Rhythm Pharmaceuticals at Jefferies Conference: Strategic Pipeline Insights

On Wednesday, 04 June 2025, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:RYTM) participated in the Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference 2025, where CEO David Meeker discussed the company’s strategic focus on developing therapies for melanocortin-four pathway deficits. The company is advancing its drug, cetmelanotide, with a focus on lifecycle management and market expansion. While promising opportunities lie ahead, challenges such as patent expiration and competition loom.

Key Takeaways

• Rhythm Pharmaceuticals is focusing on developing oral and weekly formulations of cetmelanotide to extend its lifecycle beyond patent expirations.
• The company is targeting Hypothalamic Obesity (HO) and Prader-Willi syndrome as key growth opportunities.
• Phase II data for the oral formulation is expected in Q3 2025, with a focus on achieving at least a 10% weight loss compared to placebo.
• Current challenges include a 5% discontinuation rate due to hyperpigmentation and the need to maintain market exclusivity post-2034.

Financial Results

• The composition of matter patent for cetmelanotide expires in 2032, with formulation patents extending to mid-2034.
• Oral and weekly formulations, with patent term extensions, could protect market exclusivity until 2040 and beyond.

Operational Updates

• Rhythm’s drug, Civri, is approved in Europe and available in about 14 countries.
• Phase 3 trials for cetmelanotide in Hypothalamic Obesity showed a 20% placebo-adjusted weight effect.
• Phase II data for the daily oral formulation, involving 28 patients, is anticipated in Q3.
• An open-label study in Prader-Willi syndrome is ongoing, with results expected by year-end.

Future Outlook

• Rhythm plans to file for cetmelanotide approval for Hypothalamic Obesity.
• The company is developing both oral and weekly subcutaneous formulations, potentially expanding to other indications.
• Prader-Willi syndrome is a priority if the study demonstrates compelling results.

Q&A Highlights

• Hypothalamic Obesity affects an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 patients in the US and Europe, presenting a specialty market opportunity.
• The oral formulation aims to reduce hyperpigmentation by enhancing MC4 receptor specificity.
• The Prader-Willi syndrome study targets a 5% weight loss with dose titration starting at 1mg.

Readers are encouraged to refer to the full transcript for a detailed discussion of Rhythm Pharmaceuticals’ strategic initiatives and future plans.

Full transcript - Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference 2025:

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Yeah. Hi. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome to day one of the Jefferies Healthcare Conference.

My name is Dennis Ting, biotech analyst here at Jefferies. I have the great pleasure of having CEO David Meeker here with us from Rhythm Pharmaceuticals. Welcome.

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. Thanks, Dennis.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: So perhaps just level set us in terms of where the company is today and just sort of the evolution of the company since over the last twelve to twenty four months, and just briefly talk about the outlook.

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah, thanks. So maybe I’ll start one chapter earlier. But for those not familiar, Rhythm is a focused biotech company based in Boston focused on developing therapies for this melanocortin-four pathway deficit, so the pathway that sits in our hypothalamus and governs our energy balance. So basically signaling through this pathway tells us we’re full and you can increase your energy expenditure. And if you have a defect in that pathway, which by the way that pathway works, you’re not producing enough of alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone.

They’re hungry all the time, and it’s not the hunger you and I feel when we miss lunch. This is really a pathologic drive to eat, preoccupies these patients and their families. And your energy expenditure is low, so it’s often complicated by severe obesity. So we’ve been developing we have an analog of the hormone alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone, which is called cetmelanotide, brand name, and Civri. And our initial approvals were for the genetic defects in this pathway.

The first two were extremely small, tens of patients. We didn’t put a sales force on the field. The more recent one, Bartlett Beetle syndrome, in summer twenty twenty two. We’ve launched that, and we’re launching it globally. And that’s gone very much as expected, as Dennis asked, over the past twelve to twenty four months.

We described that as a classic ultra rare disease where you basically do the work each quarter. You have to find the patients. Some work them through the reimbursement process. And it tends to be it doesn’t inflect as a market opportunity. It’s just slow and steady.

And put the emphasis on steady, not slow. But it just continues, we’re very much in that path. And so we’re about three years in now, we’re a global company. We have the drugs approved in Europe, and we’re selling in about 14 countries around the world. More recently, a little bit unexpectedly, we discovered that the other way you can injure this pathway or have impaired signaling to this pathway is a direct injury to the hypothalamus.

There’s a classic well recognized condition which is related to these benign tumors that develop between the pituitary and the hypothalamus. The tumor itself can grow into the hypothalamus and injure it. Or more commonly, the tumor is diagnosed and it’s the surgery, plus minus radiation, to treat the tumor that injures the hypothalamus. And about half of the patients who go to surgery come out of surgery with this hypothalamic obesity. And what they experience is, in many most cases, again, this classic hyperphagia, severe hunger.

And their weight accelerates. And it’s not just they gain a few pounds. They literally particularly the kids, they explode off their growth chart. So our treatment, which is basically an analog, as I said, of the endogenous hormone, really remarkably in our phase two study, which we announced in 2022, very consistently improved all of the eighteen patients in that trial. Seventeen and eighteen had a response.

And we just completed our phase three. We can talk about the details of that. But it reconfirmed the consistency of response. And it was basically a best case in terms of the overall effect that we had. It was a 20% placebo adjusted effect on weight comparing the treated and the placebo group.

So we’re looking forward to filing that drug and getting it launched. We can talk about

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. Yeah. Mean, like, for H. Maybe frame that market opportunity relative to BBS and some of the other genetic obesity indications that you guys are approved for, and why HO is such a big deal, so transformational for the company.

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. So I’ll start with BBS. So as I said, the classic ultra rare disease, we think there’s about four thousand to five thousand patients in The US. The majority of those patients are not diagnosed. So what you do as a company is you don’t find those patients by knocking on every door.

That’s not very effective. They tend to be dispersed, and as I said, not diagnosed. So you’re trying to create a system where they have an easier time of getting to a diagnosis. And then if you’ve done that well, as many patients will find you once they get a diagnosis. They look at what’s available and they see a drug’s available, so they find you as often as quote unquote you find them.

HO is different. VBS is four thousand to five thousand in The US, similar numbers in Europe. We think HO is probably in the order of five thousand to ten thousand, so broad range there, but more patients, some maybe significantly more than BBS. But what’s strikingly different between BBS and this HO population is the extent to which they are diagnosed. So this is a pretty recognizable complication.

There’s a before and after. Otherwise healthy kids get their tumor and go to surgery and they come out and it is different. And so that moment in time enables diagnosis. And the other thing is because of where in the brain hypothalamus and the pituitary are quite close together eighty percent plus of these patients will require some level of pituitary hormonal replacement. So they have some level of pituitary insufficiency, which means they’re going be managed by an endocrinologist.

And again, unlike BBS where they may see a specialist to get to a diagnosis, there’s not much for that specialist to do so they get sent back to their primary care. So they’re dispersed. They’re out basically again, could be anywhere literally. Whereas this patient population, the acquired hypothalamic obesity population, will be actively managed by an endocrinologist. So although it’s very much an ultra rare opportunity by the numbers, given the high rate of diagnosis and the concentration in the endocrinologist, we think about this very much as a specialty opportunity.

And put that in context, and not to say we’re going to be vertex, but a classic rare disease specialty opportunity would be cystic fibrosis. Newborn screening, basically every patient’s diagnosed. They have centers of excellence. They’re all being cared for in these centers of excellence. And so concentrated, big unmet need, they have a good drug and obviously addresses that unmet need.

So there’s elements of HO which are like that. And so as Rhythm prepares for it, we will prepare differently for HO than we did for BPS.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Perfect. Now, if we can kind of shift over to a very relevant topic in the near term, it’s just around the pipeline and just around lifecycle management with cetmelanotide. Maybe remind us when you expect, the loss of exclusivity for cetmelanotide and the opportunity for your oral, which is in Phase II in HO, and your weekly sub q, which is also in phase I B in HO. Great. So let’s start

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: with the IP situation. So composition of matter for semilanotide is up in 2,032. Our formulation patents go to mid-two thousand and thirty four. We actually think the formulation patents are quite important in that the FDA puts out a guidance document when you get your drug approved, which tells the world what they might need to do if they wanted to develop a generic for your drug. That guidance document basically says, we think you have to go through our formulation.

So we actually think the formulation patents may be quite helpful. And we think in terms of the protected period out to 02/1934, mid-two thousand ’30 ’4. ’1 other note people don’t always think about in an ultra rare situation. There is no cliff in an ultra rare disease loss of exclusivity situation. When the competitor comes in, they tend to price the drug similarly.

The reason they don’t come in and dramatically cut the price is because you can’t make it up on volume. It is rare. And so they come in, they price similarly, and the two companies have battled that out in the marketplace in that sense. And so yes, you may lose some share, but it’s not the classic generic entry kind of model. So that said, we think in terms of 2034 as our current period for semilanotide.

Next generation is important for two reasons. So as Dennis mentioned, we have two drugs. One’s a daily oral, which we acquired in license from LG Chem, who had cracked the ability to target this MC4 receptor with an oral small molecule. And that is a phase II study that I’ll be reading out here in quarter three. And then we have our own internally developed weekly formulation, which is a peptide that’s very similar to our approved drug.

It’s a seven amino acid peptide. Our current drug is an eight amino acid peptide. And that will hopefully be able to say something by the end of the year. Both of those are being studied in HO, this hypothalamic obesity population. And the beauty of that population, if you will, from a pure drug development standpoint, is because it seems to be so sensitive to this drug, to the MC4R agonism, it’s an on target off target effect is that you get increased pigmentation.

And about five percent of patients in our current world, real world experience, do stop the drug because of that. So it’s not a huge percentage of patients, but there’s no added benefit to the hyperpigmentation. So both of these drugs have been designed not to have hyperpigmentation. We’ll hopefully confirm that in the thing. And then the last piece from an IP standpoint is the IP for both of these with patent term extensions would take us to 2040 plus.

So this part of the lifecycle management does meaningfully increase our overall market opportunity.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah, definitely. From a valuation perspective, when you’re out in 02/1934, when you are at billions of dollars of revenue, having that lifecycle management tool to continue that even for five years is massive to the NPV. So the oral Phase II data is the most near term. Think the guidance is Q3, so it could literally come in a month. Can you help frame that readout for investors given that we already have set melanotide phase two, set melanotide phase three?

How should people think about that data vis a vis what you guys have already reported?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. We live in an interesting world that used to be, I think, for anti quote unquote obesity medications, it was just as a work or not work. Now it’s, of course, all about the percent change. And as Dennis knows, worked hard to try to help people think a little differently about the world we live in from the glipse, where it’s very much trying to compare percent changes. What was striking about our current drug, semilanotide, as I said, was the consistency of response.

So what we’ll be looking forward to these readouts with both the daily oral and the weekly is what one, what’s the consistency response? That said, semilanotide has put a bar in the sand or sorry, a stake in the ground. And we would expect in an apples to apples comparison that it should be at least 10% plus in terms of the weight loss. I don’t think it needs to be exactly the same as semilanotide to still be a drug. I mean, if you’re an oral with a better profile, more convenient, and maybe some other features, that may be great for some patients.

And so we would definitely take that forward. Now the data set you’re going to see in quarter three, it’s a pretty small data set. It’s 28 patients. There’s four groups, one placebo group and three doses. So seven patients in each one of those cohorts.

And as you can imagine, seven patients so we’re not so many. We’re not going to be internally so focused on the mean percent change in those group. What we’ll be looking to understand is, can we get conviction around the fact that it’s working? And I use the example like in your seven patient cohort, if you had five patients where it looked pretty good and two patients that didn’t look good at all and your mean was kind of not so impressive, mean’s not interesting. The question is can you figure out why did the two patients who seem not to respond, not respond?

And that’s how we’ll break down that data set. So we’ll do our best when we report this out to try to explain it in a way that comparison, the listener can have some appreciation for how this compared to our current drug at a similar point in time in a similar population. We’ll try to provide whatever caveats we have in terms of what’s needed to understand that data. And then the other part of the data, which is not a part of this readout per se, is that all of these patients roll over into an open label extension at the top dose. So every patient will go, which is six hundred milligrams, every patient will be on six hundred milligrams rolling forward.

And we’ll begin to get that data at three month intervals. And I think that will be a really important part two of this data set to give us confidence that, A, if we have a drug, we know what we need to do to take it into Phase III.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: And going into the Phase III readout for semilanotide, I mean, you made some comments around, hey, look, like if you in the younger patients there might be a little bit more variability, whereas in the older patients then there’d be less variability. But the data ended up being pretty consistent, right, around 20% BMI regardless of what age cutoff. So now that with that data in hand and you’re going into this oral phase two data, should we kind of expect a similar consistency? Or like what may or may not be, impacting that?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah, just so we’re all on the same page. What Dennis is referencing, for those who haven’t seen the data, in our Phase III data set, which was 120 patients, two to one randomization, eighty treated, forty roughly in the placebo group, We stratified for three age groups six to 12, 12 to 18, and 18 and above. And one of the earlier questions before we ran our phase three was, would it work as well? Because our phase two was largely pediatric patients, and the world wasn’t so confident that it would work similar in adults. But amazingly, as Dennis said, it was literally 20%, twenty %, twenty % placebo adjusted for all three of those.

So we didn’t see the variability there. Inside every data set, of course, these are mean values. We’ve got a spread, there was a spread. So in our phase two, the kids six to 12 had a greater percentage change, and they drove the mean effect at our early sixteen week readout in our phase two. So things we’re alert to are those kind of imbalances.

Our current data set, just because of the formulations that they had, they weren’t set up to go below 12. So this data set is just 12 and above. So as we present this, for example, and try to give people insight into apples to apples comparisons, we’ll try to well, not try. We will look at those other data sets in the population 12 and above and, again, try to put it in the right context.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Got it. And then if you can speak a little bit to hyperpigmentation, given that the oral and the weekly are not really supposed to be hitting MC1R. So going into the Phase II data in Q3, how should we think about hyperpigmentation?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah, so when we talk about not hitting MC1, it’s all relative specificity. So it’s much more specific for MC4 over the MC1 receptor, which is on the melanocyte. But it’s not to say that either drug has no interaction with the MC1 receptor. So this is to be tested. Our preclinical data would give us some confidence that it should be less, if not significantly less, and we hope zero.

But our expectation is it will definitely be different. I think in terms of a desired profile, zero would be the optimal. But it doesn’t have to be zero to make a difference here. I think anything that’s meaningfully less would be good. And the hyperpigmentation is not won’t call it it’s more than cosmetic in the sense that it can be quite troubling for an individual.

But it has no health impact beyond that. So it wouldn’t kill the drug if we see some hyperpigmentation. And as I said, I’m pretty confident if we did it would be less. So yeah, it’s a feature but not the most critical piece.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And last question on the oral. Just when you in licensed this from LG Chem, And they have some data that’s out there, preclinical phase one. What additional due diligence have you or did you do and have done since then on the asset that could be driving some of your confidence into that data?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. Just how that deal came together. We’d been talking to LG Chem for over a year before is the way that some of these things work out. So we’ve been following the work they were doing as they put it out. They really did an incredible job developing the drug.

They ran the drug in more preclinical models than we had, our own drugs. And so they had a very robust data set from that standpoint. And then in their phase one study, basically looking for two things. One was, was there any change in BMI or weight? And it’s not the percentage again.

That was not interesting. It’s just, was there a signal? Because this mechanism, MC4R agonism, does not work in general obesity. And these phase one trials, they did and we do run them in patients with general obesity. But it doesn’t work.

It’s not a weight loss drug in that sense the way a GLP-one is. But if you take it, you should feel something. You should feel full maybe sooner, a little more often or whatever. So they saw that. And the second thing we were looking for were GI side effects.

So if we had not seen any GI side effects, that would have been worrisome that they’re not getting MC4 agonism because those GI side effects, the nausea, vomiting specifically, are very much a function of hitting that receptor. It’s not a drug effect per se. It’s a MC4R agonist effect. So we wanted to see that and they had that. So that gave us a lot of confidence.

Since then, we’ve repeated a couple of the models internally and have confirmed their findings. So I think we’re very confident that we have both their drug and the one we developed, the weekly, two very good MC4R agonists. So I’m not worried that we’re testing to see if we’re going to get an effect or not. I think it’s more a question, are we dosing things correctly? Do we have that right dose?

Is there something else about the drug that is not giving us the result we would expect? But from a pure MC4 agonist chemistry standpoint, it should work.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Shifting over to the weekly sub q, RM718, can you speak to your confidence in that compound relative to the oral? And I’m not trying to make you pick your favorite child, but as we go into the second half of the year and you have these two readouts, would love to kind of hear what you’re thinking about that.

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah, and it’s the right description or analogy. There is no favorite child. I think if they both work, we’ll take them both forward. There’s a place for both in the market. And our objective there would be let patients and physicians make the choice of what’s prefer preferable and best for them.

And you can imagine scenarios where one might be preferred over the other. I think in terms of handicapping the two, the way we’ve answered that is that just from the pure chemistry, if you will, the weekly is closer to our currently approved drugs. So you would argue there maybe there’s fewer unknowns, and so maybe that’s a little bit of a higher probability bet. An oral small molecule maybe by definition might have more unknowns. So I guess I’d say that.

But if you look and these molecules have been run head to head in the preclinical models, you get the same result. So I think that’s as far as I can go. I’m just I’m theorizing why one might be better, but I have no evidence that one might be better.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Well, let’s say both of these trials work, right? And you take them into phase three and they work and they like how should we think about both products on the market? And how do you think about prioritizing one or the other? Or how does BBS factor into this?

Because having both assets is quite valuable, you also kind of run into the problem of, like, which one do you prioritize?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. So if they both work, we’ll take them both into phase three for HO. HO is a big opportunity. We want to maximize that. We want all options available.

Your question about BBS becomes interesting. I think that will hinge on when we look at the data, is there anything about the data set that makes us think one might work better in BBS than the other? All things being equal, you might say, let’s get them approved in all of our both of them approved in our current indications and it’s really a BBS question there which then would make cetmelanotide a little less relevant on the market. And we could see what might be optimal case there. But at least that option would be there.

Patients would be well served with two better drugs if we develop them in all indications. But going forward and there’s multiple additional indications which we’ll be researching it’s very unlikely we would take both indications both molecules forward in every new indication.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Sure. There’s also a third readout in the second half. You guys are running a open label study in Prader Willi. So maybe talk a little bit about that. And you guys did run a trial a few years ago which didn’t work.

And what’s different now?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. So, yeah, we’re pretty excited about the Prader Willi opportunity. Mean, a lot of attention. That’s a huge unmet medical need and I think a big milestone with Celanos drug getting approved. So first drug approved, which opens up a regulatory path at one level.

The trial we ran back in that Dennis was referencing back in 2018 or so the problem was it was a complicated trial. The dose we used were too low. That was earlier in the development. We didn’t know as much about the drug as we do today. And it was too short four to eight weeks, and the maximum dose was two point five mg.

So there were patients who responded at the top dose, the two point five mg dose. But the trial design itself there were some placebo patients who had a good response as well. It was uninterpretable. So we’re trying again. But the current trial design is it’s an open label study, but we’ll dose every patient up to five mgs, so 2x the dose ultimately for six months.

So I think from a duration standpoint, if it’s going to work, we should see something. And part of the reason we’re excited is that there’s good biology that says this melanocortin-four pathway is involved in Prader Willi. Now it’s not the only thing that’s going on in Prader Willi, and that’s the challenge. There’s a lot of other things that these Prader Willi patients struggle with, and the behavioral challenges and the like. And that’s what can make running clinical trials very difficult and interpreting results from the trial very difficult.

So it is possible, and it may have happened in the past, where you have a drug that is active, but the trial’s negative because you can’t see it for reasons that confound your ability to read it out. So we’ll see where it goes. Our goal is to hopefully be able to say something by the end of the year. Yeah, that’s it.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Can I ask you a question on Prader Willi again? So you said a max dose is five milligrams a day. Is there a dose titration scheme? Like, how can you ensure that patients can actually reach the top dose?

And then what kind of implementations do you have in the trial to help them with that?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: So good question. For anybody who’s using an MC4R agonist in all of our trials, the GI symptomatology, the nausea predominantly that you get, is mitigated by starting low and going slow. So dose escalation’s a critical part of just using the drug correctly and getting a better outcome from it. So all these patients will dose they’ll start at one and dose escalate weekly as tolerated. If somebody’s having some nausea, you go a little slower, maybe stay at the dose for a couple weeks and then go up.

And the only other thing we’re working with Doctor. Miller, who was part of the first trial. Her impression in the first trial was Prader Willi patients tolerate this extremely well. So HO patients interestingly have a lot of background gastrointestinal complaints related to their underlying disease and complications. So actually they maybe were a little more challenging whereas in this case the Prater Willi.

So I’m pretty confident we will get many, if not all, of the patients to the five mgs.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Is there a set dose escalation protocol where like you have to get to five milligrams by twelve weeks?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: No. Not in this trial. We did force titration earlier in drug development, bartabetal first. I think that what we’ve learned is probably not wise being that prescriptive. There is an individualized dosing here in the sense of based on how patients are tolerating the med.

That’s quite, as I said, individualistic. No. But the goal is they’ll go weekly as long as it’s tolerated and may take a little longer, but hopefully not too much.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And then what would you consider to be good data there from Prader Willi?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. So the Slanos drug’s approved based on decreasing hyperphagia. I mean, our drug works has an impact, decreases hyperphagia as well. I think I know we work by a different mechanism. If we only saw hyperphagia, I think that wouldn’t be enough.

We really need to see weight loss. But the weight loss bar, I would argue, is lower here for example, than the GLP-one world we live in. So anything 5% or better to me would be a very clinically meaningful contribution to a community that doesn’t have anything that does that today. So that’s the goal, I think.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Five percent at twenty four weeks?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah, six months. I mean, again, with a caveat that if a patient isn’t making it but we have a good reason to why they didn’t, we’re not going to throw the drug out.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And assuming that readout is positive and it’s encouraging and you guys will move forward, would you prioritize semilanotide in that indication? Or at that point you would already know whether the oral works or the weekly sub q would work?

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Yeah. Still part of an internal discussion. I think the Prader Willi opportunity is quite large and meaningful. If we see a meaningful result, I think there’s an argument be made that you just go aggressively and quickly with semilanotide. Developing a drug as a supplemental NDA with multiple prior negations and a large safety database behind it, of course, that’s a huge advantage as opposed to starting with a new chemical entity.

But the reason you wouldn’t do that is that sooner or later you’re going to do it with the next generation, so maybe you could just skip that. So there’s definitely discussion to be had. But again, if it’s compelling, I wouldn’t be surprised if you saw us move quickly with semilanotide.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, very good. I think that is all the time that we have. David, it’s great to see you. Thanks for hanging out with us. And yeah, we’re very excited about the path ahead for you guys.

David Meeker, CEO, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals: Thanks, Dassie. I appreciate the opportunity to be here.

Dennis Ting, Biotech Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah, thank you.

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