Altimmune at Jefferies Conference: Strategic Focus on Liver Diseases

On Wednesday, 04 June 2025, Altimmune (NASDAQ:ALT) presented at the Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference 2025. The company discussed the potential of its dual-action drug, pemvidutide, in treating metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and its strategy to navigate the competitive landscape of obesity and liver diseases. Altimmune outlined its financial strength and readiness for upcoming clinical trial phases, while addressing challenges like the placebo effect in trials.

Key Takeaways

• Altimmune is focusing on pemvidutide for treating MASH by addressing both obesity and liver effects.
• The company is preparing for a Phase 2b data readout and potential Phase 3 developments.
• Financially robust, Altimmune holds $150 million in cash and a $100 million credit facility.
• The company is exploring partnerships for NASH but is ready to proceed independently.
• Altimmune aims to expand into alcohol-related liver diseases and alcohol use disorder.

Financial Results

• Altimmune reported a strong cash position of $150 million as of Q1 2024.
• The company has secured a $100 million credit facility with Hercules Capital.
• These resources are expected to fund operations through the end of 2026.
• Altimmune is exploring additional funding strategies for Phase 3 development.

Operational Updates

• The Phase 2b trial for pemvidutide is fully enrolled, with data expected later this month.
• To minimize the placebo effect, biopsies are being reread with a three-panel approach.
• Altimmune will provide ITT, completer, and imputation analyses for the Phase 2 data.
• A Phase 2 trial for alcohol use disorder is underway, and another for alcohol liver disease is planned for Q3 2024.

Future Outlook

• Altimmune plans an end-of-Phase 2 meeting with the FDA in Q4 2024.
• The company is considering innovative trial designs to expedite Phase 3.
• Existing data from obesity trials will be leveraged to reduce patient burden in Phase 3.
• While open to partnerships for NASH, Altimmune is prepared to advance independently.

Q&A Highlights

• Altimmune uses a three-panel biopsy read and blinded assessments to mitigate the placebo effect.
• The company aims for statistically significant results in weight loss, MASH resolution, and fibrosis improvement.
• Phase 2 trials for ALD and AUD are either underway or planned, with AUD data expected next August.
• The company sees significant market opportunities in ALD and AUD due to unmet needs.

In conclusion, Altimmune’s strategic focus on pemvidutide and its robust financial position highlight its commitment to addressing obesity-related liver diseases. For more details, refer to the full transcript below.

Full transcript - Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference 2025:

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Alright. Welcome everyone to twenty twenty five Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference. My name is Roger Song, one of the senior analyst covers Mecha Biotech in The US. It’s my great pressure to have the fireside chat with our next presenting company, Altimmune, the CEO of the Pennant and CMO, Scott Harris. Welcome, gentlemen.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Thank you.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Awesome. Yeah. So, we know know lots eyes on the upcoming phase two MeSH data, But before that, let’s take a step back to say how the, pembodatide is uniquely positioned in the future mesh landscape, given you have two sides of the story, incretin and the liver side. So just give us some some overview, and then we can dive into some of the the data and then upcoming data readout.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yeah. Well, thank you. Thank you for inviting us. And as you said, we are looking forward to presenting our phase two data here, phase two b data later this month. So very excited about that.

So pembutadiol, as you know, is a dual receptor agonist, GLP one glucagon. So really, if you think about treating mash, the best way to treat mash is to treat both obesity as well as have a direct effect in the liver, and that’s exactly what pemidutide is doing. It’s got direct because of the glucagon, there are plenty of glucagon receptors in the liver. So because of that, it has direct effect in the liver. We’ve got lots of data on that.

One of best in class liver defecting effect pemidutide has shown. And in addition, we have clinically meaningful weight loss. So that’s the best way to think of it mashed with obesity. Eighty to ninety percent of subjects with MASH are either obese or overweight and would benefit from losing weight. So obesity is the cause of MASH to begin with.

So we’re taking away the the reason for MAsh disease itself and are treating the serious condition at the same time. We think down the line that’s the best way to treat MAsh. It’s really more complete solution for MAsh treatment, and that’s the pemidutide should be well positioned to do that. It’s gonna be differentiated from every other compound in development that either only have weight loss or only have effect in the liver. We are combining these two benefits.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. That’s well said. Okay. So I think the value proposition is pretty clear, right? So you want to address both the liver and the weight loss and then seems Panvi is the maybe the only one can do that because we already know a lot of the important data and also on the liver side FGF 21.

Okay. So and then you are running a phase two, which is a big, well powered phase two mesh histology data at twenty four week. My understanding is you designed the trial by learning a lot of the, you know, MASH study before in terms of, you know, control the placebo effect, the right you know, the right patient population. You know, based on the blinded data, believe, you are seeing for the demographic, so how much you can tell us about the data you’ve seen so far into the baseline to give you the confidence you are making the right enrollment and then potentially control see the effect size you wanna see.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Scott, do

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: you wanna Yeah. Thanks, Roger, and thanks for having us. Well, announced in our last earnings call that we were seeing a study population that was very representative of MASH in terms of mean age, proportion of women, liver fat at baseline, the proportion of F2, F3, the amount of diabetics, the non invasive tests like the alpha and the fiber scan. At the time of that announcement, we did not have all of the data in house. As you know, we’ve been rereading the biopsies and didn’t want to provide actual numbers because those numbers would change based on the final number of patients included in the analysis.

We haven’t given further guidance, but just in looking at that we would be fairly clear in saying that this is a very representative match trial.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And then you mentioned the reread. And so what are the maybe just summarize for us what are the key procedure you are implementing to try to minimize the placebo effect? Because we know from the previous MASH study, the placebo effect is all over the place. Right?

So we try to minimize that then in order to really detect the the drug effect.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: The placebo effect for, let’s say, fibrosis improvement in mesh studies has ranged between seven and thirty two percent. It’s not biologically feasible that a placebo response on a hard endpoint like a biopsy read would be that high. So there has to be a process problem, and the process is the way the pathologists read the specimens. We know that the studies that have reread their biopsies, and I’ll describe what that process is, have seen placebo responses that are low, in the range of seven percent to thirteen percent. We’ve seen ones that have not reread their biopsies high, as high as thirty two percent, but clearly in the 20s.

And that placebo response can make it very challenging to hit statistical significance. There are two things that we do to minimize that placebo response. We’ve learned from trials that have preceded us. The first is a three panel read where three readers read independently and then you move ahead of either three or two of the three agree and if not, they get together and they consult and they come up with an agreement, which doesn’t really happen that often. Statistically, it gives you a better chance of hitting the actual true biopsy read.

The second thing is that it’s recognized that there is a bias in the reading of the biopsies over time. Whereas biopsies are upgraded in their severity early in the trial when pathologists believe they’re reading the baselines because, after all, it takes about six to eight months for the treatment biopsies to start appearing. And there’s the inherent bias to want to put the patient in the trial. And if there’s indecision, they upgrade. Whereas that effect is lost over time or may be driven even in the other direction, the pathologists think that they’re reading a post treatment biopsy.

So what we do is that we take all of the biopsies at the end of the tunnel, essentially put them into a basket, scramble them, give them back to the pathologist so they’re totally agnostic to the time of the biopsy, reading the baselines on the same basis as the week twenty four. We believe that those two methods are really drive down the placebo response and enhance our chances of hitting stat sig in this trial.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Excellent. And then another area of the the nuance for the data readout is the statistics statistical methods, right? So we have the ITT, web completer, maybe some imputation methods. Just tell us what methods you are using for phase two, what data you will present to us when you release the top line data, and then which data point we should focus on.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Right. So as you’ve indicated and we agree with that, the readouts have been really very scattered and very varied in terms of the treatment responses and the magnitude of the effect and even the placebo effect. And they’ve used completer analysis, where they ignore the patients who didn’t complete the trial, which creates problems, doesn’t it? And then they have ITT, where they look at all patients, and then an in between method, where they find a way of statistically imputing the missing data. And drugs have read out in all three.

So we’re going to provide all three and make those comparisons for analysts and investors so they can clearly understand the relationship to other readouts in the past.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: And then my understanding is eventually Phase II FDA probably okay with any of those data readout when you host the end of Phase II meeting, they will look at the whole thing. But what is the requirement for the FDA for Phase three? It’s the ITT, I believe, right?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Well, the let’s say that I can’t tell you what the requirement will be, but the standard for Phase three has been the ITT analysis. And that’s where the FDA is the most conservative, and that’s what the FDA will put in the product label.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Got it. And then using ITT, the one of the key area we pay attention So how should we think about the dropout in terms of maybe some of patients not qualified for the inclusion criteria, F1, F4 versus maybe the discontinuation due to any other reason than not throughout that whole treatment period? What’s your expectation for the dropout?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: I mean, I think there will be a re re dropout rate. We think it will be controlled. We’ve accounted for it on the power calculations. And I can’t give specifics here. And I’m also blinded about the dropouts, the numerical dropouts we’re seeing, but we’re very encouraged by the data.

We think it’s very looks good on blinded basis in terms of not only the number of dropouts, but the dropouts due to adverse events. We think that the numbers are going to look good in the final analysis.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Got it. So you are seeing the blinded data into the dropout, you are encouraged by the data, not anything surprising to you as you design the study because you powered the study already considering some of the dropout rates.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Right. We think that on the two metrics, the total dropout rate and the dropouts due to adverse events, we think the data will be looked at very favorably.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Very good. Okay. And then exciting timing upcoming, right? So it’s it’s I think it’s June, right?

So basically, will say that two k o, so it’s right now. It can be any day from here. And then what’s your expectation in terms of those three, I would say three endpoints into the weight loss, the mash resolution and then the fibrosis improvement?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Yes. Well, if we hit statistical significance on all three of those, again, the mesh resolution, the fibrosis improvement, which are your biopsy endpoints and weight loss, we think this trial will be representative of a compound that’s very differentiated from any other compound that’s read so far. Remember, the incretins have read out all the way at forty eight to seventy two weeks. This would be the first incretin with the potency to read out at twenty four weeks like the FGF21s. So it would be in the class of the direct acting agents.

And that’s because glucagon has direct effects on liver fat reduction, but also on fibrosis as well. So we think that it matches up as well, if not better, than the FGF21s because we have better liver fat reduction than the FGF21s. And that seems to be the primary driver of NASH resolution and fibrosis improvement. But then we differentiate further from the FGF21s for providing weight loss. None of those drugs offer that.

Resimitaram doesn’t offer any weight loss as well. So consequently, a very differentiated profile where we can treat not only the metabolic phases of NASH as you would, which needs weight loss, F0, F1, F2, even F3. Patients die predominantly of a cardiovascular disease, not a liver disease, but the potency also to treat fibrosis. So if you would, the complete solution for NASH from the less severe stages of fibrosis all the way up to cirrhosis, we think that we would have that in one drug.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yeah. Just wanted to add that in this patient population, weight loss is very to physicians and as well as to patients because NASH is a silent disease. So patients can’t really they don’t really know if a drug is working, but if they’re losing weight, they really like it. So it’s very attractive to them. And we saw that in our phase two enrollment.

It was really very fast because, you know, it was attractive to patients to enroll in this trial. Yeah.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Makes sense. And then we, you know, to in order to expecting the data and then we did some preview ahead of time. So based on our power analysis and I think you gave us some guidance as well, we think the weight loss is well powered. I think, you know, based on your Phase one MAFLD data and then mass resolution potentially can also be very very good because the the the liver fat. The fibrosis, given this is twenty four week.

Right? So based on the all the historical study, we get some regression. Analysis seems that’s maybe the among those three, maybe the most difficult endpoint to hit. So first of all, do you agree agree with that? And then if you agree so let’s say if we hit three stats, that’s a home run.

Right? So everyone should be very happy, and then I think you will absolutely move forward without any hesitation. But how about if you hit weight loss static and then maybe mesh or one of the histology, he’s static, but the other one may I don’t know. Let’s talk about some nuance in terms of how much miss there. But just miss the static, how are you gonna think about that profile moving forward?

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yeah. Well, look. As we’ve stated very clearly, our goal is to hit statistical significance on all three of these endpoints and really look at the drug more holistically. We’re going to look at noninvasive tests. We’re going to look at biomarkers.

Our goal is to really present a very compelling package that’s differentiated from other drugs in this class. And that can be achieved by hitting three the three endpoints statistical significant and combining it with additional measurements that we’ll be presenting.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. I think I’m going to ask the question still. But I understand you want to aiming for that situation. But our in the at least in The U. S, even for MAASH Phase III, this MAASH and fibrosis is the dual primary endpoint, not the co primary endpoint.

They only need to hit one to in order to get the label. Is is that right? Then the so if that’s the case, how are you going to think about if you hit one and then it’s going to move forward? That’s the another question.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Right. Well, first of all, we’ll start by saying I think we’re going to hit it. Okay. Okay. All right.

So we’ll start with that. But let me also point out the two most successful drugs in mash right now. Resmitteram and semaglutide did not hit their endpoint in fibrosis improvement. Semaglutide at seventy two weeks. Resmitteram at thirty six weeks.

So rismideron got approved, semaglutide’s on the verge of being approved, we think we solve a very successful drug. Now, we do think we’re going to hit the endpoint. We also have the week forty eight data. We won’t have biopsies then, but I think the noninvasive tests will adequately predict what the biopsies would have shown at week forty eight. Now that effect will grow over time.

We’ve seen that in the Accura data. I think it tripled between week twenty four and week ninety six. We would assume approximately that it would double between week twenty four and week forty eight. The noninvasive tests have been very reliable as we’ve seen in the Resmitter on open label data, the Afruxifirman data. The noninvasive test of fibrosis, the FibroScan, which is also known as VCTE, and the ELF, which is a blood test, alone and together have very well predicted fibrosis improvement.

So we would be able to use that in order to predict that response at week forty eight. So again, I think we’re going to hit it. I think there have been drugs that have hit it, have not hit it, have done extremely well. Everyone would agree that ResMediram has been successful and that semaglutide will probably get approved. And we also have the data at week forty eight to look at if we need to look at that.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. Think that’s a good point because you have this biopsy biopsy at twenty four week because you think the drug is more potent, right? That’s why you think you can hit that at 24, but you do have a 48 data readout. Just tell us, I think, Scott, you already mentioned, so you will have additional biomarker and then the non invasive measure. So what’s the coloration at the forty eight week for those biomarker color with the histology data just historically?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Well, the week forty eight readout will be identical to the week twenty four with the exception of not having the biopsies. So it’ll be a catalyst because it’ll provide forty eight week weight loss, forty eight week noninvasive tests, including liver fat reduction, but ELF, VCE for fibrosis markers, and a variety of other measurements. So we think the forty eight week readout is important. And our analyses have shown that we should be able to predict with that fibrosis improvement would have been at week forty eight had we done the biopsies. These non invasive tests have been very reliable in making those predictions of biopsy responses.

So we do have that additional information coming. But again, I think we’re going to hit the endpoint at week twenty four.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Got it. And then you made a statement say, okay, if we have stat seg, that’s already very good and then which we agree. Some of the investor also asked about the effect size, right? So maybe we can separate by the histology versus weight loss. What are the effect size you want to see, understanding the trial is already powered very well for the statistical significance, which means if you hit that, say, the effects won’t be too low.

But what are the effects that you want to say to investors, okay, this is what we’re targeting for?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Yes. So it’s difficult to quote actual numbers because as you introduce the concept, the numbers are all over the place, right? Are you looking at comparing to placebo of 7% or 32%? Are you looking at a composite endpoint? Are you looking at an ITT?

So to put a number out there, it could be very confusing because that number will stick and then people will look back on it because that number is hard. That number is only relevant relative to how you’re reading out the data. We’re starting by looking at Statsig. We think that’s the most meaningful and then we’ll combine the comparisons to the other drugs and I think the comparisons will be very good. Obviously the treatment effect is not going to be very low or else we wouldn’t hit statics.

So we think that we have to hit in the range of the other drugs given the analyses that they did and the numbers that they used to do those analyses.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. No, I think that’s fair. That’s why you have this well powered Phase II versus smaller trial. Okay. And then moving on, assuming you will you have positive results from the Phase II and then supporting the next step for Phase III, given PanV is seems very unique in the future, the NASH, the profile.

So, what will be the potential Phase three design can capture all the differentiation for Panvi in the future mesh?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Yes. So, we’ve done market research, which has indicated that two things. Number one, physicians equate speed with efficacy. And they want to use the most efficacious drugs. So a twenty four week readout along with the FGF21s would equate to speed, which they equate to potency and desirability, and also the effects on fibrosis.

And they also want to have an early indication of response. They don’t want to have to wait seventy two weeks to see how the patient is doing. They want to have some data early on to know that patient is responding. Time is critical. So we’re certainly going to build in those analyses early on so that physicians can have that data in the label.

In terms of the whole program, we think that we can expedite it based on a couple of important considerations. Number one, generally programs have had eighteen hundred patients going into their NDA, but you can get credit for other exposures. And remember, we have over five hundred exposures in obesity alone. So we think that’s going to reduce the burden of the program. The second is that we’re getting into looking at some innovative methods that we’re going to discuss with the FDA to get an earlier readout.

And we could give greater details once we have the end of Phase II meeting with the FDA. So we’re planning that right now. We feel fairly confident about being able to have it in the fourth quarter. And then we could provide those results once we meet with the FDA in good

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: agreement. Okay, good. I know you have the cash to absolutely supporting the readout and then forward and then but if you want to continue the development, so what is the financing plan, the funding plan for the Phase three for the NASH?

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yes. So at the end of first quarter, we reported $150,000,000 in cash. That’s sufficient to take us pretty much to the end of twenty twenty six. So we’re well positioned to initiate the Phase three program. We’re putting a number of other pieces in place.

We put a $100,000,000 credit facility with Hercules. So really, we’re putting all of the levers that we can pull to provide sufficient gas. So we’re well positioned

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: going forward. And then what’s the strategic thinking around the partnership versus going along considering NASH is still a large opportunity? And then also you have obesity, you already Phase III ready, and then we will talk about the AOD in a minute. But in terms of the Panvi like pipeline product type of the situations, how you think about the partnership decision?

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yes. So let me just talk about obesity first and then link it back to NASH. I mean the obesity landscape is changing as you can see with just two players there’s almost a price war breaking out. So obesity is going to be a race to the bottom in terms of pricing of products for obesity. And as more players come into obesity, pure obesity space, that’s going to get even further complicated.

The oral drugs, you know, oral medications, small molecules, all of that is going to put pricing pressure on obesity. We think the better place to be is to treat a serious disease that results from obesity like NASH. So really, as I pointed out at the beginning, we’re really treating NASH with obesity. We bring that added benefit. We’re not only treating NASH, but people are also losing weight, which is beneficial.

So everything we’re looking at sort of follows that theme of dual mechanism. What is it that we can do that’s a comorbidity of obesity, but it’s a serious disease, So the pricing pressure is not there just for pure obesity space. So we’ve been very clear. We are not planning to proceed with obesity on our own. But for NASH, we are well prepared to take that forward on our own.

We’ll be open to partnership discussions. And if it turns out that we have a compelling strategic partnership to be done along the way, we’ll certainly look at it. So we’re not close to the idea, but we are preparing to take it forward on our own all the way to initiation of Phase three and completion of Phase three.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: And then I believe you have already have a lot of the conversation for those strategics. So how do they think about one product with different indications and if they want to do one versus or that’s the one of the thinking probably the strategics will have?

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Yes. I mean, look, we are hearing the same thing that we’re telling you that people are interested in innovative ways to sort of take these metabolic drugs forward rather than just pure obesity. So that’s one play. But perhaps a more interesting place to treat these serious diseases. And the strategics are thinking about the same way.

What is the creative way to go into the obesity marketplace where you’re really taking advantage of the full profile of the drug as opposed to just weight loss? So we’ve had very encouraging discussions. People will be very interested in our data. But again, I wanna emphasize, we are preparing to take it forward on our own. And if it happens that we have a compelling transaction to be done, we’ll certainly look at it.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Noted. All right. A couple more minutes. So we should talk about the ALDA because I’ve been talking with the investors and then people are interested because that makes a lot of sense because you are very potent on the liver side.

And then if you can address weight loss and the liver and then potentially you can address this kind of alcohol related liver disease as well. So maybe take a step back first, what are the key mechanisms to lead you to pursue this, and then just give us some primer, and then we talk about the development plan as well. Take that.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Sure. So as we’ve announced, we’re pursuing two additional indications, alcohol use disorder that we call AUD in alcohol liver disease, which we abbreviate ALD. ALD and NASH are very similar. If you do the biopsy, the biopsies are indistinguishable. When I trained, we used to call this nonalcoholic liver disease.

We were accusing people who are overweight of being closet alcoholics, and that’s how it got its name. Then it was later recognized that you didn’t have to drink in order to have the same pathophysiology, which are toxic lipids accumulating in the liver, leading to inflammation and then fibrosis. So we have a mechanism here to reduce the toxic lipid. We have a lot of lipidomic data showing that not only reduced triglycerides, but a variety of toxic lipids in the bloodstream. And we believe that this drug will be very effective for resolving inflammation in alcohol liver disease.

Now over and above that, have the alcohol itself, which is driving the whole process. And it’s been shown repeatedly in studies that GLP-1s are very potent in reducing the craving for alcohol, both in studies and anecdotes in people who have taken the drug who find that they can’t really you know, drink their favorite cocktails or wine. I think everyone has an anecdote here in the audience. So AUD is the predecessor of ALD. These diseases are bound at the hip.

But also, in other ways, ALD and mash are bound at the hip. Obesity is a big risk factor for alcohol liver disease. Mhmm. Alcohol itself has huge implications in alcohol liver disease. But if you’re obese, the outcomes are more than twice worse in terms of morbidity and liver related complications.

Vice versa, if you drink, that makes NASH worse, as well as alcohol, liver disease, and AUD. So we see obesity and alcohol as being very similar in terms of their medical impact. We believe that we can be the leader in both NASH and ALD. There are no really effective treatments for alcohol use disorder. There are three approved drugs.

The overall prevalence of use with these drugs in The US in last year was about two percent. There’s a huge market opportunity. But we believe that we can own the fatty liver disease space, which is NASH and ALD, which are the number one and number two causes of liver transplantation in The US. So in terms of pricing and pharmacoeconomic impact,

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: we believe that we are looking at the two most important liver diseases that currently remained untreated. Okay. Good. We don’t have much time, but it will become a bigger focus moving on. But two quick questions.

One is that what’s the development plan or status right now when we start to see I believe you started the Phase two or about to start Phase two pretty quickly. And then when we may be able to see the data? And the other one is that just quantify for us what is the market opportunity for ALD and AUD?

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: I’ll take the first question, take the So we announced that we initiated the AUD trial earlier last month. And we’ve posted on clinicaltrials.gov that we believe that we’ll finish in August of next year. But we’re going to have to really just see how the enrollment goes and give guidance to the Street about that date. I can tell you that the study is at a very brisk start. Enrollment is going very well already.

ALD we will start probably sometime in the third quarter, but there’s potential for moving that up as well. And we haven’t announced the completion date of that. We think there would be good enrollment in that trial as well.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: I mean in terms of market size, these are both critical unmet medical need. The market size is huge for both of these indications for there is three drugs but only two percent of the patients with AUD are currently treated with any kind of treatment and very few are getting any pharmacotherapy because they really don’t work. So I think the opportunity is huge. Are at the front end here for both of these indications. The market is relatively not very crowded in this situation.

So we want to take advantage of that and move as quickly as we can.

Roger Song, Senior Analyst, Jefferies: Awesome. Great. I think we’re on top of thirty minutes and then thank you for being with us and then thank you everyone for listening.

Pennant, CEO, Altimmune: Thank you.

Scott Harris, CMO, Altimmune: Thank you.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.