The opportunity itself, you know, and the path towards that change in belief and conviction. Sure. So good always to be here with you. Yep. You know, I think that what folks probably did not appreciate when we first started out, and, you know, keep in mind that Insight launched just before us, and then Dermavant launched basically about the same time. This was a largely unproven space when the three of us all came out, and I think people were asking how big a topical can really be. I think what folks probably did not appreciate is that topicals remain the standard of care in these inflammatory skin conditions in spite of the amazing advances that you and I have both witnessed over the last two, three decades, right, in terms of biologics especially, but more broadly systemic therapies. Even for biologic patients, the vast majority of those patients also have a topical, right? This is a gigantic market, and it's been dominated for the last 70 years by topical steroids, which are very effective drugs, they're cheap, and I think dermatologists are generally pretty comfortable with them. We've always known that there were safety issues with topical steroids. As these newer advanced topical therapies came out, like Zoryve, it has started to shift the paradigm in dermatology where dermatologists are recognizing the issues that they have with their topical steroids and are moving towards the advanced topical therapies. You know, we talked on the Investor Call, as you look at some of the other markets where you had an entrenched generic standard of care, and then you had a newer, safer class of drugs come in, how over time those markets completely flip over. You think about anesthetics, antidepressants, anticoagulants, migraine, GERD, all of those markets sort of fit that paradigm. We believe we're in very early stages of that shift in the topical space. We talked, I think, on the call, last year, there were about 16 times more topical steroids written than all of the branded advanced topical therapies combined, right? There is an immense market out there. We're starting to see the shift. We're seeing it both in what dermatologists are saying to each other. You know, we talked at, I think on the call about the recent statements from the Society of Dermatology Nurse Practitioners and the Society of Dermatology Physician Assistants coming out highlighting the risks of topical steroids and the need to use advanced topical therapies. We expect something more will come out of the AED as time goes on. We're seeing it in their prescribing, right? There's been a dramatic increase in the use of advanced topical therapies, especially Zoryve, as we talked about on the call. You know, the whole class is growing at a pretty brisk clip. It grew 50% in volume last year over the year before. We are starting to see that shift. As that shift occurs, you know, the opportunity for Zoryve is absolutely immense. The sales peaks that we projected were using around 15-20% market share as I recall, right? This is a very achievable sort of a market conversion. We're not talking 100% or even 50% conversion for us to achieve our true potential. Yeah. One thing that you guys did that was, you know, sort of, strategically quite different, was making very clear decisions around pricing and what you felt appropriate pricing was likely to be to allow your product to not hit up against payer barriers. Right. you know, talk a little bit about that and, you know, how that's actually played out, from your sort of early plan. Yeah. You know, for investors who have not followed the story closely, we did come out with a bit of an orthogonal pricing strategy. We were the third to launch, and we launched actually substantially lower than the other two in price, not because we wanted to be lower in price than the other two, but because we thought our price was actually the right price. We have really paced the market in terms of market access. We very quickly got very high-quality coverage. You know, on the commercial side of the business, about 80% of patients have access to Zoryve through a single step, you know, typically a generic steroid, which is not an easy, hard step, excuse me, when you have that many patients already on topical steroids. What we really were focused on was Medicare and Medicaid coverage because that's about half the patients in this marketplace are on government pay. CMS sets a threshold for specialty drugs, and we intentionally priced just below that threshold, right? So the patients aren't getting hit with inordinate copays. That's allowed us to do very well in the Medicaid space. We already have, again, over half of all Medicaid recipients in the United States have access to Zoryve. With a single step or better, which is very, very good coverage for a branded drug on Medicaid. You know, like in California, Zoryve is first line in California Medicaid. There's no steps in New York. There's no step for the foam, and it's only a single step for the creams. We have really good Medicaid coverage. Medicare has been a little challenging because of the Inflation Reduction Act, you know, really disrupted the Part D insurance programs pretty significantly. If those of you who follow the insurance companies, they've all been talking about, you know, them bleeding cash and have actually lowered their guidance because of IRA, changes in Part D. That has led to some really hyper-conservatism on the formularies. I'm not aware of any branded product that has been added this year to Medicare formularies. We think that's gonna settle out at some point, and we'll start to pick up Medicare coverage as well, which we think is, is extremely important. You know, our differential access versus the other non-steroidals in the market, not just the advanced topical therapies, but even some of the older, combination therapies has really allowed us to, I think, get better access. That is important because the more doctors use a product, the more it becomes a habit, and, you know, it becomes ingrained in their practice. That is really part of our overall strategy, to make this easy for doctors to use so they use it frequently and, you know, early in line of therapy. Can you remind us the doors that open with the new pediatric opportunity, you know, from your perspective, just from an overall market reach, but also driving that conversion? Yeah. So we, you know, we just recently got approval for AD 2-5. We're in front of the agency right now for psoriasis 2-5, and we're working on a study in 3-24-month-old patients in, in AD. You know, those are important segments of the market, particularly in the atopic dermatitis market, right? A very large percentage of atopic dermatitis sufferers are children. About half of them are under the age of 18, and there are quite a few under the age of five. Most AD patients develop it in their very early ages, between the ages of one and five. There is a concrete market opportunity to be in the pediatric space. I think that parents are particularly reticent to put their kids on steroids, particularly as the popular media around steroids has really amped up in recent years. In addition to that, there is a halo into the broader business as well. You know, a drug that is approved down to three months of age clearly is safe, you know, in the doctor's mind. We think that will help the broader business as well. It is another opportunity to use it. The other thing I would say is, you know, a lot of kids do not actually go to a dermatologist. There are only about 400 pediatric dermatologists in the country. Now, general dermatologists will see kids too, but there are a lot of those kids in pediatrics who never get to dermatology. You know, we have a partnership in the primary care and pediatric space. And so these lower age indications will be important as we go into the pediatric community as well. Great. Look, third quarter, I think, was a shockingly positive revenue number for us, maybe not for you guys, but for the analysts covering your stock. Can you just, you know, help us with sort of the layers of, you know, where the upside kind of came from, but also, you know, how should we be thinking about fourth quarter and kind of the trajectory into 2026? I see you wanna take that one. Sure. Yeah, it was a phenomenal quarter, a little shy of a hundred. So, we had 22% growth quarter- over quarter, of which 13% was due to volume. So 9% is primarily attributable to price. And by price, we, what we saw was a lot of patients exhausted their, we think exhausted their deductible sooner. So our copay outlay was much less, which was the benefit to gross to net for us. So we are still in the gross to net of the 50s. We expect to stay in the 50s throughout the year. We just think the benefit that we usually see for gross to net in Q4 happened earlier. So we do not expect to see much price benefit in Q4 compared to Q3. But we do expect to see volume growth that we always see in Q4. It's probably the strongest quarter due to weather and patients filling their scripts before the beginning of the deductible reset that happens in January. Got it. Okay. You know, Shamus, I think that historically this has been one of the other things that's broken the back of a lot of the topicals was gross to nets, right? And, you know, I think, again, when we first launched, there was a lot of doubt, a lot of naysayers about our ability to drive our gross to nets down. I think it's really pretty remarkable how low we've gotten, and how quickly we've gotten to that point. You know, we feel pretty good about our ability to sustain that. Yeah. I also applaud this sort of masterful, you know, inclusion of guidance on your call, on your analyst update as well. I know some people sort of reacted to that as overly conservative. You know, I think our view of it is appropriate. What are the kind of pushes and pulls in 2026 that kind of got you to that guidance? Yeah. It is the first time we are giving guidance. We were very, we had, we were very thoughtful about it. Normally, I think guidance comes after you finish the year in Q4. We wanted to couple it with the investor day so that also lends itself since the year is not done. The pushes and pulls within the year, I think a lot of things that Frank alluded to in terms of what is there for volume and demand and the goal towards making the storytell shift. It is a big demand play. Price-wise, we intend to stay, the gross to net will be in the 50s. You will see the similar cyclical pattern with a high Q1 and titrating down. Even as we adopt Medicare coverage, which we're confident we'll get in 2026, that shouldn't erode our gross to net because of the offset that we can't offer copay to patients receiving government benefits. The key is, I think we've kind of built this, what we saw in 2025, working towards a peak sales. It's built from that trajectory to think through our current business, what COA has to offer, and where we are with the payers. Great. And one other thing that you also kind of clarified and confirmed was the path to breakeven and profitability and sustainable profitability. You know, how are you thinking about the need to invest in the business incrementally, versus the, you know, opportunity to, you know, again, increase the profitability of the portfolio at this point versus an enormous opportunity to continue converting patients to Zoryve. Yeah. So we said we'd be cash flow breakeven starting in Q4. I just wanna clarify the profitability between net income and cash flow. We'll be cash flow breakeven starting in Q4 of this year. We expect to sustain that. All the intent, the balance sheet is based on Zoryve. It is to reinvest in Zoryve, life cycle management, and 234. The grow, expand, and build is based on the infrastructure of the balance sheet of Zoryve, barring BD, then we can sustain our cash flow breakeven position. Got it. We feel pretty good though, you know, with the revenue growth that we expect. Yes. We'll have the resources we need for the business. Great. You know, the proof of concept opportunities that you see for Zoryve going forward, you know, you currently have, you know, several indications. And so you're already kind of offering a pipeline product, going after several of the areas where topical steroids are already utilized. What about new opportunities, you know, phase two programs that you, you're starting to explore, and where are you particularly, you know, starting to see some, maybe green shoots in, in white space? Yeah. I would say that, in terms of Zoryve R&D, leaving aside pipeline programs, they really fall into two categories, right? We talked about the grow piece, which is the existing business, and doing studies that fill in some of the holes in the current data that we have, with regard to our three approved indications. I talked on, Patrick talked on the investor call about some of the positive feedback we've been getting, for example, in nail psoriasis and palmar plantar psoriasis, very, very high unmet need. It is part of plaque psoriasis, but we did not collect data in those areas of the body. I would not have bet that we worked in nail, but it turns out we do, right? I think we'll be doing a number of those studies to fill in those holes, which just further builds on the momentum of our existing indications. On the expand side, we are looking at a number of new indications. We have studies ongoing right now in HS and vitiligo. Again, those were based on clinician case reports of the drug actually working, right? There's a beautiful case series of recalcitrant facial vitiligo responding to Zoryve that's been published. There's one in press right now on HS. We've got a number of case reports on HS. We think it's worth running proof of concept studies in some of these larger indications like those to see how big the effect is. You know, we've got over 40 diseases now where there have been case reports or case stories reported with Zoryve. We're not gonna pursue all 40 of them, right? There's some fairly rare, niche indications like Haley Haley disease that we would never pursue. There are a number of large opportunities that I think would be meaningful growth opportunities for Zoryve. We're gonna explore those and we'll figure out whether it makes sense to pursue a registration program, right? the pipeline, outside of Zoryve, as we kind of advance, you know, 234, CD200R, you know, I know there's, there's a lot of views around this, but the ability to pursue a biologic, and the cost of it, I think is something that investors definitely wonder about. Can you just help us understand the opportunity that you see for this program and how it fits into the longer-term Arcutis story? Sure. I think from our perspective, you know, the atopic dermatitis space, there's still a lot of unmet need in terms of systemic therapies, right? As good as the IL-413s are, they're not, you know, Skyrizi or Bimzelx-like efficacy in atopic dermatitis and with very frequent dosing. You know, again, anyone who's a parent, imagine having to inject your kid every two weeks or every four weeks for the rest of their lives, right? We think there's a lot of opportunity still there. We remain very excited about CD200R. It's one of the immune checkpoints. Unlike an immune checkpoint inhibitor, if you agonize the checkpoints, you reset activated immune cells. There's good reason to believe it should work in a number of autoimmune diseases. You know, atopic dermatitis I think is the best validated. We're gonna pursue the program initially in atopic dermatitis, and then we'll think about what other indications that we might expand out into. That might be either ourselves or it might be a co-development effort with another company if we're going into new areas like, you know, pulmonary or gastroenterology or something like that. We'll have to see as the cards play out. You know, in terms of the Arcutis story, you know, we have always been focused on what we refer to as meaningful innovation, right? Which is innovation that people care about in the dermatology space, really agnostic to modality, and focusing on highly differentiated assets that are addressing big markets with high unmet needs. We felt that ARQ 234 really fit with us strategically from a capability standpoint. You know, the team has vast experience in oral, topical, and injectable therapy. So, you know, other than our product development capabilities, which we're uniquely focused or are uniquely focused on topical therapies, the rest of the organization can flex in other therapies, other modalities. Yeah. Okay. Great. And when you look at just sort of the business development opportunities, if there's one thing that, you know, you've built this company around is on, you know, basically business development, you know, you created Zoryve, from an existing molecule. Where do you see kind of the next steps for business development? And maybe just you can help us reiterate that framework that you shared, at the analyst event, you know, in terms of thinking about next steps, from a BD perspective. Yeah. So I, you know, I think first of all, I would say we don't do drug discovery, right? That's just too expensive and too risky for me to get into. I've done drug discovery in the past. We're really focused on the development and commercialization of assets, which means in licensing molecules from other people who are doing discovery. You know, our screen has always been, again, large markets, high unmet need, biological validation, right? We don't want to take a lot of biological risk, which is why I think we've had such a high hit rate at Arcutis. And differentiation, not interested in doing me too products. You know, that's a pretty high bar. We have passed on a lot of opportunities and there's been a lot more of them in the last, you know, 24 months, let's say. You know, we don't have to do business development, right? It is a nice to have, something we would love to do, but I don't have to do it with all of the opportunities we have on our plate. We are really sticking to our principles as we're evaluating opportunities. We'd love to find another dermatology asset, especially, you know, maybe a mid-stage asset, given, you know, that ARQ 255 dropped out of the pipeline earlier this year. We will be very, very thorough in evaluating those opportunities. When you think about the sort of profile, I know there's not, there's a lot of dermatologic conditions that have adjacencies that are very clear. We have the launch of a, you know, BTK, kicking off now in CSU. Maybe just as we kind of think about the framework, what are you seeing emerge in the marketplace, in terms of, you know, new drug launches, things like that, that you're watching to get a better understanding of, okay, that's actually validating a little bit more of how we think about the profile. I know food allergy is something that's getting a lot of excitement and CSU potentially tying to that, IGE related and mast cell disorders. There's just a lot out there right now. Yeah, there are, there's been, I think, a very nice revitalization of the innovation pipeline in dermatology over the last decade or so. But I, you know, I, A, I'm not sure every opportunity is worth the investment that people are putting into it. And B, this is a challenging marketplace. And we, you know, we just saw yesterday another one of the players in the dermatology space abandoning dermatology, right? This is not for the faint of heart. You have to really know what you're doing. So I think not all of these products are probably going to meet their promise, which is true in every therapeutic area I know, but dermatology, as you know, has some unique wrinkles. and I think, you know, one of the things that Arcutis has working for it is the strength of its commercialization organization as well. So we can develop drugs really well, but the team has also proven their ability to commercialize. Yep. And again, that's part of the screen as we're looking at opportunities. We've passed on some products that we just felt like the market really wasn't as big as people thought it was. Got it. Whenever I hear someone say, you know, 90% of the patients aren't being treated, but we're gonna activate them, I start getting nervous. You know, that's never happened in my entire career, all the decades I've been doing this, right? Yeah. That is why when we talk with investors, we talk about our serviceable, attainable market, the patients who are already in a dermatologist's office, already on topical therapy, right? I do not have to activate anybody. Right. It's gotta get the doctor to switch the prescription. Yep. Fair enough. And you know, when we just sort of think about not just the growth opportunity for Zoryve, as you think about other dermatologic adjacencies, is it more, you know, we're looking for systemic, we're looking for topical? This is more a question around, do you view yourself as a topical dermatology company? I think the answer to that is very clearly no, because you already have CD200R. But is there sort of a directional path that we should be, you know, thinking about? Because you really do have a phenomenal, you know, development team. We really do. I. The hit rate with Zoryve is. Nine, nine phase threes is just incredible. Six FDA approvals. It is, it is really pretty amazing. I, you know, I would say there is probably a bit of a bias towards systemic therapies over topical therapies. You know, topicals do have some additional challenges that you have to navigate. You know, I think we have proven that we can navigate them. If I had to choose between the two, I would probably lean towards systemic. Really the primary thing is the innovation and the differentiation. You know, if we found a really good, you give me a really good topical acne asset, I would be all over it, right? There is just, they are, they are almost impossible to find, right? Right. Yep. And then, you know, just rounding it out, the IP portfolio, you know, there have been attempts and challenges, so far, seemingly quite unsuccessful, but just remind us the IP portfolio. Yeah. Where it stands today. I think we have 23 now issued U.S. patents, covering the foam and the cream. We have one patent that only applies to the foam, and that's why we have a longer IP. We have protection on the cream and the foam through 2037. We have a patent that extends the foam out through 2041, which is, you know, think about, that's a really long time in this business, right? I think our IP is very strong. I think what happened most recently with this and a filer is a perfectly good example of that, right? It's a very difficult product to formulate. We have very broad IP around formulation, the pharmacokinetics of topical roflumilast, and method of use. You know, I only have to win with one claim out of one of those 23 patents to block someone. they're having to navigate around all of them. I think it was clear, from that last situation just how difficult it was to accomplish that. We feel good about where we are from an IP standpoint. Great. Frank, Lata, thank you so much for joining us. Always good to see you. Thanks, Arcutis, for joining us as well. I look forward to the next one. Absolutely. Me too.