Good day everyone and welcome to today's Neurocrine Biosciences fourth quarter and yearend 2011 results conference call. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode. But later you will have the opportunity to ask questions during the Q&A session. (Operator Instructions). It is now my pleasure to turn the conference over to Mr. Kevin Gorman, CEO of Neurocrine Biosciences.

Thank you very much. Thank you all for joining us for the fourth quarter earnings call. I am joined here by Chris O'Brien, our Chief Medical Officer and Tim Coughlin our CFO. Before we get started I would like to have Jane Sorenson read our Safe Harbor statement please.

Good afternoon. I want to remind you of Neurocrine’s Safe Harbor cautions. Certain statements made in the course of this conference call that state the company's or management's intentions, hopes, believes, expectations or predictions of the future are forward-looking statements which are subject to risks and uncertainties. Information concerning factors that could cause the actual results to differ materially from those contained in or implied by the forward-looking statements is contained in the company's SEC filings, including but not limited to the company's annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Copies of these filings may be obtained by visiting the Investor Relations page on the company's website at www.neurocrine.com. Any forward-looking statements are made only as of today's date, and we undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances. Kevin?

Okay, thank you Kevin and good afternoon to all. After the market closed today, we filed our earnings for both the fourth quarter and the full calendar year of 2011. We had another good quarter and met our overall financial plan for 2011. At the beginning of 2011, we guided to net income of $37 million to $39 million. Our net income for the year was $37.6 million. We also guided to a net cash burn of $3 million to $6 million and end 2011 with approximately $130 million in cash investments and receivables. We met both of these goals ending 2011 with a net cash burn of $4 million and with a $131.7 million in cash investments or receivables. Our net income for the fourth quarter was $1.3 million or $0.02 of income per fully diluted share compared to net income of $2.5 million or $0.04 of income per fully diluted share in the fourth quarter of last year. Our 2011 net income of $37.6 million or $0.67 per fully diluted share compares favorably to a net loss of $8 million or a loss of $0.15 per share for 2010. This significant improvement in operating results for 2011 is a direct result of two items. The first is a full-year revenue recognition under our collaboration agreements with Abbott and Boehringer Ingelheim. These collaborations both commenced in June of 2010. Second during 2011, we recognized $30 million of milestones under the Abbott agreement related to the Elagolix endometriosis and uterine fibroids programs. Revenue recognized under our collaboration agreements was $11.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 and $77.4 million for the full year. Amortization of upfront licensing fees was $9.2 million for the quarter and $37 million for the year. Reimbursement of internal and external research and development expenses…

Thanks Tim. As Tim said, we couldn’t be more pleased with the conduct of the offering and how smoothly it went. We couldn’t come close to satisfying the demand that we realized in the offering and again that’s showing up in the performance of the stock since we went out. And what that additional funds allows us to do is really accelerate our VMAT2 program to a commercialization more quickly with a much more robust program than what we had planned previously and we’ve been able to see now through animal model work that we have been doing that, truly the VMAT2 compound that we have in hand with our three months talks now done is behaving quite nicely in both species. And also it has shown us an animal model have potential impact on the underlying symptoms of schizophrenia and now we are going to be able to really track that down in our Phase II and Phase III program. The funds will also support VMAT going into an additional movement disorder indication that we hope to start later this year. And then finally with the funds, our research group has been very active and we have several compounds now that are moving their way out of research and into development and this allows us now to take several of those compounds forward and we plan on doing that and by the end of this year to be in a position to file an IND in the completely novel neuroscience area with a novel compound. So we are looking very forward to that and as that matures this year we are going to be speaking more about that. So at this point I’d like to turn it over to Chris. So that he can give you a review of our main clinical program.

Thanks very much Kevin and good afternoon to all. The key things to talk about of course are VMAT2 and Elogolix. The Elogolix program is obviously being driven by our partner Abbott Laboratories and we had a successful meeting with Abbot and the FDA at the end of the year and Abbot has memorialized the results of those type C discussions in the form an SPA which was submitted a few days ago and the plan as noted. The start of the endometriosis Phase III pivotal trial that should be later in Q2. So Abbott has geared up for this. The study sites have been qualified. The clinical trial materials, study medication prepared, the vendors engaged, etcetera. So things are moving ahead there and we are very excited about the start of this Phase III initiative in endometriosis. While that's going on the uterine fibroids Phase II study has been recruiting to schedule to plan. This is a 300 subject trial. Details are publicly available at the clinicaltrial.gov for the Elagolix in Uterine Fibroids by trial and our partners have stated that they would anticipate that some data from this Phase II uterine fibroids study later this year. So Phase III endometriosis, Phase II uterine fibroids and of course in the background the usual supportive studies that round out at NDA submission are underway. The rest of the drug-drug interaction and Phase I type studies are underway. A very intensive effort with all the resources that Abbott can bring to bear to this important health initiative. So that's the [gross] program, what gets us obviously excited and this is what Tim and Kevin have mentioned is the VMAT2 program, probably the biggest driving event for us on this program was having in hand the three month toxicology data from two…

Thanks Chris. So as you can see we've got a lot going on this year, I mean just in the next 12 months we’re going to have initiated a Phase III program, read out for Phase II trials of launching new program out of research and the clinical development, so a lot for us to do this year. It’s worth noting that on a couple of these programs as we said before, the plan that we have is to retain the VMAT2 rights in North America all the way through commercialization. This is a very attractable market that we believe we can handle ourselves. And at the appropriate time, we will bring on a partner in rest of the world, that's not something we plan on doing right away, because even though it’s an outside US partner that we would be bringing on, it nevertheless would slow our efforts within the United States and we are in a position, a very strong position now to take this forward quite away ourselves. So we are not any hurry to bring that partner on until we’ve advanced the program more. And then finally, with the Urocortin 2, as Chris said we should be getting those results also this quarter and if those are very strong results then we will take the time and the efforts in order to out license that program to a strong cardiovascular company. If negative, obviously, we won’t; and if they are not really that strong we’ll probably only spend limited efforts initially and looking for a partner we have much more valuable activities that our Business Development Group and Chris have to get to this year in that, because we do hope to move the VMAT2 into its Phase III clinical programs next year. And so that’s what quite a bit of our internal focus is on. So with that, I would like to open it up for the questions now.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Ian Somaiya with Piper Jaffray. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Chris thank you for all the comments related to the VMAT2 Phase II and how you think about it; I was really hoping to get your thoughts on the other product Elagolix and how should we think about the uterine fibroids results which, if you could give us a timing, but I would expect them to be really some point to this year. Just you know what is the goal of the study and how should we think about the trial and what you would consider to be successful results?

Thanks Ian. So on clinicaltrials.gov, you will see that the primary endpoint for that study is uterine bleeding and that is in this particular case measured by a quantitative method called alkaline hematin which basically cauterizing the amount of blood loss during menses and the threshold for heavy or excessive uterine bleeding is the criterion that must be met for a woman with fibroids to be in the trial. So, what you would anticipate sponsor for Abbott reporting is the reduction in alkaline hematin as a primary endpoint. It is also important to remember that again as you can see our clinicaltrials.gov that this is an early Phase II study. So we are looking at multiple doses and regimens of Elagolix as a way of helping them understand how they want to use this going forward.

And then I just had question on the guidance, the range 55 to 60, I am assuming the variability for delta is specifically related to R&D, can you just help us understand what would drive a R&D number; that’s in the low end or the high end of that fine layer in delta?

Well, it’s really going to depend, it’s $5 million range there and it really depends upon timing and because its so narrow, it’s just how fast things get done, how fast enrolment goes and when certain things hit, I mean if we have certain programs and we can move little more quickly, it’s going to be at the higher end of that range. If they move, basically how we think they are going to move it will be in the mid-point; if they move a little bit slower, it will be at the lower end. But you know 5 million is a pretty narrow range; I think when you look across you know it’s 10% of the burn.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Phil Nadeau with Cowen & Company. Please go ahead. Phil Nadeau - Cowen & Company: First on the VMAT2 inhibitor, I find your comments on the lack of SEs in the current trial pretty encouraging. Can you talk a little bit more about that, and specifically in the Xenazine trials did the AEs appear within the first two weeks or was there a real increase in depressing the suicidality early in the Xenazine trials?

Hi Phil thanks. So the Xenazine trials in Huntington’s chorea, and then the general literature about Tetrabenazine, report acute times of adverse events that are basically what you see if you have excessive dopamine depletion, pre-synaptically So things like akathisia, motor restlessness or Parkinsonism or sedation, you don’t see depression in a short-term trial with clinically reasonable doses of these drugs. And the suicidality, that’s a little bit, you know if you go and look at the published Xenazine trials that were done as effort by Prestwick, you will see that there is no suicidality that is associated with the drug. There was a suicide in a Phase II trial patient with Huntington’s disease and as you know, you may know Huntington’s disease has a very high background rate of suicide related primarily to the disinhibition not depression, the impulse control problems in the study notes, a devastating disease. And so the basic statement there is, where we guide we don’t see any of that; we don’t think that’s going to be an associated problem with our growth for a whole bunch of reason which we can talk about in some other time perhaps. But, we think we have addressed some of those risks with our specific molecular ways designed in those. I would not expect to see things like depression or suicidality in a short term to the crossover trial, obviously with long duration trials you have a better chance of picking up low frequency events in the larger population and hence our urgency to do 12 week, a 120 subject trials as way of demonstrating safety and tolerability. Phil Nadeau - Cowen & Company: And those Dopamine depletion side effects, would those have shot-up in the two weeks?

Yes. Phil Nadeau - Cowen & Company: And then my second question is on the SPA, that Abbott has decided to get; I guess I am still a little unclear as to why they are going after the SPA; it seems like you guys at Neurocrine had really nailed down most of the major design elements of the Phase III like a year ago; and it doesn’t seem like any of those really have been changed by Abbott, so why do they feel the formality of an SPA is necessary?

The FDA recommended. The bottom line is, there are a lot of ways to skin a cat and Abbott went through the process of making sure they were comfortable addressing all the details that they wanted to address. And at the end of the series of the end of Phase II and the two additional Type C meetings, they were addressed and the trial design is what Abbott wanted and the agency is happy with that and so basically memorialize all these things in an SPA.

Our next question comes from Jon Lecroy with MKM. Please go ahead.

One, does the quarter’s delay in Elagolix for endometriosis is the way you are sort of timing for when the drug could launch in the US?

The timings for the drug are ones that are dictated by Abbott and so Abbott’s guidance is on their website was from an October presentation they gave and October 21 I believe is when that presentation is on there and they show there that NDA filing is in 2015 and then in 2016 they anticipate an approval.

And then any update on the uterine fibroids enrollment, is that going quickly?

It’s going well too. It’s going exactly to plan.

Okay. And then just a little bit on the VMAT. Do you expect placebo differences depending on when the drug was dosed or I guess I am asking is there a residual effect of the drug that might go over into placebo in patients that are started on drug for the first two weeks.

Jon, you have asked a good question. The half life of the drug is such that since I am comparing only the end of the first two weeks to the end of the second two weeks, there will be no drug on board. It’s completely washed out within that first seven to eight days. So and we know that when you stop this drug, the hyperkinetic movement start to remerge after a few days, after a week or so. So this study is specifically designed so that it is not a problem in terms of pharmacokinetic exposure. You don’t see anything at the end of that placebo two-week period. Now there is another subtle carry over type effect, that is a behavioral effect, not a pharmacologic effect. And so that simply, the sequence effect of being in a trial and that obviously you can’t avoid that but we have a large enough sample size that we think that we can you know, we will still be able to show a nice separation of active from placebo.

So are you expecting a similar delta from base line for the placebo group regardless of when they are dosed?

So I think it will be interesting. You know I don’t know. We’ll see. It will be interesting to see how much sequence effect is there. We have a whole of series of analysis prepared to help us answer those questions. The primary comparison just so we are clear is simply aims at the end of the active period, the aims at the end of the placebo period. There is no change from baseline calculation there at all.

Okay and then on your according to, can you talk a little bit about any discussions you’ve had with pharma, potential partners or how you think the demand for this if it works would be?

Well, we’ve had contact with several companies that are in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure space. If you know that that has been a much more difficult space. So there is about a handful half dozen that are really seriously in that space. They know when these results are coming out there. They have got a familiarity with the program. So the way we are working with all of them is when the results are out. Then we will be re-contacting.

Okay. And have you thought about market potential for a drug like this?

No. Actually we haven’t. As you know we haven’t invested one dime in this program for almost five years now, since we restructured the company. So this is really something that as I said before, if the results are very good then we will go out and out-license and by out-licensing, I mean just that. It won’t be a collaborative effort like all of our other partnerships are. It will be a throughout licensing.

(Operator Instructions) We will go next to Jason Napodano with Zacks. Please go ahead.

Hi guys. Just a quick question on the Phase II VMAT 2 program. I understand the crossover design but there is two doses in there. So Chris can you, just give me a sense of what the dose range, it’s a pretty wide range 12.5 and then up to 50, can you give me a sense of what you are looking for with that dose, with those doses?

Absolutely. So the goal with this two week study was to secure efficacy as well as understand kind of what the low end of minimally effective dose kind of might be. So that when I go into my parallel group long-term trials, I haven’t informed an intelligent basis of dose selection. And so we did that by a 50 mg dose, was very well tolerated by healthy volunteers in the small open label patient trial. We believe that that dose is above that which is necessary for efficacy. So that was kind of a really strong shot on goal to see the effect. The 12.5 milligram dose is at the low end, where we think it’s just above that minimally effective dose and it would be extremely informative if that worked as well as 50 or didn’t work or only worked at half the patients that will help me with my dose selection. But when the trial is set up, when the subject is randomized, they’re basically forward pass, they can go. Placebo in 12.5 or 12.5 in placebo, placebo 50 or 50 then placebo. And so nobody is getting both drugs, both doses. It’s just active versus placebo. And with eight subjects in each of those four arms, it shows you kind of the magnitude of the set value we expect. It doesn’t have to be a very big trial and a crossover designed to weed out for a statistical and clinically significant separation.

Thank you. We will go next to Thomas Wei of Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Thanks. Just a couple of questions, first on the VMAT2 program. Can you say it all on a blinded basis maybe what you’re seeing in terms of safety, anything unusual there that might be expected simply or even not?

Hi Thomas. So, far I’ve obviously reviewed every piece of clinical chemistry in ECG and lab data that’s come in. So there are no safety signals to-date in a blinded fashion. We had no treatment related SAEs. So that’s good. I’ve seen the adverse events that you see in any study and there are all the usual stuff. There is nothing that catches my eye as being unusual. I mean, in every trial, particularly in CNS, you’re going to see headache, fatigue, nausea, headache, fatigue, nausea and so that’s all. So we’ll have to wait till the binders broke in to really have a comment, but nothing unusual.

And with the VMAT2 inhibitor, can you just remind us from the early dosing work that you’ve done, where had you figured out that you did start seeing some of the problems that have emerged with Xenazine? What sort of window do you have dosing wise do you think?

I think it’s pretty good. In our Phase I studies, what I considered signs of pharmacology or things like trouble focusing your attention, sedation and we saw that with single dose, healthy volunteers at 150 milligrams and in a couple healthy volunteers after repeated dosing for 8 days at 100 milligrams. My guess is the clinically relevant dose to be monitored 25 milligram range. So we have very broad (inaudible).

And can you remind me what the PK; is it linear through this whole dose range and is there overlap at the edges between those who are dosed at 25 milligrams on a multi-dose basis and those who are dosed at 100 milligrams on a multi-dose basis?

So the first is very dose proportional, it’s a very well behaved molecule, good exposures in narrow coefficient variation. As you would expect with a long half-life drug, once you reach a steady state, there is -- I may have misunderstood your question, but let's say for example at a single dose of a 100 milligrams can overlap or actually just barely overlap with maybe as a 50 milligram repeated dose, but just barely there.

And then just long-term on the uterine fibroids program, can you confirm that that still is the primary strategy for European regulatory approval? And can you also remind me what you said about whether or not this set of Phase II data that we’re going to get is sufficient to go directly in Phase III trials?

I really can't comment on Abbott’s strategies. And maybe Kevin has a point.

Yeah, I would say that Abbott is still doing a lot of work over in Europe as they are in the United States on uterine fibroids. So we’ll leave it to them when they will talk about that and as far as we’re aware of this Phase II that they are doing with uterine fibroids is to set up a true dose response to Phase IIb clinical trials with uterine fibroids to follow.

Thank you. It appears we have no further questions at this time. I’ll turn it back to Kevin Gorman for any closing remarks.

Thank you very much and we’re going to be looking forward to the two Phase II clinical trial results that we’re going to be having this quarter. The one in VMAT2 on the 32 patient study in March and then sometime between now and March to get the Phase II results on Urocortin 2. We’ll be speaking at several conferences over the next two months, so we look forward to meeting all of you there and presenting that data as it comes through. So once again, thank you very much for your attention and we will be presenting data shortly. Take care.

This conclude today’s program. We appreciate your participation. You may disconnect at any time. Have a great day.