Oct 28, 2026 earnings call — VK2735 Phase III progress and maintenance results
Viking raised gross proceeds of approximately $575 million and held $960 million in cash at Sept 30, 2026.
EPS $-1.55 (est $-1.06)
Key quotes
"Both trials are fully enrolled and during the third quarter, both continued to advance toward completion."
"participants receiving VK2735 successfully maintained the majority of their initial weight loss following the transition to every other week or monthly dosing schedules."
"This balance includes the aggregate net proceeds of approximately $550 million from our recent financing."
Analyst Q&A 17
cross-trial comparison and product differences
Q (Joon Lee · UBS): Can we compare VANQUISH-1 results to tirzepatide? How much of Phase II will show up in Phase III? Also, what will be 2735's commercial differentiator?
A: They said the program has multiple differentiators. They have two formulations (subcutaneous and oral) of the same molecule and, if oral is approved, it would be the first approved dual GLP-1/GIP oral. They also emphasized dosing flexibility (weekly, every other week, or monthly) and cautioned against direct cross-trial comparisons while expressing confidence in their data.
"I guess from the highest level, we have two formulations, a subcutaneous and an oral formulation of the same molecule, and it would represent, if the oral is approved, the first approved dual agonist of GLP-1 and GIP." — Brian Lian (CEO)
commercial team and launch readiness
Q (Gregory Renza · Truist): How far along is the commercial build? What gaps remain in infrastructure and leadership?
A: They said they already have a solid core commercial team even though launch is 2.5 years out, including an SVP of Commercial, VP Market Access, VP Medical Affairs, HEOR, and Director of MSLs. They are adding staff in tech ops, CMC, supply chain, and quality and compliance and will continue building.
"we have a pretty solid commercial team, especially given that we're 2.5 years out from potential launch" — Brian Lian (CEO)
oral dose choices and amylin data plans
Q (Jack Padovano · Stifel): Why a narrower oral dose range in Phase III versus Phase II, and what is the titration cadence? Also, will you report SAD DACRA data separately and what target profile would be acceptable?
A: For the amylin agonist, they are finishing a single ascending dose study and will disclose interesting SAD findings, but they view the 4-week multiple ascending dose study as more informative. For SUNRISE dose selection, they prioritized lowering tablet burden and size and ensuring sufficient gross margins; the chosen doses reflect those aims and give a good potency range.
"we think those doses chosen in the SUNRISE program reflect both of those and I think give us a very nice potency range there" — Brian Lian (CEO)
titration schedule and maintenance dose range
Q (Nathanael Charoensook · Leerink Partners): What is the SUNRISE titration schedule and how long at each dose? What oral dose levels will Part 2 of maintenance test and will they be lower than induction?
A: Titration uses 4-week blocks: the 27.5 mg track starts at 10 mg for 4 weeks, then 17.5 mg for 4 weeks, then 60 weeks at 27.5 mg; the 55 mg track also increases in 4-week blocks and ends at 55 mg for 52 weeks. For oral Part 2 they will test a range from around 17 to 55 mg with 5 arms (weeks 21 to 33) and 6 subcutaneous arms (every other week and monthly).
"So the 27.5 starts at 10 for 4 weeks, 17.5 for 4 weeks, and then that spans 60 weeks at 27.5." — Brian Lian (CEO)
using maintenance data for label and M&A interest
Q (Hardik Parikh · JPMorgan): Could the subcu maintenance data support label language? Are you open to in-licensing external assets or focused on internal pipeline?
A: They said the extension studies could support potential label language, though they won't disclose regulatory dialogue details and recognize review issues. On external assets, they do some diligence and see interesting programs externally but prefer to focus on their internal pipeline while remaining aware of opportunities.
"But I think that based on the extension studies that we're going to be conducting, we think they would support potential language in the label." — Brian Lian (CEO)
VANQUISH extension dosing frequency
Q (William Wood · B. Riley): How will the VANQUISH extension be dosed — will you test less frequent dosing like every other week or monthly, and will you disclose doses? Will oral maintenance mirror those schedules?
A: They will include both every other week and monthly subcutaneous cohorts in the extension but will not disclose dose levels until the extension is underway. They also plan oral extensions to SUNRISE but said it is premature to discuss specific oral doses.
"So with the subcu extension, we will be putting in both every other week and monthly cohorts." — Brian Lian (CEO)
oral maintenance target expectations
Q (Michael Ulz · Morgan Stanley): Is there a target success rate for the oral maintenance arm, given strong subcu maintenance results?
A: They said it is hard to predict because exposures change when moving from 17.5 mg weekly to a lower daily oral dose; daily dosing offsets some exposure differences. They expect a sustained plasma level after the 12-week oral window but said it is difficult to prognosticate exactly how the step down will play out.
"No, that one is a little bit of a hard one to predict because the exposures when you go from 17.5 mg weekly down to a lower daily oral dose are just going to be -- it's such a jump in exposures." — Brian Lian (CEO)
why no weekly oral maintenance arm
Q (Timur Ivannikov · Cantor Fitzgerald): Why did you not include a weekly oral maintenance regimen — cost, tablet count, or something else?
A: They said oral single-dose variability is quite high, producing volatile exposures, so they preferred to test multiple daily dose levels. They also added more subcutaneous cohorts and felt time and resources were better used on daily oral arms and more subcu doses.
"We thought that because the single-dose variability is quite high with the oral route of administration that it might be better to look at multiple different dose levels on the daily basis." — Brian Lian (CEO)
retention trends and filing inclusion
Q (Jay Olson · Oppenheimer): How are retention and blinded discontinuation trending versus Phase II expectations? Will less frequent dosing arms be included in initial regulatory submission?
A: They said discontinuation rates are tracking their expectations, though blinded data make interpretation difficult. On regulatory submission, inclusion of less frequent dosing arms is TBD; it is probably more likely those data would be a supplement later but could possibly be included in the initial filing.
"But the overall rate is within what we expected when we designed the study." — Brian Lian (CEO)
oral positioning and key Part 2 questions
Q (Xinwei An · Canaccord Genuity): Will oral formulation mainly target treatment-naive patients or switchers from injectables? What key questions from Part 1 will Part 2 answer?
A: They view oral therapies as expanding the market, with many initial oral users likely transitioning to subcutaneous to achieve greater weight loss. Part 2 will focus on how weight changes when switching from weekly subcutaneous injections to daily oral dosing and on transitions between weekly, every-other-week, and monthly dosing.
"So the -- what we're seeing right now with the oral therapies is sort of a market expansion." — Brian Lian (CEO)
enrollment pace and site overlap
Q (Ryan Deschner · Raymond James): How is enrollment pacing for SUNRISE vs VANQUISH and how much site overlap is there?
A: They said there is a fair amount of overlap and they retain high-performing sites, but because obesity is common they can also add new sites and do not expect enrollment competition to be a problem. Enrollment is early but they are satisfied so far.
"But as you would also expect, obesity is so prevalent that we can -- we have no problems identifying new sites." — Hubert Chen
oral maintenance max dose and amylin goals
Q (Jiale Song · Jefferies): Will you include higher oral doses like Phase II in maintenance? For the amylin program, what profile would justify later-stage development and combo plans?
A: They said they probably would not exceed 55 mg in maintenance and 55 mg would be the highest for the oral maintenance setting. For amylin, they want reasonable tolerability, potential once-weekly dosing, and reasonable weight loss and trajectories after a 28-day regimen; they see combos with 2735 and single-agent uses for those who can't tolerate GLP-1.
"So we probably wouldn't exceed the registration doses that are going up to 55 milligrams in the SUNRISE study." — Brian Lian (CEO)
titration speed rationale
Q (Tsan-Yu Hsieh · William Blair): Why is the titration step-up arranged to reach 55 mg in the way you did? Is tolerability a concern?
A: They said because plasma levels accumulate slowly, the titration is unlikely to change tolerability materially. They also noted tablet strengths are 27.5 and 17.5, which explains the specific dosing multiples used.
"Well, I think it's probably not -- since you're slowly accumulating plasma levels, it's probably not going to result in any sort of a change in tolerability, if that's sort of the underlying question." — Brian Lian (CEO)
GI tolerability and competitor combo view
Q (Jeet Mukherjee · U.S. Bank BTIG): How do you expect GI tolerability for oral maintenance versus subcu? Thoughts on competitor amylin combo and how 2735+amylin could differ?
A: They tied GI risk to initial and overall exposure and noted starting low and ramping mitigates GI adverse events; they expect the risk of increased GI events when switching from weekly subcu to daily oral to be somewhat low given prior exposure. On the competitor data, they found efficacy attractive though full tolerability is unknown and said it bodes well for potential combinations with their compounds.
"Now we haven't done that part of the study yet, but that would be the initial thought that, that risk would be somewhat low because of the length of time you've been exposed to the mechanism." — Brian Lian (CEO)
which maintenance data for filing
Q (Yale Jen · Laidlaw): For approval filing, will you mainly use Part 1 maintenance data or VANQUISH extension data? Could VANQUISH extension timing allow inclusion in initial filing?
A: They prefer to use the VANQUISH extension studies because they will be longer and larger than the first maintenance study. Whether the extension data could be included in the initial NDA is TBD; if they can assemble something suitable they would, but it seems more likely the extension data would be a later supplement.
"If we can put together something that might be suitable for submission with the initial NDA, we would do that." — Brian Lian (CEO)
efficacy projection and amylin half-life
Q (Biren Amin · Piper Sandler): What weight loss do you expect for 17.5 mg weekly at week 78? For an amylin combo, would you aim for weekly amylin dosing and what half-life is desirable?
A: They said they would like the amylin half-lives to be plausible and similar enough to allow matching weekly dosing, but they have no PK yet from the SAD. They declined to project VANQUISH efficacy at week 78, saying it's hard to predict though early results at 21 and 33 weeks look encouraging.
"I think you'd want those to be, I think, plausible within a plausible range of each other to allow for the weekly dosing frequency" — Brian Lian (CEO)
R&D and SG&A expense trends
Q (Daniel Brims · Lake Street): How should we think about R&D and SG&A going forward after the R&D step-up and sales build-out?
A: They said SG&A should be fairly consistent near term with a possible pickup later toward commercialization. For cash use company-wide they expect average usage of around $100 million per quarter, with some quarters higher and some lower.
"as we think about cash, just company-wide, I think we'd see a usage of average of around $100 million per quarter" — Gregory Zante (CFO)