Compass Pathways at Canaccord Conference: Psilocybin Progress

On Tuesday, 12 August 2025, Compass Pathways (NASDAQ:CMPS) took center stage at Canaccord Genuity’s 45th Annual Growth Conference. The company presented an optimistic outlook on its synthetic psilocybin treatment, COMP360, for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), while also acknowledging the regulatory and commercialization challenges ahead.

Key Takeaways

• Compass Pathways reported positive Phase 3 trial results for COMP360, showing significant improvement over placebo.
• The company is engaging with the FDA for potential accelerated approval pathways.
• Commercialization efforts focus on a targeted approach, with partnerships outside the US under consideration.
• Compass Pathways is advancing its PTSD program with a late-stage trial design nearing completion.

Financial Results

• Cash runway includes data from the Phase 3 trial expected in the second half of 2026.
• No specific figures on current cash holdings or burn rate were disclosed.

Operational Updates

• Phase 3 Trial (COM005): Demonstrated a statistically significant separation from placebo at week six.
• Phase 3 Trial (COM006): Involves two administrations, with primary results expected six weeks after the first administration.
• PTSD Program: Finalizing the design for a late-stage trial, with more details forthcoming.
• Regulatory Engagement: A meeting with the FDA is scheduled for this quarter to discuss Phase 3 data and potential accelerated approval.

Future Outlook

• The company aims to complete Phase 3 trials for COMP360 and pursue regulatory approval.
• Compass Pathways is preparing for commercialization, focusing on targeted strategies rather than broad sales forces.
• Exploring partnerships outside the US to enhance market reach.

Q&A Highlights

• FDA Engagement: A Type B meeting with the FDA is planned to discuss data and accelerated filing potential.
• Data Release: Full dataset from the first Phase 3 trial will cover all time points up to week 26.
• PTSD Program: The company is motivated to advance quickly after previous setbacks.
• Competition: COMP360 is seen as complementary rather than competitive in the psychedelic therapeutic space.

Readers are invited to refer to the full transcript for a detailed account of the conference call discussions.

Full transcript - Canaccord Genuity’s 45th Annual Growth Conference:

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Good afternoon, everyone. I’m Sumant Kulkarni, a senior biotechnology analyst here at Canaccord Genuity, and it’s my pleasure to have Compass Pathways here with us today. They’re one of the leaders in this wave of the psychedelic renaissance we’ve seen. They are a mental health focused company that has a product, COMM three sixty, that just reported from top line data on its first phase three trial for treatment resistant depression. And you guys are doing a lot of things to help patients in what is a huge unmet need indication.

That I’ll turn it over to Steve. We have two Steves here. So Steve Levine, who’s the chief patient officer, and Steve Schultz, who heads up IR. We also have Mara in the audience. She helps with all the IR stuff and outreach.

So thanks for being here, and I’ll turn it over to you guys, and then we’ll keep it interactive. There will be a mic going around just in case you have any questions. Please feel free to raise your hand.

Steve Schultz, Head of IR, Compass Pathways: Good. Sumant, thank you for having us. We appreciate that. And of course, before we begin, I just wanna make sure that you know that we’ll be making forward looking statements and that you should be referring to the risk factors of investing in Compass. Simple as that.

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Cool. I

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: like the abridged version there. Yeah. Let’s go ahead. Steve, go ahead, please. Quick intro.

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Yeah. Just quickly introduce myself. As Simon said, I’m Steve Levine, chief patient officer. I’ve been with Compass Pathways for five years now. I’m a practicing psychiatrist.

And prior to Compass, I came from the provider side of the world. My background really is in building new models of care delivery to deliver more novel treatments in psychiatry. Starting in 2010, that was building the initial infrastructure to deliver ketamine for psychiatric indications and then kind of blossomed into a national network of clinics delivering interventional psychiatry which I then bring into Compass to start to think about implementation and scale should we have an approved product.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: So I’ll start with some recent events, the political and regulatory landscape which seems to be a significant tailwind for some of the approaches that you’re using right now in the clinic. Do you see these political support endorsements as a tailwind or a headwind because they might raise expectations too much?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: I can start with that. I mean, I think we would see them see them as neutral at worst. As many may be aware, these these have certainly been prominent stories in the media. Several in administrative and government leadership have made statements supportive of the development of psychedelic treatments and recognizing that there are major unmet needs in mental health care broadly and specifically in indications like treatment resistant depression and PTSD. This is cut across HHS leadership, FDA, VA, etcetera.

In some cases, making commitments to access for patients, whether it’s community patients or veterans within twelve months. So, you know, certainly that sounds like tailwinds. Naturally, those are, you know, high level leadership making these statements. We still, on a daily basis, deal with the psychiatry division at FDA, and ultimately, these will be the decision makers. Fortunately, psychiatry division of FDA continues to be very engaged and responsive as they’ve been for years with us now having breakthrough therapy designation.

And so we are having conversations, as you would imagine, both within government leadership as well as with FDA, trying to understand, you know, what is the synthesis of the support for this for psychedelics and some recognition that there is some urgency to meet these unmet needs with understanding what is the regulatory framework to potentially accelerate with our commitment to not lowering that bar. You know, we firmly believe that rigorous science is important here, that the the standards for the approvals of psychedelic treatment should not be lower than for any other treatment. There shouldn’t be psychedelic exceptionalism. But with that, we also believe that we really are the only company developing psychedelic treatments at this point that with the evidence we’ve generated to date do meet the guidelines that FDA has put forward back from June 2023 for what constitutes a sufficient evidence package for an approval.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: answered my next question, but I’m gonna ask it anyway. When FDA leadership says they would like to see a secondelic therapeutic approved within the next twelve months, which product do you think is best positioned to be in that approved product and why?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Yeah. So as you said, I maybe started answering that, but to give some more detail around it, you know, we had a a very large phase two b study in treatment resistant depression. This was two hundred and thirty three patients conducted in 22 sites in 10 countries. We saw a very robust primary endpoint achieved with a high degree of statistical significance. It was a three week primary endpoint, but even at six weeks, which aligns with our phase three program, we continue to see a statistically significant separation of our twenty five milligram dose from the one milligram active comparator.

And and so, you know, with that as an active comparator study combined with our recent announcement of the top line from what we call zero zero five, our first phase three trial, which is our twenty five milligram dose versus an inert placebo, that together that that reflects that June 23 guidance from FDA calling for a complete package of both an active comparator study and a true placebo study. So I’ve gotten this question a fair amount from investors,

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: you know, recently and over the time I’ve been covering this space, which is do you think major biopharma companies will play directly in the psychedelic therapeutic space by acquiring assets? And this question, you know, the drumbeat’s gotten only larger, like, after or louder, I guess, after we saw some news articles on AbbVie potentially looking at Gilgamesh. What’s your thought process and all that? Do you think a an asset has to be a certain point in the clinic or or beyond to derisk it before major pharma dips in?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: I’m gonna start and Yeah. Sure. Fill in. Yeah. Right.

To your point, there was, you know, the recent articles that is essentially rumor at this point, but but nonetheless of of AbbVie’s additional interest in Gilgamesh. Of course, they already have some investment in Gilgamesh as well as other activity by Otseca and others. You know, certainly, there seems to be interest on the part of big pharma. You know, we know that they are doing some work. We’ve had some conversations.

You know, we do see that as some validation of this area of science. You know, we’ve also been consistent all along that we feel very confident that we are best positioned to commercialize comp three sixty, at least in The US. This is not your typical big pharma playbook of commercialization. This is not your 400 to 800 person sales force detailing every primary care physician and psychiatrist in the country. We have some unique skill set and experience in house that we think, you know, really positions us well.

Now outside The US, there’s the possibility we might look for a partner there. Bitterly to have those conversations yet, but again, it’s it’s encouraging and I think validating of the space that that big pharma is clearly doing more work and taking an interest.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Okay. So let’s move now to some specific questions around COM three sixty, which is your synthetic sill seven for treatment resistant depression. In your seat as chief patient officer, what do you point to in the most recent phase three dataset that you have as most exciting from a patient point of view?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: I think it starts with the primary endpoint. There are many things we could highlight, but the mere fact that we demonstrated a clinically meaningful and highly statistically significant separation of our twenty five milligram milligram dose from placebo at week six following a single administration is so highly differentiated from anything available to patients living with treatment resistant depression today. The best comparator would be really the only product in the market that’s currently being prescribed to patients with TRD, which is esketamine, SPRAVATO. And in their trials, their primary endpoint was at week four after eight administrations. By week six per their protocol, patients would have 10 administrations.

So again, a comparable delta of our active dose from placebo at week six after a single administration regardless of whatever durability that we expect to see with with twenty six week data, and we’re we’re, you know, pretty optimistic about that. But even excluding that, the mere fact of seeing this effect at week six after a single administration as a clinician, as a practicing psychiatrist, and on the behalf of people living with treatment resistant depression is a big, big deal.

Steve Schultz, Head of IR, Compass Pathways: I would just add also that in that disclosure, the DSMB safety board issued a statement regarding the patients up to that point in both phase three trials and that was a clean safety statement. So that was very reassuring from a safety standpoint as well.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: So we’ve characterized your phase three data as really encouraging and potentially misunderstood by investors in our published work. What do you think first of all, do you agree with that characterization? Secondly, what do you think was most misunderstood if you do agree?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Yeah. I mean, I think it was at least initially misunderstood, and I think there were a couple of points. You know, certainly, in in conversations that we’ve had subsequently, we’ve been able to, to learn more about, you know, what perhaps was not fully appreciated initially. One of the things was with a 3.6 difference in zero zero five versus an inert placebo and with recent data from others where there was no placebo response, which we don’t expect here because the differences in trial designs. But not knowing the absolute difference in each of the arms, it left open the possibility or at least, you know, people to assume that that might be the case.

I think there was the interpretation that that might, in some way, add risk to the likelihood of success in our zero zero six trial, the second pivotal phase three, because that’s versus an active comparator of a one milligram dose. Not understanding the difference in trial design, which was in zero zero five, it was a measurement six weeks after a single administration. Mhmm. In the second study, zero zero six, it’s still a week six primary endpoint. But because there are two administrations three weeks apart, that six week primary endpoint is only three weeks after a second administration.

Mhmm. So we think if anything, zero zero five actually derisks the likelihood of technical success in the second study. Right. Another thing is, you know, I don’t think people understood how important that DSMB statement was that Steve referenced just before. And the fact that that independent DSMB was reviewing not only the data from zero zero five, the first trial, but also data from zero zero six concurrently.

And at that point, many patients were through part b or even part c of this study. So this is a big pool of patients at this point deep into this study with no new safety signals and no clinically meaningful imbalance between the arms. You know, we think that to the extent there was any overhang of concern about safety that this fully discharges that.

Steve Schultz, Head of IR, Compass Pathways: I would just add that I I think there also investors may not have fully appreciated the comparability of the data that we produced with the SPRAVATO data. Right. And they are, you know, very comparable. And, you know, we had been telling investors for months that, you know, our our belief was that, you know, a three point plus reduction in the MADRS would be clinically meaningful and that’s really kind of the target that we were looking at and of course we exceeded that.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Right. Yeah. I think you’d characterize anything above three as a bonus is what you’d said That’s right. Specifically. Yep.

With that knowledge, what’s been the reception to your dataset from the neuropsychiatric community? Not necessarily the key opinion leaders or experts, but rank and file kind of neuropsychiatrists. We have

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: a team of medical science liaisons that’s out in the community speaking with health care providers every day, and, you know, the feedback has been enthusiastic. I think that, you know, most psychiatrists are seeing this as an approvable drug at this point, and they are too aware, they are acutely aware of the unmet need and the limitations they have as far as available tools to meet that need at this point. And so I think they are optimistic about the approvability now of this product and they’re just excited to get their hands on it.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Right. So have you had any engagement with the FDA specifically after you release the top line data?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: We’ve requested a meeting to discuss the data. We’ve announced now with our earnings call a couple weeks ago that that meeting is scheduled for this quarter. And with what we were discussing earlier about the the regulatory tailwinds, the the statements that are being made at various levels of leadership, Certainly, a topic for discussion at that meeting will be, you know, despite, you know, the previous discussions of our base case, which is twenty six week data from both of our phase three trials, what is the sufficient evidence package at this point, you know, considering our large phase two b of 233 patients, are there scenarios where we could potentially accelerate a filing? Right. And you also applied to the commissioner’s national priority voucher process.

Right? Yes. We have applied for the commissioner’s priority voucher as, of course, you know, many likely have given that it is a fairly easy application to complete. And, you know, we look forward to hearing more detail about the selection process. So you

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: said you have a meeting scheduled with the FDA for this quarter. That’s a type b meeting. Right? Yes. And you typically have thirty thirty days after that to get meeting minutes.

As a public company, what’s your philosophy on disclosure? Would you disclose what happened at the meeting as soon as you get out of it, or will you wait until you have written meeting minutes in hand so you don’t somehow mischaracterize what the FDA is trying to say?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Not necessarily either. You know, we this isn’t our first type b meeting with FDA. We have breakthrough therapy designation that has afforded us robust and relatively frequent dialogue with FDA over the past several years. And our policy to this point and and likely going forward will be not to disclose every conversation that we have with FDA. That would not be typical.

That would probably not be welcomed by FDA. The likely the most likely outcome of this meeting will not be a binary, you know, yes or no reaction from them. It will likely be some some agreement to show them additional data at some point. So depending upon the nature of the output of that meeting, there may be material information to disclose. But I think that the expect the baseline expectation should be that in line with our previous practices that there may not be anything to disclose even if it’s relatively positive outcome.

Given you’ve had so many interactions with the FDA, how has the composition of the team within the FDA changed if at all? They’ve been engaged throughout. They continue to, both within conversations as well as public statements, you know, really seem to get the the urgency of having approvals in this space and to be supportive of psychedelics as a class. You know, despite, you know, some of the the news media suggesting that FDA may be understaffed in some ways at this point or that they might be less responsive, They continue mean, we’re not aware of significant changes within the division of psychiatry. They continue to be very engaged with our request for this type b meeting.

They responded quite quickly. So we’ve been, you know, very pleased by their support and their engagement.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: What about the specific people you’ve interacted with? Have those remained the same or have

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: there been substantial changes? No, those remain the same. Okay. So

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: now when we were getting into the top line data for your first phase three trial, the Part A of COM005, you were crystal clear on what we should expect which is placebo adjusted difference on the madder scale, p value confidence interval, and a high level data safety monitoring board assessment. As you go into Part B of that dataset, what should investors expect specifically?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: You’re gonna get a lot more information. Right? With part a, we remained blinded. We still are blinded. And so all we received is what we communicated.

We only had the points that you just mentioned. When we have twenty six week data following part b, that will be a full dataset. So that will include all the time points up to that primary endpoint of week six and the endpoints that continue through week twenty six with the data for the individual arms and, you know, all of the significant endpoints that will be analyzed in the, you know, two to three months it will probably take to analyze and clean that data.

Steve Schultz, Head of IR, Compass Pathways: Along with this, probably a a more detailed safety table.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Right. So we could expect to see like a placebo score from party, all of those kinds of things. Yes. This is a hypothetical, I think a really interesting question. Retreatment wise, what fraction of patients do you think might not need retreatment at all within the time frame that’s contemplated for part b?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: We may see some differences in o o five versus o o six because of the single administration initially in the first study and the two in the second study. You know, ultimately, you know, we expect a number of patients to be retreated. And as a reminder for those that aren’t familiar with the study design, the trigger for that is madras driven, and it would be those who have not yet remitted or who had but subsequently relapsed. And, at that point, they’ll be offered the option of a single dose in part b that would be in the same assignment that they had in part a because it remains blinded or to start an antidepressant from a prespecified list. But, you know, we’re gonna get very interesting information from that.

It will help us to understand the effect of a second dose, the, the impact for those who perhaps were partial responders and who may now become full responders or remitters, of course, longer term durability of initial response or response after retreatment. So there should be a very rich dataset that that will be very valuable for payers, for clinicians, for patients, of course.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Right. You mentioned durability. What’s the sweet spot in durability, and

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: is there any difference between what investors might see as a good durability versus patients versus payers? In some ways, going back to, what I was saying about the the key takeaway for patients from zero zero five top line, we’ve we’ve already almost hit that sweet spot, you know, with a single administration, with the separation we saw to week six that is already highly differentiated. Now if we look at the results from phase two b, where those who were responders or remitters at the primary endpoint of week three, The majority of those sustained that out to week 12. And from from those at that point who enrolled in our long term extension out to fifty two weeks, many of them sustained that out to six months. Right.

So, you know, we do expect to see durability well beyond that six week time point, but I would say that really anything beyond that is upside. It’s gravy. Yeah. So you fast forward to a commercial time when this product is approved. Do you still see annual pricing of SPRAVATO as a good benchmark for pricing of a product like this?

I think we’re really gonna need to see the full profile of the drug to answer that more clearly. You know, we do anticipate much less frequent administration of comp three sixty versus SPRAVATO, which is really significant in terms of the burden on patients and their caregivers who need to drive them to all of those treatments. We think there’s potentially the opportunity to demonstrate the value beyond that realized with the delivery of SPRAVATO. But again, we’re we’re going to need to see the data to to really fully characterize the profile and and make decisions and have conversations about pricing. Got it.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: What what do you think insurers might need to see to readily pay for a product like this?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Yeah. We’re encouraged by what exists today with payer policies related to Spravato. In most cases, you know, SPRAVATO has has broad coverage, and in most cases, the policy language is pretty close to label. You know, this is being approved for patients who meet that definition, a regulatory definition of treatment resistant depression, which is third line. It’s they’ve been failed by two treatments in their current episode.

So I think that that would be our goal. That’s a reasonable expectation for us. And I think if we continue to see the data that we’ve already demonstrated through phase two and already with with phase three that that would be realistic. So let’s take a situation here where you have product a which is a non psychedelic and product b which

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: is a psychedelic. Let’s say you have equal or equivalent efficacy, the durability is much better on the psychedelic. As a practicing psychiatrist, what would you prescribe

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: and why? You know as a psychiatrist what’s always going to guide those decisions is a conversation with a patient and individual patient characteristics, their clinical picture, their preference. There may be some patients who may be more accepting of a psychedelic treatment versus others. There are certainly many patients who value not having to take daily oral treatments and have that burden of side effects. Ultimately, this is a lot of patients we’re talking about, you know, specifically with treatment resistant depression.

There are three million US adults living with with TRD right now. Last year, only about fifty to sixty thousand of them got SPRAVATO. Many of them are receiving daily oral antidepressants even though they have not necessarily shown efficacy in that population, and they may just be languishing on those. So, you know, the the consideration of a nonpsychedelic at this point has to be theoretical because there isn’t one that exists that has shown efficacy in that population. But, again, in that theoretical scenario, it will come down to to patient characteristics and preference.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: It’s a bit of a cynical question, but is there anything like how much money can be made by portions of the supply chain that apply to this product given that you might have a really durable effect? People may not be going in as often? Anything like that we should consider from from an investor cynicism standpoint, I guess?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Not necessarily. Right? You know, yes, the the frequency that’s required with SPRAVATO means, you know, x number of sales per year and x number of visits for a provider. Although, you know, that also places burden on patients and caregivers, and it’s challenging for the capacity of these centers given the frequency of treatments. You know, with our product, yes, less frequent treatment, but, you know, we think that, you know, the value will lie in in the efficacy outcomes, the patient experience, and the fact that there, as I said before, are too many patients with treatment resistant depression.

Right. And so even if the same patient isn’t treated frequently there are many others who are waiting for care.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Do you think to achieve real commercial scale, given the size of this market, you would need a setting where three or four patients are treated at the same time in the same room or would you be able to achieve scale at one patient per I guess treatment?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: The latter. You know, if you look at SPRAVATO delivery today, it typically is in private rooms, one patient per room. The interventional psychiatry infrastructure has scaled dramatically in the past six years since the launch of SPRAVATO where in 2019, there was very, very little interventional psychiatry infrastructure. There’s now 6,000 plus sites delivering SPRAVATO. About 80% of those prescriptions are concentrated in a smaller number of those centers, about a thousand, but most of them operate multiple rooms simultaneously.

They typically have a team based approach to delivering care where there’s one prescriber on-site that might be a psychiatrist or a nurse practitioner, and then nurses, techs, etcetera, who are helping to manage multiple patients. Right.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Almost out of time but I don’t want to ignore the program that you have for post traumatic stress disorder or PTSD. On that you had some promising data, could you talk about your next steps and whether it would be a phase two or phase three trial that you expect

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: to run and would you open that up to all types of PTSD including complex PTSD patients? We are really motivated to move forward as quickly as possible in PTSD following the negative LICOS decision, the CRL last summer, and then a negative AdCom recently for brexpiprazole. The the unmet need remains. There’s thirteen million US adults living with PTSD. There hasn’t been an approval in that indication for a couple of decades now, So another area of high unmet need.

We are currently finalizing the design, and so we will, you know, forthcoming be releasing more detail about the, you know, which populations we’ll be enrolling, and we have said it will be a late stage trial, but more more information to come. I’ll squeeze one last one in, investor question for you. What are

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: the specific data sets that you expect to see within your current cash runway and can you remind us exactly that cash runway is?

Steve Schultz, Head of IR, Compass Pathways: Yes. So the catalyst that we have coming up for the phase three trial for the six three arm trial, we expect the twenty six week data at the second half of next year 2026. We will also have twenty six week data from the five placebo trial, but that is dependent upon completing the Part A, the nine weeks of the six trial, but that will come ahead of that. Again, we will have more information on PTSD. We’ve got a regulatory landscape that’s interesting and dynamic, So there’s a lot going on in the company.

It’s exciting time for us.

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: Alright. I have I I had to kick myself off and didn’t ask you this question, so I’m gonna ask it. How do you view COM three sixty with its six to eight hour time in the clinic as a competitor relative to shorter acting psychedelics like the Atai Beckley program, like the GHRS program with five m d m t?

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: Yeah. We don’t necessarily see them as competitors even if it’s the same indication. Given the size of the unmet need, you know, I think there this is not a winner takes all environment. We need more tools. There will be various patient characteristics and other decision points that might, you know, point a clinician or a patient towards one treatment or another.

You know, we do think we have a head start. We will likely be on the market, you know, well ahead of some of these other options. But ultimately, you know, positive data for those programs, I think, is good for the field. It’s good for the sector. It’s good for patients.

So, you know, we welcome more approvals in this space. Thanks for that and

Sumant Kulkarni, Senior Biotechnology Analyst, Canaccord Genuity: all the work you’re doing for on behalf of patients. Thanks again for coming, and thank you for tuning into the

Steve Levine, Chief Patient Officer, Compass Pathways: webcast. Thank you. Thanks a lot. Thank you.

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