Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning still, I think, everybody, and welcome. We are very pleased that you're joining us here on the second day of Goldman Sachs Healthcare Conference. My name is Chris Shibutani and along with all my colleagues, especially on my team, we're thrilled that you could join us. Especially pleased to have Chris Boerner here in your debut performance as CEO at the Goldman Conference. We really appreciate you making the effort. I know things have been very dynamic and very busy.

I think one of the things that was interesting, I remember in the past year, you and I actually sat down for a beer, hands down, kind of just casually. And I came away and like, "Gosh, I really did not know who he was." And there's this tendency, C-suite, nice headshots, everyone's got an accomplished background. Your journey actually is quite intriguing. You're well educated. You've done a lot of different roles. Tell us a little bit about who you are in the journey that you -- got you here.

Well, I grew up in a town in Arkansas, so being CEO of Bristol-Myers Squibb, was not exactly on the radar screen when I was growing up. In fact, when I got to college, I wanted to be an economist, and I was going to be an academic and went to graduate school at Berkeley with the goal of becoming an economist. And it was really through a series of kind of lucky moves more than anything that I ended up getting interested in this industry. I did my dissertation on new product development in biotech and pharma, mainly from a sort of studying innovation standpoint. Decided not to go into academia, went to McKinsey & Company and then was very fortunate to land at Genentech in the early 2000s. And I was there for about 9 years, but between Genentech and then 2 subsequent small biotechs, most recently before Bristol, Seattle Genetics, I really had my view of the industry shaped in some ways, right, because I got to work on incredibly exciting science and some amazing products. I learned the language of science, which is really the language of our industry, primarily at Genentech, I had great mentors there, got to build a network in mainly the biotech side of our industry. And all of that I took with me when I joined Bristol, I started at BMS running our U.S. business to launch Opdivo. Eliquis was declining in share so we had to turn that business around and I have to say, even though when I got to BMS, I didn't envision that I would build a longer-term career in a big pharmaceutical company, never mind BMS. It's been an incredible journey. I've had the great pleasure to work at a company that has a 150-year history. It's reinvented itself many times over that period. And all along the way, it's been a leader in areas like IO or cardiovascular or HIV. And I think we're, again, at this kind of pivot point in the company's history, where we have the opportunity to kind of write the chapter for the next 100 years. And so I look at the opportunity we have. It's fantastic. We have a great team. And what my focus has been over the last 7 months as being CEO is how do we make sure that this company is exquisitely focused on delivering on that opportunity, changing the organization and driving a culture of accountability and being able to deliver and say what you're going to do and then execute it. And that's really been the focus for me and the leadership team. But it's an incredible opportunity, and I look forward to see where we take the company.

Yes. No, I mean you were at a lot of incredible institutions, golden age of Genentech, Sue Desmond-Hellmann, a lot of folks that also have ties over to Bristol from a corporate standpoint, the relationships focused on oncology, the delivery of that. You had a front row seat with Giovanni, particularly on the commercial side, tremendous success in 2022 in terms of just developing first-in-class kind of -- not simple when you're trying to disrupt the landscape like Camzyos, which we'll talk about a little bit later, but just a paradigm shift. And so there was always going to be a lot of weeds to hack and paths to navigate, et cetera. And so you are very much a part of that. You use the word focus, which is obviously very core, very difficult, particularly at a time when there's a lot of moving parts. And by that, I mean, you kind of ruined everyone's holiday vacation last year, with the day before and the day after Christmas, announcing some deals. Very exciting, but from the standpoint of thinking about all the stuff that has to happen literally at the time that you are sitting in the seat and figuring out how to move parts around, it seems as if there's always the McKinsey whiteboard exercise that we're going to do this, this and this, then there's actually having it actualized. So talk about that process and where you are in that because a lot of us sit here with our spreadsheets and we're analyzing margins, I've never managed the P&L within a pharmaceutical organization. So what's that actually like? And how satisfied are you with where you're at?

Well, let me maybe take that question and just say where we are in this journey. So when I took over as CEO last November, I sat down with the leadership team and said, "We have one objective. And that objective is to reshape BMS to deliver long-term sustainable growth." And when we look at the opportunity set that we have as a company, I'm convinced we not only will grow this company, but we have the ability to exit this decade with top-tier growth. And so we were then focused on how do we deliver that. Now when you look at obviously how investors are seeing the company right now. I think it -- generally see the opportunity, but there's also a recognition we got it, near-term uncertainty with Eliquis. We've got the LOE exposure we have over the course of the decade. And in that context, we said as a team, we're going to do 3 things. We're going to do them exceptionally well. First, we're going to focus the organization. There are so many opportunities. We've launched 12 drugs over the last 3 years. We have the potential to launch 7 NMEs over the next 3 years. We did the deals that you just described, which we think added additional opportunity. We've got a number of data readouts over the next 2 years. And delivering on those catalysts has to be priority #1, whether you're sitting in commercial or R&D or any supporting function. So that was step one. Step two, and this gets to how do you effectively manage a P&L is we have to look across the organization and say, "How do we make this place simpler to operate and drive a culture of having a sense of urgency and accountability for the delivery of all of the opportunity that we have." And so we've taken $1.5 billion in resources out of program so that we can redirect them to higher ROI opportunities, we've delayered the organization, simplified how we operate, and that enables us to operate more with a sense of speed. And then finally, we've said we've got to continue to be strategic in how we allocate capital. That means focus on business development, but business development that's going to contribute to growth in the back half of the decade, while at the same time, being disciplined, we're going to pay down the debt over the next 2 years and ensure that we're also returning cash to shareholders, via, for example, the dividend. So we stood back and said as a leadership team, we're going to be focused on those things and over the last 7 months. We've accomplished a lot, but we've got more to do.

So I want to use the word specifically prioritized because that tends to be where the investors are keenly watching for variations and how the information is phrased. You just rattled off a litany of the capital allocation priorities. I would say that there is an interest, an appetite, a desire amongst a lot of shareholders that I talked to for you to continue along the path of the business development pursuit, the notion that it's like, okay, you have with subject to -- an immunology renaissance, with KarXT you're back in the game post-ABILIFY, we remember there in terms of their -- getting critical mass in those 2 verticals, immunology and neuroscience, neuroscience is a little bit less in terms of the payer backdrop, but nonetheless, thinking about having a portfolio approach, having a little bit more sort of shoulder breadth of that, can you go further? And if so, is that something that you're eager to do? Or are we currently a little bit vast -- away in digesting, and where are you with the capital allocation priorities and then within BD, where does that fit? And what is your alacrity?

Yes. Well, what we've been clear on is we did a number of deals at the end of last year. We need to make sure we execute against those deals. Now the good news is we closed both RayzeBio and Karuna relatively quickly. And so in terms of digesting those deals, I think we're well down the path. But keen focus we have right now is the launch of KarXT. That is a critically important growth driver for us. We acquired that as part of Karuna and we've got to deliver on that. Having said that, we've got a fantastic balance sheet. We have the ability to continue to engage on business development. We're going to be disciplined, as I said, and pay down the debt that we accrued in doing the deals last year. But with that in mind, as we look at opportunities, we're focused on the therapeutic areas we're in. We have a right to win in [Technical Difficulty] focus area. So that's an area we're going to continue to look at. Obviously, cardiovascular is an area the company has a long [Technical Difficulty] on our radar. Neuro is an area as you point out [Technical Difficulty] neurodegeneration. Karuna gives us an immediate entree into neuropsych. But I think it's fair to say that the company is a bit subscale in that space. And so that's going to be an area of focus for us. And then immunology, what I would say about immunology on a forward-looking basis is, look, we're incredibly excited about the opportunity we have with CD19 NEX-T that's an opportunity to fundamentally transform autoimmune disease, potentially deliver long-term durable responses, maybe potentially a cure. We'll see early proof-of-concept data in SLE later this year for CD19 NEX-T, we'll see additional proof-of-concept data next year. That's a potentially substantive opportunity for us. And as we think about business development priorities in that space, I would think about us looking for more transformational opportunities as areas where we would be in.

And it's interesting, cell therapies, I think it's kicked off at JPMorgan, a little bit above and excitement in the air about translating that platform into the immune-mediated diseases. And science is exciting. However, then when we are actually trying to figure out what do I do with my spreadsheet and who's going to be able to manifest this from a commercial standpoint, it would seem with your infrastructure and the oncology side of the cell therapy that you're kind of advantaged in terms of just equipment. Is that fair?

That's the way we see it. I mean if you think about the opportunity with CD19, look, we have Breyanzi on the market today. We know the profile of that product. And the thing about CD19 NEX-T, it's the same platform. It's the same chassis, if you will. And so we've got a good read on the safety profile for this product. We clearly know how to manufacture. Look, manufacturing and cell therapy has been a journey for every company that's gone into it. But we've been clear, even as recent as the Q1 call, that we see a clear line of sight to almost unconstrained manufacturing for Breyanzi. That gives us a lot of confidence that we can manufacture in -- for CD19 and that we're going to improve the profitability of this platform over time. So when you look at the basic infrastructure, we know the way this drug operates. We are able to manufacture it. We built the logistics around it. We're in a great spot. The other thing that gives us confidence here is, remember, a lot of this data is being generated out of Germany, Georg Schett. He had [Technical Difficulty] chose to go with us. And I think that's [Technical Difficulty] and we obviously know a lot about immunology. We've had a long presence with ORENCIA, we can bring that knowledge and expertise to bear. So you sort of line this up. This is tailormade for us to be successful and to win. Now we have to see the signs play out but we're incredibly excited about the opportunity. It's potentially a big opportunity [ for us ] as a company, and we're going to invest to win. And like I said, you'll see early data, [ proof-of-concept ] later this year.

Sticking to immunology, let's talk about SOTYKTU, a product that has a very attractive profile, keen interest from the clinician community a little bit more of a sort of rough sledding from the reimbursement coverage, talk about where we're at there and when we might be able to progress between now and the end of the year, for instance?

Yes. Well, look, this is a space that is incredibly competitive. It's one where market access is the name of the game. And let's remember, when we launched SOTYKTU, we came out of the gate very, very fast. We were able to get to double-digit market share in a number of months. And given the competitive dynamics, what that led to was an increase in the amount of spend, an increase in the amount of rebating and transparently, we had to step back and say, "Do we have the right resources and have we put the right muscle around this?" And so over the course of the end of Q4, certainly into Q1, we continue to up invest to make this product successful. And that's going to be our focus. We've had good wins on the access side. We'll be announcing another big PBM win in the Q2 call. So we feel good about where we are, but undoubtedly, to be successful in this space, it's going to be commercial muscle, and it's going to be a lot of sort of hand-to-hand combat. Having said that, there are some data readouts to be on the look for. We have 2 PsA studies that will read out, the first this year and the second next year. And those 2 studies are important because there's about 20% to 30% of the PSO population that is off limits because of comorbidities with psoriatic arthritis. Once we get that data, that opens up that 20% to 30% of the population as well. So again, excited about the long-term potential, but this is one that's going to be one of continued competitive dynamics, and we're going to have to invest to win, right?

No, those are the [indiscernible] studies, [indiscernible] in psoriatic arthritis. And I think there's also going to be some data from alopecia areata as well?

That's right.

Okay. Terrific. So label expansion opportunities, SOTYKTU, stay tuned. Let's talk about the second member of the class of 2022 of novel approvals and launches Camzyos, it's almost like I don't know the artificial -- it's just like -- the prescription trends just look like an ant calling up a wall, like up and to the right, it's oddly linear. I remember we were all obsessing over the fact that the REMS was just like, oh my god, such a complicated degree of difficulty. And like remember these folks have had cell gene and Revlimid, et cetera. So it's not as if they're newbies to this. Camzyos, the opportunity here is transformational, as a former clinician, I think about the options that were there. What's going to get sort of maybe some sort of acceleration or launch trajectory? Are we thinking about this the right way? Should we be patient?

Well, I think the way we should think about this is at a macro level, let's remember what cardiovascular launches look like and the progression of cardiovascular commercialization. It's generally a straight line, as you described, up and to the right, if you have a good drug. We've actually run the analogs on a market launch-adjusted timing to look at the slope of this launch relative to ENTRESTO, relative to Plavix, other successful cardiovascular launches and we feel great about the slope of this launch first of all, it compares very well to those analogs. The second thing to keep in mind is that this product has all of the hallmarks of a very important and significant cardiovascular drug. You look at the profile of this drug. It's fantastic. This is one of the first drugs to be approved in this indication to have a significant improvement for patient benefit. It's really only one of the first drugs that you could argue is remodeling the heart. You see patient feedback is almost uniformly positive, patients don't want to come off of this drug, so you get long duration of therapy. And frankly, we've got the Eliquis team promoting this product. And remember, Eliquis was, if you talk about a team that knows how to compete, they were competing with Xarelto for the last number of years. And you can just look at share performance of Eliquis versus Xarelto to know how well this team operates. So we put our best team on this. So all of that bodes very well for the opportunity that we have with this product and obstructive hypertrophy cardiomyopathy, which is the [ initial ] indication. And of course, we do have an opportunity to see a bit of an acceleration when we get the nonobstructive indication, and we anticipate that next year.

Additional opportunities as well. I think, EMBARK is the name of the study.

That's right.

Data coming this year?

Data, likely this year or early next year. And what we like about the EMBARK data is that while that may not -- we may actually use that EMBARK data to inform MYK-224, which is a follow-up compound, but we're very much looking forward to that data.

Right. Now I was going to bring up that follow-up compound because there's this ecosystem where investors are very aware of aficamten. It's a competitive agent in there. And I often find that there's a little tug-of-war over people who feel as if this a zero-sum game and who's going to eat whose lunch versus the opportunity -- for the potential opportunity to expand because there's so much in the way of physician education, patient education, et cetera. So how are you seeing the impact of that? I think the go-to is the notion that the hassle factor associated with the REMS could be a source of differentiation. Just any commentary about anticipated competitive dynamics and the card you have in your back pocket with 224.

Well, I would say on the competitive front, I've been somewhat consistent in this view that based on all of what we've seen and what we know about the competitor in this case, that we didn't think it was going to be a differentiated asset now that we've seen the data card turnover. I maintain that this is not a differentiated product. And so in some regards, you can say that the competitive landscape is clearer air for us. Having said that, we know this market is one where you have a lot of patients who are undiagnosed and so my view is that if you have an even undifferentiated competitor enter the market, you have the opportunity to potentially expand diagnosis rates [Technical Difficulty] that we have a multiyear head start. And the team that we've got in place, I feel great about our ability to get disproportionate share. And so in some ways, I'm not terribly concerned about it, and it could be a source of market expansion. Beyond that, I would say, look, we're looking forward to the EMBARK data. We'll see how the data looks. We have a lot of reason to believe in the opportunity in HFpEF and we'll see what the data looks like and apply those learnings to MYK-224.

Milvexian, a pipeline asset. Phase II data was kind of in the distant past, at least a year ago. We're -- working busily on Phase III. I think confidence is something that often gets debated amongst investors in terms of the indications and the scale of the program and the commitment. Now you're hedging some risk because you have a partnership here. But how would you encourage someone to feel confident about milvexian's opportunity here?

Well, I mentioned earlier that BMS has a right to win in cardiovascular disease. Why do I think that's the case? We have a long history in this space. We know this space very well, going back to the Plavix days. We have a lot of people, whether it's in research and development, who know how to do clinical trial development in this space. And so one of the things you may recall from [ earlier ] in the year, obviously, there was a big question mark with the Bayer data. I think what I've been consistent in saying is we have to wait and see the science play out. But there's one thing that I note is true. We designed a Phase III study in AFib for this asset, milvexian, that if the science is favorable that study is going to show it. So we feel very good that we designed the right study. We used a dose that was a therapeutically relevant dose and so at this point, we need to wait and see how the study plays out. We won't have to wait terribly long because we anticipate that Phase III data in 2026. But again, it's 1 of 3 indications that are roughly coterminous with one another. You have AFib, ACS and secondary stroke prevention. And we're excited to see the Phase III data pan out, and our confidence in this program hasn't waned at all based on competitor data.

And obviously, it's going to try and take the mantle from Eliquis. And Eliquis is currently in pole position in a process that I'll ask you as CEO of a company and a process that's partnered with Pfizer. But as I understand it, that the Bristol team is leading. What can you say about the IRA negotiation process. Usually, I think that word always gets accompanied by air quotes. So I'll just do it for token purposes, even though I don't think this is a video webcast, but how is it going?

Well, listen, what we've said is we're engaged with CMS right now. I don't want to get ahead of that process, and we need to respect that process that they've defined. What I would say is we've been clear on the concerns that we have as a company about IRA. Having said that, if you have to go through a process of IRA, you want to go through it with a drug like Eliquis. Eliquis is a drug that got on to this list, remember, not because it has a high price, but because it has tremendously high volume. And that volume is reflective of the fact that this is a very, very good drug. It's got very good clinical data. We have built over the years, the largest -- I think the largest collection of real-world data, certainly in the cardiovascular space, if not in pharma, generally, and that's given us the ability to tell a fantastic story about not only the patient benefit, but the pharmacoeconomic benefit and the fact that this is going to be -- this is a drug that decreases the cost of the overall health care system. And we can do that in the context of Medicare patients. So we can demonstrate that in the CMS discussions. So we got to let the process play out, but I would tell you on the merits and on the facts, I feel great about the arguments that we've been able to bring to bear as part of this process. And let's also remember that when you think about IRA, there are sort of 2 parts to this. One is the price negotiation, "Negotiations" side of that. But the second is Part D redesign. And in the case of Part D redesign, that's unequivocally a good thing for Eliquis. And in fact, as we look at Part D redesign, generally, that's something that's going to be very portfolio dependent, so it depends on what drugs you have. And so whereas it might be a negative for a drug like Revlimid, which is a declining business for us. It's unequivocally positive for Eliquis. So that's sort of a wash as you think about our portfolio.

You've probably been getting a lot of questions about that dimension of the Part D redesign. And if there's some really fundamental decoder ring or the right way that investors should be asking those questions. We're all just trying to look at our models. This is like, "Oh, come on man, tell me the number, up or down."

I think the way you have to model that piece because you're looking at redesigning different components of how Part D is reimbursed. You really have to think about it on a product-by-product basis. And so we've actually done that work both in the short term and in the longer term, looking at our portfolio and how that may play out and the way we see it is you're going to have some products, again, like Eliquis, where it's a big positive. You have some other products, Revlimid is a good example, Pomalyst might be another where it's more negative. And when you put those 2 pieces together, as we look at it over our portfolio, it's effectively a wash.

This discussion on Eliquis and IRA is a logical segue to a topic that has been very much part of investor conversation with the stock since the start of the year. And that notion of this journey that the company will go from a profitability and the earnings standpoint. Trough earnings guidance, short term, long term, optionality is endless. I think investors are seeking some sort of consistency in messaging. I think you have gone away from the notion of providing trough guidance, and I think it was actually a wonderful thing that you went on this listening towards very much a signature of, I think, what I'm detecting of your management style so far is that you're going on this listening tour and doing things. And the team has spent a lot of time in that regard. So but here we sit, June 2024, what is your thinking about the earnings journey and your communication about levels because you've intentionally brought up during the first quarter call about we need to see IRA negotiations play out and that was part of the calculus to almost be a gating factor, if you can tell us more.

Well, look, I mean, one of the things that we did very early in my tenure as CEO is to say, philosophically, it's my point of view that long-term guidance in this industry is challenging and arguably should be avoided. In part because there's so much risk just in this industry generally, that I tend to think, let's stay focused on providing guidance to the things that are -- that we have clear line of sight into and frankly, investors can hold us accountable for because we can all see where we should be delivering and you can step back and say, "Did you deliver it or not? What was your say-to-do ratio on that?" And so that's philosophically how I approach this. The reason we decided to not give long-term guidance on this dimension is, I think, multifactoral. First, I think the main or one of the main questions behind this question is what's the shape of the Eliquis business. We're going to be able to say that once we know the final output of the negotiation process with CMS, and we'll know that in a few months. So the uncertainty around that will be taken off of the table. So that's step one. The second thing to recognize is that remember, what you want to be able to describe is the growth profile for the company in the back part of the decade. We're going to give great color to that over the next 18 to 24 months because what you're going to see is a series of catalysts play out. Obviously, every quarter, you're going to be able to watch and see what the growth profile does -- the growth portfolio does. And I would pay attention to that portfolio in totality, but also the most important products in that portfolio, Camzyos, Breyanzi, Reblozyl, Opdualag, the momentum we build with SOTYKTU. You'll get to see that on a quarterly basis. Towards the end of this year, you're going to have the KarXT launch, tremendous opportunity for the back part of the decade. Subcu launches at the end of the year, the PDUFA is in late December. That's an important component of us extending the IO franchise into the 2030s. That's going to be important. And then as I mentioned, you've got a series of catalyst events playing out, line extensions for Camzyos and Reblozyl next year, more CD19 proof-of-concept data. And then you've got the big Phase IIIs hitting as you get into the end of next year in '26, milvexian, LPA1, iber, mezi and then additional proof-of-concept data across some of the earlier programs like anti-Tau that could be big needle movers for us at the very end of the decade and into the next. All of that's going to play out over the next, call it, 18 to 24 months. That's going to give you a much better picture of the growth profile of the company in the back part of the decade, and I think mitigates the need to give any sort of long-term guidance here.

Yes. No, I think there's plenty that you mentioned there. Let's touch upon a couple of them. Actually, let's start by giving a little bit of love to Reblozyl. Seems to be like quietly one of the better-performing athletes here. What are we missing is what is the opportunity that we might be underappreciating here because it doesn't get as much sunshine.

Yes. Look, one of the things that we said, you'll remember, there were a lot of sort of questions about how is the second-line launch going and the like. And we said, look, stay focused here. Let's make sure that we get the launch of the second line right. People know how to dose titrate. They know how to think about this with respect to ESA and ESA switching. And that was the right thing to do because we knew the bigger opportunity was in first line. What we're seeing with the [ COMMANDS ] launches, so very good uptake across both academia and in the community setting. We're seeing good uptake on RS-positive and RS-negative patients, that's important. We're seeing increasing ESA switching here. And so the fundamentals of this launch are going quite well, and we see continued opportunity to grow this business in the U.S. There's still plenty of opportunity, particularly in the RS-negative population. We're very early days ex U.S. And of course, they're going to be dependent upon market access in individual markets. But we have a very broad label in Europe and Japan. So that's one that we'll continue to pay a lot of attention to. It's an important product, it's having significant benefit to patients, and we see it as a big opportunity for us.

Subcu, I think the PDUFA is December 29, something which is like a Sunday, 2 more trading days? Are you guys allergic to the holidays or something? Seriously man? What are you seeing in terms of reassuring us that there isn't risk associated with that being an event here. I think we have some insight into sort of what the subcu can deliver. But reassure me, I'm worried just because I do that for a living. Then talk about where you think the opportunity is and what the ultimate penetration of the subcu could be.

Well, we've seen the Phase III data. So that should mitigate some concerns. And we like the data we've seen. We've had no indication that there's any potential hiccup with that PDUFA. And the other thing to note is that this PDUFA gives us an opportunity to potentially convert the IV business across multiple indications to subcu. We have a multiyear head start relative to the LOE for Opdivo. So we have plenty of runway there. And what we've said consistently is that we believe we can convert about 30% to 40% of this business of IV over to subcu. And that's mainly going to come from a few areas. First, obviously, PD-1 monotherapy, Opdivo monotherapy is a big opportunity. If you look at combination use where you then subsequently have a maintenance phase with Opdivo monotherapy, that's an opportunity. And so those would be the 2 big areas but we see opportunities in early disease and later disease. And again, we think it's about 20% to 30% of the -- 30% to 40% of the overall business. Now in addition to subcu, though, as we think about the IO franchise into the 2030s, Opdualag becomes very important. And there, we obviously have proof-of-concept in first-line metastatic melanoma. We know this mechanism works because of the components, we'll see the actual adjuvant data in 2026, but we have high reason to believe there. We said on the Q1 call that we've seen proof of concept in lung. You'll see that data later in the year. And then we expect HCC proof of concept later this year. And so if you add all of that up between Opdualag and subcu, we see a significant piece of the IO business that extends into the 2030s. And the important thing there is no matter how you cut oncology, IO is going to continue to be an important backbone therapy. And as a leader in that space today, that gives us confidence we'll be a leader in that space going forward.

I'm going to tack on a couple more, staying with oncology, RayzeBio -- pharmaceuticals, clearly dynamic from a strategic standpoint, you have this asset. Tell us why this will make sense with you and how you're going to make sure that your integration of it is appropriate given the uniqueness of kind of the supply chain and all those dynamics.

Well, we like the platform because it's one of the fastest-growing platforms in solid tumor oncology. And when we looked at getting into this space, we looked for 3 things. We looked for an opportunity that had an on-market or near-market opportunity, so a late-stage asset that we could bring to market relatively quickly. We wanted a platform, meaning you could have a clinical set of assets coming behind that. And then most important in this space, in many respects is supply chain and manufacturing. And what we liked about Rayze is they clearly thought that through. They had multiple suppliers for actinium that they were leveraging for the clinical program, and they were building their own facility that was well underway in Indianapolis. And so you brought all 3 components of that together, and that was the reason we decided to move with this asset. Now your point about integration is really important because we made the decision when we acquired this asset to run it as a separate unit. So in fact, that's my next trip. I'm leaving here for San Diego this afternoon. And so it's run by somebody who used to be at Bristol, knows the company very well. Actually he was at Mirati and he's moved over to run Rayze for us. And we've been able to keep that team intact because when we bought this company, we bought technology, and we bought human capital. We want to make sure that team stays intact, and we didn't want to be overly forceful about trying to integrate that into the rest of the company.

And with Mirati, actually, obviously, known for headlines and familiar investments in the KRAS, but there's actually a stealth asset within there.

PRMT5.

Right.

And that's an important one. We'll see data on that one later this year. Look, the big challenge with PRMT5, people have been excited about the efficacy for some amount of time. The challenge has been, can you get the safety dialed in, and there have been some hematologic malignancies. What we like is the early data on PRMT5 that we saw -- didn't see some of those toxicities. Now we've got to see the data play out later this year. But if successful, that could be 10% of all cancers have this particular mutation that's relevant. So that's potentially an important one for us.

And anybody who claims to have a sort of agnostic toolkit diversity, you do have an ADC play as well?

We do. Look, when you think about oncology, there are platforms that are going to be relevant, and we believe ADC is one of those platforms. We did the SystImmune deal, it's a partnership at the end of the year, last year. Look, we were really impressed with the data that we saw, we sent a team to China to interrogate that patient-level data. And we think there's a real potential opportunity in lung, potentially in breast cancer, so we're excited to see that data play out as well.

And then there's probably a disregarded financial opportunity here. Rob Davis was just on stage with me, a member of your peer group here. And I think there's reason for Bristol to be rooting for WINREVAIR's commercial success?

I mean we've got a nice royalty, 20% associated with that, that plays out over time. So I'm a big fan of their commercial efforts around that product.

Excellent. Okay. We're into overtime here. A lot to cover. I look forward to continued discussions.

Look forward to it.

Thank you very much for joining us.

Thanks, Chris.