The Phase 2 results for lonigutamab showed significant improvements in proptosis response and CAS. How clinically meaningful are these improvements compared to the standard of care for TED, and how do they influence patient outcomes?

Lonigutamab demonstrated a favorable safety profile with no reported hearing impairment, hyperglycemia, or menstrual disorders. How significant is this safety data when compared to existing IGF-1R inhibitors, and could it shift the treatment preference among TED specialists?

The Phase 2 results suggest lonigutamab achieved robust efficacy with a subcutaneous delivery method. How critical is this dosing approach in terms of patient convenience, treatment adherence, and potential for broader accessibility compared to intravenous therapies?

The Phase 3 LONGITUDE program plans to enroll both 'active' and 'chronic' TED patients. How important is this inclusion for understanding lonigutamab’s efficacy across the TED spectrum, and how might it influence regulatory decision-making?

Lonigutamab targets a distinct epitope of IGF-1R, with a rapid internalization mechanism. How might this unique mechanism contribute to its clinical effects, and what insights have the Phase 2 dose exploration studies provided for optimizing Phase 3 dosing?

Considering the efficacy and safety results so far, how does lonigutamab compare with current standard treatments for TED, such as teprotumumab? Could its subcutaneous formulation provide a meaningful advantage in long-term disease management?

Acelyrin recently held an End of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA. What key considerations or hurdles might influence the progression of the Phase 3 LONGITUDE trials, and how could the current safety and efficacy data support regulatory alignment?

With Phase 3 results expected in late 2026, what additional data points will be critical in establishing lonigutamab’s long-term efficacy and safety? How might these results impact the standard of care and quality of life for TED patients moving forward?