Great question! 🙏(You're reading it right and may be one of the few people to read the entire article😊) On the drug curve alone the model agrees with you- at wk 30 the VANQUISH-1 schedule sits about 1.8pp BEHIND the Maintenance schedule (-21.9% vs -23.7% on my chart's footing), because it reaches 17.5mg 14 weeks later. The two catch up by ~wk 48 and are the same line by wk 72. ➡️ What put the VANQUISH-1 line ahead of the Maintenance Trial's actual at wk 30 in my chart is the placebo term, not the titration. That chart carries SURMOUNT-1's placebo response (2.4pp) because VANQUISH-1, like SURMOUNT-1, counsels every arm on diet and exercise. The Maintenance Trial's placebo arm did nothing (-0.1 at wk 21, +0.3 at wk 33), so the two aren't on the same footing at wk 30. Strip the 2.4 out and VANQUISH-1 reads -19.6% at wk 30, under the Maintenance arm. ➡️ This is really the cross-trial issue from the article showing up inside my own chart- the drug curve is the same, the assumed placebo response of the trial around it is not. I ran both titration schedules at 17.5mg (Maintenance and VANQUISH-1) through my model to illustrate the impact of the titration scheme on WL vs time- chart below, on the same footing as the article's projection.

$NVO Very interesting. FYI - it seems Orbis is also partly funded by Lilly Ventures which is $LLY 's VC arm.

$VKTX - @bioinvestor24 makes excellent points in the quoted post. 🙏 I agree with all of them, and want to add detail on one: ➡️ The +5 mg step at Week 10 in #VK2735 VENTURE (10 → 15 mg) did not produce an outsized AE signal. The Week 1 spike in that arm came from a 5 mg opening dose in drug-naive patients. This is the only arm that started there. The other arms opened at 2.5 mg. ➡️ 15 mg arm, Week 1: 27 GI events, nausea in 17 of 35 (48.6%). Week 10: 4 GI events total - nausea 3 (8.6%), vomiting 1, no diarrhea, no constipation. A real uptick, but not a Week 1 repeat and gone by Week 11. ➡️ This isn't unique to a step-up week. The 5 mg arm logged 12 GI events in Week 4; 5 mg Week 2 and 10 mg Week 4 logged 6 each. ➡️Small scattered clusters show up throughout the study. Caveats: n=35 per arm, so one patient moves a rate ~3 points, and by Week 10 that arm is already tolerized. Here are some slides including a modified one from my original article (green = the nuance). Take a look for yourself:

$PTGX is on a roll‼️ Just got approval for another partnered peptide drug. MIMRYLO (aka rusfertide) was approved Aug 28. They got a best-case "broad and clean label" according to JPMorgan. ➡️As a result, Protagonist got another big milestone payment ($275M) and will receive double-digit pure profit royalties on this second drug with blockbuster potential (ICYMI - ICOTYDE was the first).

$VKTX - The GI profile in the induction phase matters even though it is not the same as the titration in Vanquish. If it is good (as in consistent with the class and equal/better than say Tirzepatide's) then VK2735 will have another way to dose -> 2-week titration blocks rather than 4. Yes, this would be "off-label" but there is a lot of that happening now with both approved and compounded GLP1s varieties. Consider also: ➡️There is a segment of the market that will want to lose weight fast and would possibly risk the AE profile to do it. Getting to the top dose of 17.5mg in 12 weeks (the time it takes in induction) rather than 26 weeks would also save them money as an incentive. ➡️This would be a material competitive advantage over Tirzepatide should this 12-week titration prove viable. (Tirzepatide takes 20 weeks to get to its top dose of 15mg) ➡️ Being able to titrate up quickly says something about VK2735 tolerability that reads through to the Ph3 Vanquish study in a positive predictive way. VK2735's TMax at 70-90h is later/longer than key other GLP1's (E.g. Tirz, Reta, Sema, etc.) . It is a big reason VK2735 is likely to succeed in the Maintenance Trial with 2 week titration blocks IMO. @Doctor_Salomon @semodough @pharmdca @GilaMonstrum

Don't think any MS note had any comments like that and I don't believe BL made any statements like that either. Again-the Maintenance study titration has not been publicly disclosed AFAIK. ➡️If you have a link on MS or can reference someplace that BL stated a limit on titration steps for the ph1 maintenance study please share. I would note that there are no 5mg steps in the ph3 study so possibly that is where you got "no 5mg jumps" but that doesn't apply to the maintenance study induction phase. Here is the Phase 3 VANQUISH titration scheme:

Where did you get the information that Viking will not escalate (titrate)by more than 2.5 mg in the induction phase of the ph1 maintenance study? (I don't believe this has been disclosed.) ➡️After the first 3 wks. of being on the drug, up titrating by 5mg wasn't all that much different than going by 2.5 in the Venture ph2. Brian's comments lead me to believe there will be at least one 5mg jump after say 5-6 wks. Here is the time course of AE's from venture ⏬⏬⏬⏬⏬

I would hope they clear this up very soon and set expectations - too many unknowns right now. I’ll also make a follow‑on guess about the one arm where they titrate to 17.5 mg at some point (around week 17?) and stay there until week 31. This arm has N=15, which is really small, so we could see very wide variance. (In the Venture Ph2 SubQ study, N was 35 for the 10 mg and 15 mg doses.) If I interpolate the data for TRZ at 33 weeks (SURMOUNT‑1), I think that landed around 17–18% WL. Interpolating the Reta Ph2 data at 33 weeks, I think Reta hit ~20% at that point. ➡️ So again, using TRZ and RETA as yardsticks -assuming a normal obesity‑population baseline, a titration schedule starting at 2.5 mg and increasing in 2.5 mg increments (mildly aggressive since they’re not 4‑week blocks), and the realities of the calendar with respect to WL - I would guess absolute WL of 15–17% for VK2735 over around 20 weeks. Out to 33 weeks, I would guess VK2735 is in the 19–22% range. (@GilaMonstrum modeled ~20.6% for this arm I believe and Noumena's analysis/models have been spot on in the past IMO) Even getting close to Reta without the tingling, arrythmia etc would be very positive IMO.

Interesting points. I think @sarathmandava99 is correct that it is 21 weeks now not 19 as Brian said in the cc. Per the current company presentation its 21. (key slide included). I'm noting that BL also said the highest dose was there for a 3 week period. Really wish they would disclose the titration schedule clearly for all arms. If I had to make a new guess for the 17.5 mg arm(s) titration it would be New guess for titration on the key 17.5mg arms is now: 2.5mg x 3wks, 5.0 x 3wks, 7.5 x 4wks, 12.5 x 4wks and 17.5 x 7 wks. (21 total for induction +12 week maint = 33 total) I like the idea that it is now 21 weeks for induction vs 19. Viking needed to provide some longer data like others have provided in ph2. (I actually would like to have seen the induction phase go out to 26 weeks but 21 is better than 19 and I will take it)

$VKTX - @GilaMonstrum - I'm very interested in your simulations. (They're outstanding 🙏🙏🙏!!) As you lose weight, your basal metabolic rate (BMR) goes down and some motivation is lost the closer you get to your goal so I agree that the closer you get to max WL effect, the less weight you lose per wk. However, given #VK2735 has a 8-10 day 1/2 life, the blood plasma concentration was still changing/rising at the end of the Venture ph2 so isn't there some effect that should maintain the WL trajectory slope till you settle out for around 4-6 half lives (i.e. around 6-7 weeks for VK2735)? Secondly- the fact that Viking raised the terminal dose to 17.5 mg tells me they think they could get better/more receptor engagement by increasing the max dose. Agree? Finally for the Ph1 maintenance trial the induction phase will have approx. 165 subjects all on the same titration schedule. The induction phase can be looked at as a large single arm and I expect the WL results there will drive the $VKTX PPS even more so than the 31 wk maintenance results (12 weeks of maintenance). My best guess at the induction titration schedule needed for this study is 2.5mg x 3wks, 5.0 x 3wks, 7.5 x 3wks, 12.5 x 3 wks and 17.5 x 7 wks. So this starts small, and jumps by 2.5 until week 9 and then makes two 5.0 mg jumps to end at 17.5 for 7 wks to "settle out" in prep for evaluation of Maintenance doses. My guess is based upon BL comments and my "spit ball" analysis of the ph2 venture subq AE's. If you look at all the arms except the 15mg in that trial they started at 2.5 and didn't have a lot of AE's. The 15mg arm had one 5mg jump that didn't seem to be too bad on AE's and it suggested that once you had drug in circulation after a reasonable exposure you could raise by 5mg. So my guess is an aggressive schedule but reasonable. (I've attached the titration schedule from the ph 2 venture along with the time sequenced AE's on the 10 & 15 mg arms in the second pic to this post for reference) Could you use this titration schedule to estimate a WL range out to 19 weeks? Or if you have other thoughts, please share. TIA.

With respect to Corden TAPS, the search/AI results you posted are "generic" as you say and they don't tell the whole story. I will be commenting on this further but a better thing to do now would be to look at the actual talk Corden gave at TIDES 2025 on this topic. (see link at end of this post). The talk used Exenatide (a 39 aa peptide that targets GLP1 aka Byetta) as an example and at around the 22 min mark they talk about the fact that they were working on doing the whole peptide with TAPS as a case study. In the specific case of VK2735, neither Viking or Corden have disclosed much about how the VK2735 API is or will be made for competitive reasons. A key question is how much of the VK2735 aa sequence is TAPS being used to make. It could be anywhere from half the sequence to the whole sequence. (It's quite likely that working on VK2735 was a higher priority for them back then.) You can view the Corden 2025 TAPS presentation at this link: cordenpharma.com/resources/c…

$VKTX Peptides have many advantages over Small Molecules and I'm reposting a version of a chart I've posted before here. Viking's VK2735 has all of the advantages associated with peptides while minimizing the disadvantages. This is true of both the SubQ and ORAL forms.

$MDGL - Just hired their 1000th employee according to their LinkedIn acct. Just one year ago they were at 500 employees. (Rezdiffra was approved May 2024.) Small Biotech startups can become become big market cap companies (MDGL now at ~12B and growing). Many small biotechs have hit it big -> $AMGN $REGN $GILD Genentech and others have become industry leaders with market caps many times their first drug pre-approval size. Could $VKTX be next as @Pharmdca suggests? 🤔

Two theories. ➡️ 1-Viking didn't want to encourage competitors by letting them know just how potent VK2735 as a dual agonist peptide was in comparison to TRZ and preferred everyone look for some new MOA. ➡️ 2)- Viking is getting serious about partnership and signaling a willingness to deal now. Patience is warranted.

Yes- discrepancies between what was reported in the patent and the new slide. (e.g.- c Max of TRZ is 24 hrs. on slide and is 40 hrs. in patent table) I saw the differences before posting but figured it was worthwhile info to mention. Both indicate it was a single matched dose. ▶Regarding the pre-clinical data of 2735 vs TRZ in DIO mice, it was in liver fat reduction. I'm posting the slides I have from the Feb 2022 VKTX corp presentation for VK2735 vs Sema (in WL and Glucose) and VK2735 vs TRZ (in Liver Fat).

Viking patents from 2024 indicate that they studied PK of #VK2735 vs Tirzepatide in monkeys 🐵 so the testing occurred some time ago IMO. The table in the image I'm posting is from the Jul 2024 patent. (It is notable that compound 14 which is what I still believe is VK2735 does not appear in the table so this new slide is the first direct PK comparison made public). ▶ As additional information, I would offer that Viking has also tested VK2735 vs both Semaglutide and Tirzepatide in DIO mice. (I have old Corporate presentations saved from 2022/2023 that have slides with data comparisons - if those slides would be off use to you please let me know and I will post.) ▶ As a final point I will say that BL has indicated in past conference calls that the reason the control arm in the current studies was PBO and not an active comparator like Sema or TRZ is a FDA requirement/request. I believe Brian knows VK2735 is considerable more efficacious and more tolerable than TRZ (or Sema) and would prefer to replace a sham PBO in future trials with an active control.

$NVO- Current peptide manufacturing techniques have changed the game for new entrants in Diabesity. An example of this is noted by Jeffries when they assumed coverage on Novo Nordisk with an underperform rating and DKK 290 price target. One of the reason they cited was "there appears to be no real manufacturing moat anymore". CDMO's like CordenPharma, Bachem, PolyPeptide, Ajinomoto and others can make Peptides at scale much more inexpensively than ever before. Novo's (and $LLY's) advantage in manufacturing is no longer a barrier to new entrants. The $VKTX CordenPharma agreement is exhibit 1 in this new reality. 😲

There were several really good replies to the quoted post on $VKTX's Maintenance study. In particular there was a thread on the induction phase where @ResearchPulse1 and @GilaMonstrum commented that they rightly thought the WL originally projected at 19 wks was too aggressive especially given the titration scheme during induction is not known. Using a more conservative titration estimate @GilaMonstrum graciously created a new WL estimate at 19 wks using his much better model and that graph is included in this post requote. The "best guess" on the titration scheme is that it is 2.5mg, 5.0mg, 7.5mg, 10mg,15mg in 3week blocks which gets you to week 15 and then you have 4 weeks at the 17.5mg which is the final dose used in the Ph3 Vanquish study. A second "aggressive" guess at the titration scheme jumps goes 2.5, 5, 10, 15 in 3 wk blocks and ends at 17.5mg for 7 wks. (it is likely only one titration scheme will be used in induction to allow valid comparison of the different maintenance arms.) This gets a WL guess/estimate of around 16-17% which if achieved would be a great result at week 19 . We would also get new AE data on this large data set which would presumably be better that the good AE seen in ph2 as the titration scheme is likely less aggressive in this trial. Again this would be the longest trial data for VK2735 and with N around 180, the largest single arm where data is disclosed so it should help to predict ph3 Vanquish result. There are many other aspects of this trial that are very important. This is is a pioneering study that no one has done before because VK2735 is the only compound that can effectively support 4 different dosing regimens (SubQ weekly, and monthly plus Oral daily and weekly). There are several comments in the original post that cover the groundbreaking maintenance aspect of this study and if you are interested you can look at those aspects there. (and special thanks 🙏to @GilaMonstrum who always provides unique insights!)

$VKTX- Near term catalysts: ▶ Should start Ph2 Maintenance study in Obesity for #VK2735 this month that includes monthly subq and low dose oral options. (this one could happen any day now.) ▶ Should have IND and ph1 study in Amylin/Dacra Compound by EOY ▶Vanquish PH3 subq study initiated Jun 25th. Enrollment going well and next up is announcement of completion full enrollment. Other events that could drive the stock higher: - Renewed interest in MASH drugs due to MDGL success (and FDA relaxing Biopsy reqs for ph3) could lead to partnership of #VK2809 - Interest rates continue to decline and lead to even more buyouts in pharma.

Right now $LLY's drop of approx. $100 a share today on the Orforglipron news equates to a market cap drop of around $95 Billion. Hmmm...I wonder what $VKTX' s Brian Lian is thinking about the the potential market value of ORAL #VK2735?

Orforglipron not meeting expectations for WL according to WSJ: "Lilly Pill Helps People Lose Up to 12% of Body Weight, a Bit Less Than Expected". Note that this was over a after more than a year of treatment!!! Also in the article it was noted that "About 10.3% of the people who started the trial on the highest dose of the drug discontinued treatment because of adverse events." IMO, $VKTX #VK2735 oral should provide better weight loss with fewer side effects quicker and at lower total cost. $LLY $VKTX wsj.com/health/pharma/eli-li…

$VKTX- My current opinion is that #VK2735 Oral is "good enough" to be commercially successful as is. (and it could be great as-is depending on tolerability/efficacy data). However- I think Viking did phase 1 with a standard carrier and further improvements can be made to the oral delivery of this drug to improve its bioavailability further. ➡️There is a reasonable chance Viking is working on a better oral carrier or may team up with someone who has one. Ever since peptides became "popular" multiple companies have been working on carriers specific to peptides. ➡️Current FDA Manufacturing and Controls (CMC) guidance dictates that by phase 2 start, the manufacturing process should be well-defined and controlled to ensure the consistent production of the drug substance. ➡️By PH3, the process needs to be fully developed/validated. The ship has sailed on the injectable and that is locked in at this point as ph3 will start on that soon. But the carrier on the oral version could be modified without affecting the subq.🤔 While the ph2a oral probably uses the same carrier as ph1, it is possible it has already been modified. (Viking sure slow played ph1 oral and may have been working on a better carrier all the while). In any event, I could see a change coming before the start of a phase 2b to the carrier or a small bridging study before the start of a ph3 oral study to enable a new formulation. Yes- this is only speculation but nevertheless a real possibility.

LC (@houndcl ) - Outstanding work! 🥇 I have high confidence (95%) you are right that the NME referred to in the $VKTX patent US 2024/0239843 A1 dated Jul24 as compound 14 is indeed VK2735 based on your work. (This is also the same as Compound 4 in the US 11,744,873 B2 patent dated Sept23 as you point out. ) For anyone interested in confirming this you need to start by looking at the poster LC referenced and then compare that to the relative sizes of the TG bar graphs of fig. 1 plus carefully read the text on example 16 pg. 34-35. (I wouldn't say this is easy to do.) For the balance of this post, I will refer to this as compound 4/14 and or VK2735. Given "compound 4/14" also has a very low affinity for HSA, long ½ life, the same “phosphono group tipped fatty acid” attached at pos 20, and has 39 aa's , all the conclusions I made in the original post remain in place excepting the aa structure. To repeat those conclusions simply: ➡️VK2735 is taking a unique approach to extending half life which is not dependent on HSA affinity. ➡️This approach is also unique in that it utilizes a phosphono group at the end of the fatty acid chain that no one else in the latter stage GLP space seems to be advancing (anyone who knows different, please contribute). The phosphono group tipped fatty acid and long half life with low HSA affinity are key differentiators for VK2735 and part of VK2735's secret sauce as a Subq as well as an Oral IMO. As for corrections to the aa sequence there is an Isoleucine at pos 17 of compound 4/14. (compound 23 has Threonine at pos 17) . The corrected aa structure for VK2735 is: Y2EGTFTSDYSI2LDKIAQKAFVQWLIAGGPSSGAPPPS or Tyr-Aib-Glu-Gly-Thr-Phe-Thr-Ser-Asp-Tyr-Ser-Ile-Aib-Leu-Asp-Lys-Lle-Ala-Gln-LYS-Ala-Phe-Val-Gln-Trp-Leu-Leu-Ile-Ala-Gly-Pro-Ser-Ser-Gly-Ala-Pro-Pro-Pro-Ser. I have placed a jpg of VK2735 aka compound 14 or 4 depending on which patent you cite at the end of this post. Viking was rightly trying to make it difficult for competitors (and investors😉) to figure out VK2735’s actual structure and data. I’m guessing that’s why Compound 14 doesn’t appear in tables 1,2, and 3 in the Sep24 patent( but its structure is shown and it appears in fig1.) FWIW- Given the time that has passed since Sep24, I expect most VKTX competitors have figured out VK2735’s structure by now. If you google "VK2735 for sale" you will find it is available for purchase as a research product from AbMole. If you re-read my original post you will note that I said I “believed” compound 23 was VK2735 as I was not 100% sure. I noted that “I would appreciate any corrective comments on this post from those more skilled in chemistry science and opinion on whether you agree compound 23 is indeed VK2735.” and tagged poster @houndcl as being one of those more skilled than I in this area. Group think is very powerful! Thank you LC! 🙏🙏🙏 Here is #VK2735:

$VKTX-VK2735 All good comments in the thread I’m quoting. However- I think it is better to look at a different VKTX patent for insight - specifically- US Patent 2024/0239843 A1 dated Jul-18-24. In that patent Viking identifies a "compound 23” that after much research I believe is #VK2735. Below I’m posting the amino acid sequence of compound 23/VK2735 along with a link to the patent. Here are the key things I believe can be said about VK2735 based upon this patent: ➡️It has a low binding for Human Serum Albumin (HSA) yet it has a long half-life. (Most all GLP1 based drugs (peptides as well as small molecules) try to bind to to HSA to get a long half-life. VK2735 is fundamentally different in how it gets its long half-life than most any other GLP1 based compound that is approved or in development. ➡️A good thing about not binding to HSA well is that it allows an oral form of the drug to penetrate the intestinal linings more easily. This is because it won’t be trapped as easily by blood in the intestinal linings. (i.e. It can more easily make it to the bloodstream where in can travel to key GLP1-GIP targets elsewhere in the body.) ➡️I agree with @Sports_bios that the “-COOH end of the C18 fatty acid chain to a phosphonate” is the KEY modification in this patent vs Tirzp.” Tirz does not have a phosphono group rather it has a "20-carbon fatty diacid moiety" attached to its structure. (This fatty acid modification allows tirzepatide to bind to albumin in the blood and is linked to the lysine at position 20 of Tirz.) However there are other differences in the sequence that contribute to VK2735 superiority over Triz. ➡️Amino acid structure of compound 23: There are 39 amino acids (aa) and it has a molecular weight of around 4794 Daltons (g/mol) For comparison - Tirz is 39 aa also and has a MW of 4813.45 Da. ➡️ Here is what I believe the aa structure of compound 23 using the three letter abbreviations for aa’s: Tyr-Aib-Glu-Gly-Thr-Phe-Thr-Ser-Asp-Tyr-Ser-Ile-Aib-Leu-Asp-Lys-Thr-Ala-Gln-LYS-Ala-Phe-Val-Gln-Trp-Leu-Leu-Ile-Ala-Gly-Pro-Ser-Ser-Gly-Ala-Pro-Pro-Pro-Ser (Note - The "phono group" is attached to the lysine at pos 20 and a jpg of the structure appears at the end of this post) ➡️ Using one letter aa’s the sequence is: Y2EGTFTSDYSI2LDKTAQKAFVQWLIAGGPSSGAPPPS ➡️As you can see in the structure, there are two Aib amino acids (α-aminoisobutyric acid) just like in Tirz. Aib is a unnatural Amino acid and is not able to be made via recombinant means. This is why VK2735 (and Triz ) are better suited to synthetic manufacturing (SPPS/LPPS). ➡️ Compared to GLP-1 -Compound 23 (like Triz and Exenatide) has nine extra residues in the C-terminal (PSSGAPPPS) , which constitute a so-called ‘Trp-cage’ structure. This is thought to be a DPP-4 inhibitor. ( @GilaMonstrum- Can you please comment on this? ) ➡️Regarding 3d structure it appears that Compound 23 is has a highly foldable helical structure given it has a “Trp-cage” and 2 Aib’s. Aib is known to promote the formation of helical structures in peptides). I believe this has important implications for both ½ life and bioavailability. ➡️Brian Lian once said Viking had reason to believe VK2735 would work orally. In looking at the literature, it seems that low HSA affinity, highly helical 3-d structures and a “phosphono group tip” are all things that contribute to better bioavailability and reasons why VK2735 could succeed as an oral peptide. Here is a link to the 2024/0239843 Al patent that my above comments are based upon: patentimages.storage.googlea… Full disclosure is that my Organic Chemistry is weak as I’m a ChemE. (my forte is in automation of chemical and discrete manufacturing 🏭 augmented by an understanding of chemical separation methods). I would appreciate any corrective comments on this post from those more skilled in chemistry science and opinion on whether you agree compound 23 is indeed VK2735. In particular, I’m seeking comments on bioavailability as well as any other important observations/opinion. (Could use help here from @Sports_bios, @gila_monstrum, @houndcl, @JamesEKrause 🙏among others and always appreciate comments from @Pharmdca @semodough @BiopharmIQ @ASchulz888 @fluffer9 @mtheory11bio @cigs1234 @DewDiligence @KNielsen2000 @PharmDabbler @trentkelp

#PeptideMFG $VKTX - If you are going to compete in #obesity, you need to win against #tirzepatide (TRZ). #VK2735 has the same MOA (GLP1/GIP agonism) with much better efficacy and tolerability. It's not complicated. Against TRZ with VK2735 the patient loses more weight, in the same time frame with far fewer side effects using half the API so it will become the 1st choice for most. Making VK2735 will be much better easier for Viking than it was for Lilly. VKTX will need half the factory capacity🏭, won't do construction🚧 during a pandemic, will use new less costly 💰processes made by CDMO's who have the existing infrastructure and knowledge💡 to make peptide API product far less expensively today than done with processes born many years ago. IMO. Viking will be able to make SubQ VK2735 at scale right at launch in 2028. VK2735 will get billions in revenue by 2029.

New Short Selling disclosure rules went into effect yesterday Jan 2, 2025. ➡Managers holding short positions exceeding $10 million or 2.5% of a company's shares must now file Form SHO on a monthly basis. ➡The new Form SHO reporting provides should make it easier to detect market manipulation. #ShortSelling #MarketTransparency

Happy New Year! Image by @grok

BioAge's #azelaprag (a small molecule) had some unwanted side effects as 11 out of 204 enrolled subjects developed elevated liver enzymes in its combo study with $LLY 's #trizepatide to show weight loss with less muscle loss. It is worth noting that none of the subjects in the trizepatide only arm had elevated enzymes. $BIOA is now down 75% from it's Friday close. Once again it shows the dangers of unproven MOA's in the obesity indication and in particular concerns with small molecules. The peptide vs small molecule obesity drug argument will be getting more attention soon as more data is released near term on oral small molecules such as $LLY Orforglipron, $TERN TERN-601, $PFE Danuglipron among the small molecules. As I see it in the obesity market, it will be the: ▶️high potency and low toxicity of peptides vs. ▶️lower cost, less effective small molecules that tend to have more unwanted side effects Next generation peptides like $VKTX VK2735 are likely to capture a much larger part of the #obesity market than small molecules.

$VKTX current analyst forecast and opinions opinions from TipRanks shows it is 12 for 12: tipranks.com/stocks/vktx/for…

$VKTX #VK2735 has it all. Do the math: GLP1+GIP+DACRA+Qw Subq+QM Subq+ORAL+Best Efficacy+Best Tolerability = $$$ BigPharmaAcquisition

The only pre-clinical data I know of was shared was on the subq formulation and published in Viking Corp presentation, slides 7 & 8 which I've included here. Regarding the ORAL preclinical data, the CEO Brian Lian said that "we have reason to believe that VK2735 can work orally" when announcing the start of the ORAL ph1 at the cc discussing VK2735 subq ph1 results. Brian Lian is a CEO who tends to under promise and overdeliver. Some really important topline WL data is going to be released at Obesity week on the oral ph1 doses from 60mg to 100mg at Obesity week. We should also get more PK data as well as data on Lipids (and or other biomarkers) for the doses to 40mg. I'm anxious for the weight loss data but particularly interested in bioavailability and estimating that.

The peptide vs small molecule obesity drug argument will be getting more attention soon as more data is released near term on oral small molecules such as $LLY Orforglipron, $TERN TERN-601, $PFE Danuglipron among the small molecules and $NVO Cagrisema, $VKTX VK2735 among the large molecule subq peptides (#VK2735 is the only NCE to be providing data on both an oral and subq form). Here is a chart that shows advantages and disadvantages of each. As I see it, it is the High Potency and Low toxicity of peptides vs Oral convenience of small molecules. Each will have a place in the very large #obesity market.

VK2735 (GIP/GLP1) ph1 once weekly ph1 data for liver fat presented at obesity week. Oral version will also likely be effective in NASH