Corvus Pharma Q3 2026 Earnings Call Transcript

Corvus Pharma (NASDAQ:CRVS) reported third-quarter financial results on Thursday. The transcript from the company’s third-quarter earnings call has been provided below.

This transcript is brought to you by Benzinga APIs. For real-time access to our entire catalog, please visit https://www.benzinga.com/apis/ for a consultation.

View the webcast at https://viavid.webcasts.com/starthere.jsp?ei=1777961&tp_key=18d4adcfba

Summary

Corvus Pharmaceuticals reported a significant increase in R&D expenses to $17.8 million for Q3 2026, primarily due to higher clinical trial costs for soquelitinib and increased personnel costs.

The company’s net loss for Q3 2026 totaled $20.3 million, compared to a net loss of $10.2 million in Q3 2025. Cash reserves stood at $202.9 million as of September 30, 2026, expected to fund operations until Q2 2028.

The company’s strategic focus remains on soquelitinib, advancing its Phase 3 trial for relapsed/refractory PTCL and the SIERRA-1 Phase 2 trial for atopic dermatitis, with key data readouts expected in 2027.

Operational highlights include the initiation of trials for hidradenitis suppurativa and plans for an asthma trial targeting both T2 and non-T2 patients, along with ongoing collaborations with Angel Pharmaceuticals.

Management expressed optimism about soquelitinib’s potential across multiple indications due to its novel mechanism, with plans to expand its use in areas like ALPS and hidradenitis suppurativa.

Full Transcript

OPERATOR

Thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Corvus Pharma third quarter 2026 business update and financial results conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. It is now my pleasure to turn the call over to Zach Kubo, Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications. Please go ahead, sir.

Zach Kubo (Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications)

Thank you, operator, and good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for joining us for the Corvus Pharma third quarter 2026 business update and financial results conference call. On the call to discuss the results and business updates are Richard Miller, Chief Executive Officer; Leif Lee, Chief Financial Officer; Jeff Arquera, Chief Business Officer; Ben Jones, Senior Vice President of Pharmaceutical Development; and Suresh Mahabhashyam, Vice President of Clinical Development.

The executive team will open the call with some prepared remarks followed by a question-and-answer period. I would like to remind everyone that comments made by management today and answers to questions will include forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on estimates and assumptions as of today and are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by those statements, including the risks and uncertainties described in the Corvus Pharma quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2026, and other filings the company makes with the SEC from time to time.

The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements except as required by law. With that, I’d like to turn the call over to Leif Lee. Leif.

Leif Lee (Chief Financial Officer)

Thank you, Zach. I will begin with a brief overview of our third quarter 2026 financials and then turn the call over to Richard for a business update. Research and development expenses in the third quarter of 2026 totaled $17.8 million compared to $8.5 million for the same period in 2025. The increase in R&D expenses was primarily due to higher clinical trial costs associated with the development of Socolitinib, as well as an increase in personnel costs.

Net loss for the third quarter of 2026 was $20.3 million compared to a net loss of $10.2 million for the same period in 2025. Included in the net loss for the third quarter of 2026 and 2025 were non-cash losses of $0.9 million and $3.0 million, respectively, from Corvus Pharma’s equity method investment in Angel Pharmaceuticals. Total stock compensation expense for the three months ended September 30, 2026, was $2.8 million compared to $1.2 million for the same period in 2025.

As of September 30, 2026, Corvus Pharma had cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities totaling $202.9 million, as compared to $56.8 million at December 31, 2025. Cash as of September 30, 2026, included approximately $189 million in net proceeds received in a follow-on offering completed in Q1. Also, as announced on June 9, 2026, Corvus Pharma invested $5 million in a $13.5 million financing completed by Angel Pharmaceuticals in the second quarter of 2026.

Based on our cash position at September 30, 2026, and our current plans, we expect our cash to fund operations into the second quarter of 2028. I’ll now turn the call over to Richard, who will discuss our clinical progress and elaborate on our strategy and plans.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Thank you, Leif, and good afternoon everyone. Thank you for joining us today for our update call. We are highly focused on soquelitinib, our first-in-class selective ITK inhibitor, and maximizing its potential across a broad range of diseases. We now have soquelitinib in several clinical trials covering a number of areas of medicine. Our priority is advancing our two lead opportunities, the registrational Phase 3 trial in relapsed/refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma and our SIERRA-1 Phase 2 trial in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis.

Both programs are on track and represent significant opportunities to bring needed new treatment options to patients based on soquelitinib’s immunologic properties. We are leveraging its novel mechanism of action and broad immunomodulatory profile by strategically expanding its development to include new indications that are currently not well addressed by existing agents. This includes our recently initiated trial in hidradenitis suppurativa, our planned asthma trial across T2 and non-T2 patients, and the ongoing trial in ALPS.

Combined with the clinical activities in China conducted by our partner Angel Pharmaceuticals, we anticipate a number of key data readouts and milestones associated with our pipeline over the next year. We are positioned to generate significant value with our pipeline in 2027. I will start with a brief update on our Phase 3 trial in relapsed/refractory PTCL. Enrollment is on track with our expectations, with the next milestone being a futility analysis anticipated in the first quarter of 2027. As a reminder, the futility analysis will be conducted by an independent data monitoring committee after a predefined number of progression-free survival, or PFS, events have occurred. This is event-driven, not time-driven. At that point, the committee will determine whether the study should be continued or terminated for futility based on available safety and efficacy data.

Corvus Pharma will not announce any safety or efficacy data in conjunction with the interim analysis, but will disclose the committee’s decision to continue or discontinue the trial. We remain excited about the potential of soquelitinib to provide a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL, particularly given the challenges with current therapies, none of which are fully FDA approved for this indication. On a related note, there will be an abstract published in the American Society of Hematology, or ASH, Annual Meeting abstract supplement of research done by a team from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center that further supports soquelitinib’s mechanism of action. The MSK team studied pre- and post-treatment biopsy material from three patients from our Phase 1 trial with cutaneous T-cell lymphomas, a Th2-derived malignancy involving the skin.

Using very sophisticated spatial transcriptomics, they showed that response to soquelitinib was associated with blocking GATA3 signaling, the master regulator of Th2 cells, leading to reduced Th2 cells in the skin. I mention this work because it is relevant to the treatment of both PTCL and atopic dermatitis and adds to the growing body of knowledge supporting the fascinating immunologic properties of soquelitinib. Now for an update on soquelitinib for atopic dermatitis. We remain very excited about the data to date and we are working to advance development and enrollment in the Phase 2 SIERRA-1 trial as quickly as possible. The trial is planned to enroll approximately 200 patients, including patients who received prior systemic therapies across three soquelitinib doses and a placebo group. The treatment period is 12 weeks with a 90-day drug-free follow-up period.

Enrollment is on track with our plans, with top-line data anticipated in the third quarter of 2027. Assuming a successful result from SIERRA-1, our strategy is to advance soquelitinib into a Phase 3 program similar to the other approved systemic therapies for atopic dermatitis. This includes a primary endpoint based on EASI score and IGA score at 12 or 16 weeks of therapy compared to placebo. If our current timelines for SIERRA-1 hold, we could be in a position to start a Phase 3 trial in 2028.

Our goal is to make soquelitinib available as soon as possible for patients and then expand the clinical evidence and label with post-marketing studies exploring some of its more unique attributes, such as post-treatment response duration. In addition to our efforts, our partner in China, Angel Pharmaceuticals, is conducting a Phase 1b/2 clinical trial that may provide further evidence in support of soquelitinib’s safety and efficacy in atopic dermatitis while also advancing its development in China. The Angel trial has a similar design to our Phase 2 trial and is open at several leading dermatology centers in China that have been involved in many global registration trials. It is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Angel has completed enrollment in Cohort 1, which includes 24 patients randomized evenly to soquelitinib doses of 100 mg twice per day, 200 mg once per day, or placebo. This is the same as the lower dose level studied in our Phase 1 trial, but the treatment period is longer at 12 weeks compared to four weeks. Recall we found evidence of efficacy at these lower doses in our Phase 1 trial with four weeks of therapy. We have been working closely with the Angel team on the trial, including the review of photographic images of disease from every single patient.

Based on current timelines, we anticipate Angel and Corvus Pharma will announce preliminary data in March 2027. This timing accounts for all patients to complete 12 weeks of therapy and at least a 30-day post-treatment follow-up period, allowing Angel and us to remain blinded up until this point. The physicians and patients will continue to be blinded for the complete 90 days post treatment, which will allow us to evaluate the durability of response.

We are pleased with the progress of the Angel trial and we are monitoring blinded baseline patient characteristics. I can report that the Angel patients have similar baseline clinical characteristics to those patients enrolled in our Phase 1 atopic dermatitis trial. Of particular interest, and we are pretty excited about this, is that Asian American patients who were enrolled in Corvus Pharma’s Phase 1 trial have very similar characteristics to the patients enrolled in the Angel trial conducted in Chinese patients. In our Phase 1 trial, Asian Americans accounted for 11%, or 8 of the total of 72 patients. Our testing shows that our Asian American patients had significantly elevated levels of serum IL-17 at baseline compared to the rest of our non-Asian population and a group of healthy volunteers.

This aligns with the literature, which shows that Asian patients and certain other populations with atopic dermatitis have a greater component of Th17 disease, making them more difficult to treat with existing therapies that only target Th2 pathways. A recent report indicates that some patients have the coexistence of atopic dermatitis and psoriasis, either concurrently or as a result of treatment-induced phenotype switching between the two. We anticipate Angel will begin enrolling patients in Cohort 2 this month, November, with data from Cohort 2 potentially available in the second half of 2027.

Cohort 2 will include 24 patients randomized evenly to soquelitinib doses of 200 mg twice per day, 400 mg once per day, or placebo. Depending on the results from these 48 patients in Cohorts 1 and 2, an additional 60 to 90 patients are anticipated to be enrolled in the Phase 2 portion of the study. Turning back to Corvus Pharma, in September we initiated a Phase 1 trial of soquelitinib in patients with moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa. While there are approved biologic therapies for HS, many patients are in need of new treatment options due to lack of efficacy or results that wane over time. The approved therapies mainly target IL-17, a key downstream cytokine of Th17 cells, which are the primary drivers of this disease. We believe soquelitinib is well positioned in HS because: (1) we have shown it reduces both Th17 and Th2 in our atopic dermatitis trial and other work; (2) we have shown in preclinical studies that it reduces fibrosis, another hallmark of HS; and (3) it is an oral therapy in a category where the majority of approved products and development candidates are injectable biologics. The Phase 1b HS trial is designed to enroll up to 25 patients. All patients will receive a soquelitinib dose of 200 mg twice per day for 12 weeks followed by a 90-day follow-up period with no treatment. The primary endpoint of this trial is safety and tolerability.

The key efficacy endpoint is the proportion of patients achieving hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response, or HiSCR 50 or 75, at week 12. We plan to intensively evaluate skin and blood biomarkers, looking for Th17, Th2, Tregs, and related effects. There has been very strong interest in our HS trial. While we have only been open about one month, we are ahead of our enrollment plan, positioning us to potentially report data in the first half of 2027.

We are also making progress on the asthma front. This includes our plan to enroll both the allergic or eosinophilic and non-allergic type of asthma, also referred to as T2 and non-T2. Most asthma drugs and most clinical trials address only the allergic T2 patients. We intend to enroll both types based on our mechanism of action, which we believe will address both T2 and non-T2 disease. A substantial proportion of asthma patients, up to 40%, have the non-T2 type and are in need of new and better therapies.

The trial design will include an interim analysis, which will allow us to discontinue a disease type, such as T2 or non-T2, if there is futility. We are on track to initiate the asthma trial in the first quarter of 2027. I would like to report on our work in ALPS, or autoimmune lymphoproliferative disease, a study led by NIAID. Initial data covering three patients enrolled in the trial and treated for one year was selected for a poster presentation at the ASH meeting in December, and the related abstract was published yesterday. The data is consistent with the safety profile we have seen across our lymphoma and atopic dermatitis trials, and all three patients had a positive response to therapy.

Key highlights include, first, safety: all three patients completed one year of treatment at the 200 mg twice per day dose. The treatment was well tolerated, with no interruptions in therapy and no grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported. Next, clinical activity was observed in the three ALPS patients as follows: all three patients were able to discontinue their background medications, including corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs. Two of three patients had a drop in circulating proliferating double-negative T cells in the blood.

These are the pathologic cells in ALPS. One of the patients had very low circulating numbers to start with, making quantitation difficult. Splenomegaly was reduced in two of the three patients. Other disease-related markers were also improved. Based on these results, we plan to transfer the IND for soquelitinib treatment of ALPS to Corvus Pharma. Our plan is to meet with the FDA to expand the number of treatment centers and to reduce the age eligibility to include pediatric patients.

Overall, we believe we are executing on a strategy to confirm the broad potential of soquelitinib and ITK inhibition across a range of Th2- and Th17-driven diseases. In 2027 we have significant milestones across our pipeline with clinical trials covering four significant market opportunities: PTCL, atopic dermatitis, hidradenitis suppurativa, and asthma. This will be complemented by Angel, which is expected to have trials in atopic dermatitis and asthma, and the NIAID study in ALPS that is transitioning to Corvus Pharma.

To briefly review our upcoming and 2027 anticipated milestones: initial ALPS data at ASH in December; interim futility analysis from the Phase 3 PTCL trial in the first quarter; Angel Pharmaceuticals atopic dermatitis Cohort 1 data in March; hidradenitis suppurativa Phase 1b results in the first half of 2027; Corvus Pharma SIERRA-1 Phase 2 data in the third quarter; Angel Pharma Cohort 2 data in the second half of the year; and the Phase 3 PTCL top-line data before the end of the year 2027.

In addition, both Corvus Pharma and Angel plan to launch asthma trials in 2027. The key through-line across our development pipeline is the unique mechanism of action of ITK inhibition—resetting the immune system by modulating several key cellular functions with an oral tablet that so far has shown a very favorable safety profile. We look forward to updating you on our progress in future calls. I will now turn the call over to the operator for the question-and-answer period.

OPERATOR

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you’d like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. If you’d like to withdraw your question, press star 2. One moment, please, for your first question. Your first question comes from Lee Watsack from Cantor. Please go ahead.

Lee Watsack (Analyst at Cantor)

Hey, thanks, guys, for taking my questions. So just, you know, in terms of the Angel data, looks like it’s been, you know, pushed out by a quarter. Maybe help us understand the reason for the timeline shift. And you noted that the baseline characteristics in the trial are very similar to the U.S. trial. Just wondering which cohorts you are referring to, given there are some variabilities between cohorts.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

So, Lee, thanks for the question. I assume you’re referring to the atopic dermatitis trial by Angel. So, in the Angel patients enrolled so far, that’s their first cohort, their baseline characteristics, blinded baseline characteristics. We can look at things like age, gender, et cetera, other mean EASI scores, et cetera. So when we look at that and compare that to the patients that we enrolled in our entire Phase 1 trial, 72 patients, we find that the characteristics are very, very similar regarding age, EASI scores, IGA scores, et cetera.

This motivated us, obviously. We’re tracking Angel very carefully. This motivated us to go back and look at cytokines in Asian patients enrolled in the Corvus Pharma Phase 1 study. Obviously, there are Asians that are sometimes enrolled in American studies, and when we look at those patients, the baseline characteristics are very, very similar to the Chinese patients. And most interesting to us is many papers show that Asian patients with atopic dermatitis have a very strong IL-17/Th17 component.

We confirm that in our U.S. Asian patients. Now the Angel trial is going as planned. We’ve been very careful about patient selection, documentation of disease by photographic images, working at the very best centers in China. And so we are just enrolling that according to plan. In addition, before we disclose any data, we wanted to have the full 12 weeks of therapy with 30 days of follow-up. And we remain blinded during that period of time. The company, the patients, the doctor, everybody.

So that’s the reason why we’ve extended that out a little bit. Does that answer your question?

Lee Watsack (Analyst at Cantor)

Yes. Thank you very much.

OPERATOR

Your next question comes from Greg Suvanaves from Mizuho. Please go ahead.

Greg Suvanaves (Analyst at Mizuho)

Good afternoon, Richard. Thanks for taking my question. Congrats on the progress and all the updates. I had a question—two questions, please. One on your futility analysis that you will be announcing first quarter of next year. I think you said in your prepared comments that you are just going to announce pretty much like a yes-or-no answer and not disclose any safety or efficacy. Is that true in either case? In other words, if there was a futility that went negative, you still wouldn’t want to share the safety/tolerability data?

So just wanted to clarify that and perhaps reasoning. And then just second, as it relates to your hidradenitis suppurativa readout, I think the HiSCR 50 or 75 are the main efficacy endpoints. I was just curious if you were going to also share, or is there any lesion-based clinical endpoints that you have incorporated into the study, and will you be sharing any of that? Thanks.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Okay, thanks, Greg. Regarding the futility analysis, if the study continues, we would just let people know that. I mean, it would be inappropriate to disclose data publicly at that time because one could argue it could bias the remainder of the study. So that’s fairly typical. Now if the study is negative and you stop it, yes, of course you can disclose data at some point. Now the second question on the HS, there are other parameters that we’re measuring in HS. We’re very interested in not just the nodules, but we’re also scoring abscesses, tunnels, draining tunnels, all that sort of stuff. So we’re excited about HS because we’re pretty convinced now we’re having an effect on Th17. Th17, major player in asthma and in HS. A lot of neutrophils in these lesions. Neutrophils come from Th17 effects. So all of these things are sort of coming together.

There’s a reason behind the diseases that we chose based on the mechanism of action of soquelitinib. So the HS endpoints will look at everything you mentioned—nodule count, which is just a HiSCR—but we are very interested in the other aspects, abscesses and tunnels, because we’ve previously reported, and this is a Th2-mediated effect, that soquelitinib has an effect on fibrosis. That was published last year and presented at the ACR meeting. It was in a mouse model of systemic sclerosis.

And then I hope that answers your question.

Greg Suvanaves (Analyst at Mizuho)

It does. Thanks. And then just a quick follow-up on your ALPS program. It’s interesting that you’re going to have the IND transferred over to Corvus Pharma, and I’m wondering if you can confirm those are the same doses that you previously have tested. And given just the patient population, which tends to be, I believe, a more rare orphan type of a situation versus something more broad like asthma or atopic dermatitis, how are you thinking about dosing or pricing, I guess, ultimately, if you were to have success in all of these indications?

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Okay, so first of all, so far the ALPS patients have been adults. They’ve been 30 to 40 years old, and the dose has been 200 mg BID, same thing we’re doing in lymphoma and in AD. Now, ALPS is mostly a disease in children. And we’re going to meet with FDA and move into a pediatric population, expand the number of sites, want to have more control over this study. That’s why we’re taking over the IND. Obviously, when we go to pediatric population, the doses may change based on just the size of the individuals involved.

I think that the value of ALPS is what it is teaching us about our drug, about ITK, and about the immune system. So right now we work in T‑cell lymphoma and autoimmune diseases. ALPS sits at the adjacency between these two areas. We have learned so much from the ALPS patients. Not only did it confirm the safety that we’ve been seeing in a pretty sick population, but really it’s been giving us a lot of information on other diseases that we may want to go after in the future.

Now, regarding pricing and commercialization, I think it’s a little early to talk about that.

Greg Suvanaves (Analyst at Mizuho)

Okay, thank you very much.

OPERATOR

Your next question comes from Roger Song from Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Chacha (Analyst at Jefferies)

Hey, guys, this is Chacha on for Roger. Just two questions for me. So I just want to confirm your Phase 2 AD patients—you said they failed at least one systemic or topical therapy, but does that mean that they’ve not necessarily failed Dupixent or a JAK, is that correct? And then my second question is about your HS study. Can you just give us some expectations for the data benchmarks in order for soquelitinib to be competitive in this space?

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Okay, thanks for that question. Let’s be clear. On our Phase 2 study, you must have failed either a topical corticosteroid or a systemic therapy, but you can have failed more than that. And so we accept patients who have failed Dupi, a JAK inhibitor, or other therapies, or systemic corticosteroids. So that’s in distinction to, I think, most other trials—you can have failed Dupi. And in fact, in our Phase 1, if you go back and look at the data that we presented at SID, there were several patients who had failed JAK inhibitors or Dupixent.

Okay. And the reason we’re excited about that is because our mechanism of action does not overlap with those mechanisms. And so we would not expect, nor did we ever see any evidence of cross-resistance. Now the second question on HS—what do we expect to see, what we expect. I think that’s what you were asking—we expect. So that’s a trial that we’re doing where we have now very good biomarkers to look at. We know what to look for: IL-17/Th17s and the correlated transcription factors. Myeloid cells are going to be really interesting in that setting as well. And this is surprising, as there are a lot of B cells in the HS lesions. Let me also point out there are a lot of B cells in ALPS patients.

Even though it’s a T‑cell disease, there are a lot of B cells in their lesions. And if you look at our poster at ASH, you’ll see some work on that in that area. T cells drive B cells. So anyway, we’ll be looking at all of that and I think we’ll be able to get a good feel for whether or not we’re seeing efficacy. And as soon as we see that—we don’t have to wait for all 25 patients to be treated—we can start planning on a more definitive, randomized, placebo‑controlled Phase 2.

We don’t have to wait till the end. Does that answer your question?

Chacha (Analyst at Jefferies)

Yeah. Thanks.

OPERATOR

Your next question comes from Jeff Jones from Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Jeff Jones (Analyst at Oppenheimer)

Good afternoon, guys, and thanks for taking the question. Maybe just to build on the HS question, as you look at the other studies in the field, any feel for benchmarks or hurdles that you would want to see—the degree of efficacy or signal that you want to see to support moving ahead? And then one follow-up.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Yeah, so I think that, you know, there are benchmarks for HiSCR 75 and 50. You’d want—for HiSCR 50—you want to see 50–60% of the patients achieve that. For the HiSCR 75, maybe around 30%. So I think if we hit that or better, you know, we would be happy with that result with an oral agent with a good safety profile. And of course I didn’t talk much about it on this call, but as you know, we’re very interested in durability of response.

Jeff Jones (Analyst at Oppenheimer)

Yep, great, appreciate that. And then in follow-up, I guess then on the AD side, obviously really interesting as you were just talking about in some of the patient recruitment and allowing some of these patients who have failed more advanced therapy. Given what you’ve seen to date, how are you thinking about where soquelitinib could fit in sort of the treatment milieu? Given the various biologics and approvals out there and some of the bispecifics advancing, are there particular patient subsets where you think soquelitinib would fit particularly well?

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Based on what we’ve seen so far from our Phase 1 study, based on our safety and based on our mechanism, we think soquelitinib can be an upfront treatment for patients with moderate to severe AD or can be used in the relapse setting for patients who have already had other therapies. Now keep in mind, there are many other therapies out there now and the pool of patients that are prior systemic therapy‑experienced is increasing, which we actually predicted a couple years ago when we started working in this area.

So, Jeff, I think the answer is we have every reason to think that you could use this as a first‑line systemic therapy or later line.

Jeff Jones (Analyst at Oppenheimer)

Greatly appreciate it. Thanks, guys.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Thank you, Jeff.

OPERATOR

Your next question comes from Sean Lee from HC Wainwright. Please go ahead.

Sean Lee (Analyst at HC Wainwright)

Good afternoon, guys, and thanks for taking our question. I just had one on the asthma study. So we noticed that the start is slightly delayed to early next year. So what caused the delay? And have you finalized on what kind of patients you are going to be recruiting for this study in terms of thresholds for T2 or non‑T2 groups?

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

So first of all, we had been talking about late December to start asthma. Given that it’s Christmas and New Year’s, we figured it would be safer to talk about January. There’s no material change in that timeline. As a matter of fact, our IND is already through FDA, and everything’s fine. What was the second question on the second part? The—

Sean Lee (Analyst at HC Wainwright)

Patient types and predefined groups for T2 and non‑T2 patients.

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

What are the—what? I’m sorry, no.

Sean Lee (Analyst at HC Wainwright)

Do you have any predefined thresholds for—

Richard Miller (Chief Executive Officer)

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. I understand your question. Sorry, I didn’t understand the question. Eosinophils at 150 are the cutoff. If you’re above 150, you’re T2, and if you’re below 150, you’re not T2. And then we’re also looking at the fractional exhaled nitric oxide, which is above 25 for the T2. These are very typical, so 150 is our cutoff.

Sean Lee (Analyst at HC Wainwright)

Got it. Thank you for that.

Zach Kubo (Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications)

Any other questions? Okay, well, thank you, I think. Operator?

OPERATOR

There are no other questions.

Zach Kubo (Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications)

And I want to thank everyone for participating in our conference call. We look forward to updating you in the future. Thank you, everyone.

OPERATOR

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect. Thank you.

Disclaimer: This transcript is provided for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, there may be errors or omissions in this automated transcription. For official company statements and financial information, please refer to the company’s SEC filings and official press releases. Corporate participants’ and analysts’ statements reflect their views as of the date of this call and are subject to change without notice.