of different irons in the fire and data drives the process. So that's, we've always been, we've always said that. We've always behaved that way and that will continue going forward.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Lebowitz with Citi. Your line is open. Check to see if you're on mute David. David, your line is open.

Sorry about that. Thank you for taking my question. Could you speak to your launch preparedness for treating neuroendocrine tumors given that it's not overlapping as much with renal, how much of an extra lift does this represent for the team?

Yes, David, thanks for that question. We covered that pretty extensively on the call. PJ, want to give the one-minute summary real fast.

Yes. Thanks, David. I think we've got a good handle on this. It's not much of a significant lift. It's more or less incremental as we've said from a resourcing perspective. We see a strong overlap in net treating physicians with our current customer universe. That we call on because we're calling on GI specialists already with HCC and then we're -- we have a very strong presence in community oncology. So I think there's a couple of things there. One is that it's not a significant incremental resourcing request and the others we're well-positioned to take advantage of it.

Okay. Thanks, PJ.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jeffrey Hung with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Hi, this is Michael Riad on for Jeff Hung. Thank you for taking our question. For CABINET and neuroendocrine tumors you noted that five-year survival rates trend down when going from GI to lung to pancreatic. Given that, but also given the CABINET was stopped early due to the compelling efficacy, how long into the treatment course do you want to go into with STELLAR-311 to see sort of the competitive landscape? Thanks so much.

Hi, Michael. Yes, thanks for the question. I think we're still refining the study. We hope that Zanza, if the study ultimately is positive, would be -- would effectively be the preferred first oral treatment in patients who have advanced or metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. So in that sense, it's looking pretty early on. In the treatment setting, we know that median progression-free survival in this setting can be up to 22 months as observed with LUTATHERA. So I -- we're hoping that we'll beat Everolimus and that we can establish Zanza as the preferred.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jason Gerberry with Bank of America. Your line is open.

Hey, guys. Thank you for taking my questions. I think you largely answered it. But as I was thinking about NET and the opportunity with Cabo and how it differs ultimately with Zanza, it sounds like with Cabo, you're kind of in that third, fourth line of treatment absent some of those segments you highlighted like NET lung, but it's really with the second, third line study that you have with Zanza where you can really open up the market opportunity and see a dynamic like in RCC where you can get some patient stacking. And I know you mentioned 22 months PFS with LUDA. What would be your expectation for like whatever alignments will do in this setting just to try to get some sense of how long these patients are staying on therapy in sort of the second, third-line setting? Thanks.

Yes, Jason, it's Mike. Thanks for the question. I guess I would challenge your assumptions about where you think Cabo will land. It's clearly the patient population that was studied in CABINET is a broad population. We won't go into all the details again now just for sake of time. But let's see the kind of label we get and let's use that to benchmark kind of where Cabo goes relative to the initial -- our initial foray into the net population. So stay tuned on that. I guess in terms of Zanza, I think the challenge there and the opportunity there is to go head to head against an active control. And I think that's the, in our view, that's the main focus of what we're hoping to do with STELLAR-311, and analogy -- an analogy to what we do with METEOR back with Cabo and RCC against Everolimus as well or even Cabo with Sunitinib. So think about it from that point of view, obviously, if you fast forward that reads out positive. We've just beat kind of go-to first small molecule oral therapy, it puts us in a very different position than what Cabo could have based upon the Cabinet label. So lots of moving pieces. Don't want to speculate, you could see how this might evolve. Let's get the CABINET, you know, Cabo label first and then we'll get, we'll get STELLAR-311 going with, again, high priority, really pleased with the progress that the development team has made over the last year and being able to kind of streamline processes, a sense of urgency and focus. Kudos to Amy and her team for kind of getting us a path to where we've been in the past and we'll address all these issues with more data and time as we go forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Akash Tewari with Jefferies. Your line is open.

Hey, this is Amy on for Akash. Thanks so much for taking our question. So in terms of the NET opportunity, do you think this can get to $1 billion over time? And how are you thinking about the size of the NET market relative to RCC long-term?

Yes, Amy, thanks for the question. I mean that's the key question. Obviously, we're not going to answer that today. We need to see the label and how that looks. I think it's safe to say and we're all talking about that in different context is today that we think NET is underserved. We think the opportunity in terms of the incident patient population, the prevalent patient population, the long-time these patients kind of factor or kind of go from one therapy to another. This could be a real opportunity to help those patients longitudinally with Cabo, with Zanza, potential other combinations as we go forward. So we are excited about this. We're not going to give numbers today. Certainly, as things go forward, we see the label, we have a better sense of being able to frame the initial market opportunity. And maybe more importantly, the bigger opportunity as we go forward over the next few years, it could be really interesting. So stay tuned. Great question. Come back in a few months or quarters once we get approval and we'll be happy to talk about that. Okay.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Alex Bullocks with Barclays. Your line is open.

Hey, good afternoon. This is Alex on for Peter Lawson at Barclays. Thanks for taking our question. I just had a quick one on the USP1 program. I was wondering if you had any comments on your development from competing programs. We've had some discontinuations in this space and also some data at ASCO. I'm curious if any of these developments impact in any way your clinical development strategy with this asset. Thank you.

Yes. Yes. Thanks for the question. Dana, do you want to cover that one?

Sure. Yes, thanks for the question, Alex. Yes, we obviously were very attentive to the data presented on the KSQ Roche molecule at ASCO as well as to the discontinuation of the Tango molecule. So, first of all, we remain extremely enthusiastic about XL309. It has a unique scaffold. It is a different compound than either the KSQ or the Tango molecule. And as we noted previously at the R&D Day event last December, we presented a lot of data showing how our molecule differentiates from the KSQ compound. What was shown at ASCO was primarily -- with that compound was primarily a PK limitation. And that is exactly what we predicted from our preclinical data given their poor solubility and some other issues with their compounds. So we believe that our compound is differentiated from that in the pre-clinical data and we're very eager to share the first clinical data when they're available to hopefully show that we aren't in fact differentiating from that compound, but we remain very enthusiastic about our compound to differentiate from anything that's been out there so far.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Sudan Loganathan with Stephens. Your line is open.

Hi, everyone. Thank you in advance for taking my question and congrats on the strong quarter and all the pipeline progress. In regards to COSMIC-313, was that program kind of considered the last opportunity to really further tap into the first-line RCC population? And then is there a path to exceeding 50% to 60% market penetration by taking share away from with another strategy? And then what would be a marketing strategy here to kind of show growth in the near term for CABOMETYX in the first line RCC?

Yes, PJ, do you want to take that one?

Yes. Thanks for the question, you know, I would say, 313, we certainly did significant market research on it. We just didn't see a risk-benefit profile going forward that was really going to raise the bar relative to the current combinations. In particular Cabo and Nivo. Nivo, as I mentioned, the leading first-line IOTKI combination now for seven quarters and our market share has continued to grow. And in fact, as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, reached the highest point thus far in this quarter. So we're pleased about that. Our data resonates very well with customers and our team is executing at a high level. So we're optimistic that we could potentially drive further market share growth there with Cabo and Nivo.

Thank you. Please standby for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Chris Shibutani with Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity. There have been a lot of detailed questions about the pipeline. If I could just throw in two bigger-picture questions. Broadly speaking, the pharmaceutical industry is going to be faced with the Inflation Reduction Act, IRA-related adaptations to commercial models and Medicare. Everyone is trying to understand the impact on 2025 from Medicare Part-D Redesign. And obviously, I believe you guys have the small company exemption. Can you just give us a sense for how you see Exelixis' exposure and impact, including in 2025? And then secondly, Michael, the Board has included several new phases over the last 18 months, which is healthy and good to see. Just curious to know in what way those new voices may have been shaping some of the strategies going forward. It certainly seems as if execution has been very consistent, but if you can provide us with any hints about this broadened board and directionally ways that is influencing your thinking strategically. Thank you.

Chris, thanks for the questions. As you mentioned, we have been successful in securing in terms of the IRA, the small biotech exemption in terms of price negotiations. So we've got that covered. And we're also, as you mentioned, have been able to secure the small manufacturer phase-in on the Medicare Part D. So '25 should be relatively minor relative to the way that phase-in works for companies that qualify for the small manufacturer phase-in. So it's going to be a relatively small almost innocuous impact on our gross to net. But we'll get into that next year. I don't want to give guidance now, but we're certainly in that ballpark where we've got that coverage. And kudos to our government affairs team and our legal team to help us get over the -- and navigate all those issues as we've gone forward. In terms of the Board, look, we are ecstatic about the Board. It just been a great collaboration as we've always had with the Board relative to both strategic issues, operational issues, alignment issues around how we navigate. It's a pretty hard business in terms of doing the right science, being able to navigate a lot of really important issues on the commercial side, on the clinical side, making it through COVID, and kind of coming out the back-end as strong as possible. So very, very strong Board. We've always had a strong Board. That continues to be the case. You're right, different faces, different voices, different perspectives are valuable to have. And I think everybody on the management team is really excited to be able to work with this Board very, very closely.

Thank you. At this time, there are no further questions. And so I would now like to turn the call back over to today's host, Susan Hubbard. Ms. Hubbard.

Hey. Yes. Thank you, Tawanda, and thank you all for joining us today. We certainly welcome your follow-up calls with any additional questions you may have that we were unable to address during today's call. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.