Hello, everyone. This is Thomas Kudsk Larsen from the Sanofi IR team. Welcome to the Q2 2025 conference call for investors and analysts. As usual, you can find the slides on sanofi.com. Please turn to Slide #3. Here, we have the usual forward-looking statements. We would like to remind you that information presented in this call contains forward-looking statements, which are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially. We encourage you to read the disclaimer in our slide presentation. In addition, we refer you to our Form 20-F on file with the U.S. SEC and our French universal registration document for a description of these risk factors. As usual, we'll be making comments on our performance using constant exchange rates and other non-IFRS measures. Numbers used are in millions of euros and for Q2 2025, unless stated otherwise. Please turn to Slide #4. First, we have a presentation. Then we'll take your questions. We have kept the presentation as short as in the past, as other companies report today, and we aim at keeping the call to maximum 1 hour, all included. For Q&A, we have Brian, Olivier, Thomas to cover our global businesses as well as Roy, our General Counsel, and Brendan, Head of Manufacturing and Supply. For the Q&A, you have 2 options in Zoom: Raise Your Hand or submit your question using the Q&A function. With this, I'll hand you over to Paul.

Well, thank you, and hello, everyone on the call. We've delivered another strong quarter with double-digit sales growth. Our strategic focus on innovation continues to drive our top line performance with significant contributions from our new launches, vaccines and Dupixent. The performance of our growth drivers made us more confident in our full year business outlook. With that, we've refined our 2025 sales guidance to high single-digit percentage sales growth at constant exchange rates. Let me highlight the performance of our new launches on Slide 6. In Q2, our launch has generated close to EUR 1 billion in sales, continuing the momentum we saw in Q1. ALTUVIIIO extended its strong performance, increasing market share through patient switches. The presence of Beyfortus in Southern Hemisphere countries was further expanded in Q2. Keep in mind, these are smaller markets compared to our key launch countries in the Northern Hemisphere. Qfitlia, following the FDA approval at the end of Q1, has recorded initial sales. Uptake has been as expected, and we're pleased to be able to offer an additional treatment option to health care professionals and patients living with hemophilia A or B. Together, these 9 launches now represent 10% of our total sales, demonstrating our successful execution in bringing innovative medicines and vaccines to patients. Dupixent sales reached EUR 3.8 billion, up 21% in Q2, driven by the continued strong demand and improved indications across geographies. Momentum has been driven by the market growth across all indications where biopenetration remains low as well as by recent launches, including COPD. In the U.S., sales reached EUR 2.8 billion, up 22.7% as Dupixent continues to lead in both new-to-brand prescriptions and total prescriptions across all established indications. The CSU launch is off to a promising start, supported by positive feedback from physicians and patients…

Thank you, François. Since our last update, we received U.S. approval for Dupixent in bullous pemphigoid and MenQuadfi 6 weeks and, last week, the EU approval for Sarclisa in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible patients. Furthermore, Dupixent was submitted for review in Japan for BP and Cerezyme in the U.S. for Gaucher disease type 3, with an FDA decision expected in January next year. Despite itepekimab's mixed Phase III results, our pipeline continues to advance, with new rabies vaccine showing consistent Phase III efficacy. We secured 7 new regulatory designations, including orphan and fast track, and had 7 medicines featured in prestigious journals, which emphasizes our determination to accelerate our commitment in improving R&D. Last quarter, as François said, we acquired DR-201 (sic) [ DR-0201 ] from Dren Bio, now entering Phase I in immunology. We since made 2 acquisitions: Blueprint with Ayvakit and 2 new potential options in mid-stage clinical development, the potential next- generation molecule elenestinib to mastocytosis and BLU-808 in inflammatory indications. And lastly, Vigil with VG-3927, which has the potential to magnify and restore the neuroprotective function of microglia in Alzheimer's disease. We remain committed to expanding our pipeline with more opportunities, both internally and externally. We're excited about new monoclonal antibody from multiple myeloma, which was recently designated an orphan drug, showcasing our ongoing innovation from our own research in France. Externally, we continue to augment partnerships and collaborations, working hand in hand with the leaders in the field to bring cutting-edge treatment to patients. Next slide. We're committed to addressing the large unmet medical need for different COPD patients with Dupixent, with itepekimab and, lastly, with lunsekimig. At ATS, we presented pooled data from BOREAS and NOTUS Phase III studies, showing significant reductions in exacerbations, FEV1 improvement and quality of life, confirming our legacy in COPD…

We'll now open the call to questions. As a reminder, we would ask you to limit your questions to 1 or 2. [Operator Instructions] And we'll take the first question. Please go ahead.

Yes. First question is from Luisa Hector from Berenberg. Luisa?

So I wanted to touch on the R&D transformation because we see enormous amounts of progress at Sanofi across the whole organization, but the share price is still lagging. And I think it's awaiting pipeline progress. So on the R&D transformation, I wanted to check your levels of confidence given some of your recent successes but also some more mixed data sets, which are still in-house. And if we go back to your December '23 R&D Day where you laid out some objectives, you were targeting a 50% increase in Phase III trials for this year, 2025. You highlighted the new launch cohort with risk-adjusted sales over EUR 10 billion in 2030 and your 12 blockbuster assets, of which 3 of those could be over EUR 5 billion. So I wonder if you could just comment on those specifically. Are you on track for the Phase III trials? Are you more confident in your EUR 10 billion by 2030? And if so, has the mix changed now that you have more data in-house?

Thank you, Luisa, very comprehensive. Houman, do you want to get started?

Yes. Luisa, thank you for the question. And I'll try to remain succinct. Sanofi has become an R&D-driven company. We are committed to innovation in the service of patients. And I'm excited by the transformation that takes place. But we have to acknowledge that an R&D transformation is something that doesn't happen overnight. Many in the industry would believe it takes 5 to 7 years. And I'd like to believe that we're a significant way through that. The proof will be in the pudding, and we remain humble in the face of disease. My -- to answer your question specifically and very directly, of the 3 big ones that you described that we talked about on the 7th of December 2023, amlitelimab was 1 of the 3 as well as frexa and balinatunfib. We remain committed to all the molecules in our portfolio. Amlitelimab will read out in the relatively near future with its first Phase III. We look forward to pressure testing our predictions. I'll stop there and hand over to Paul.

Yes. I mean, Luisa, and I think it's fair to say, we had plenty of time to reflect on the ups and downs of this year. And while not everything has gone our way, the data sets have allowed us to do some good thinking around how to go forward or not as the case may be. I think Houman used the word humble, and I would add to that because I think this transformation has been moving at such a pace that we have spent the recent months, literally going back and kicking the tires to make sure that we have dotted every i and crossed every t on the studies to make sure that we will continue to push science, of course, as expected of us. What we would like to avoid is stubbing our own toe. So we have some work to do. I think we remain, on balance, optimistic about the nature of the big 12 and what that could mean for us. Of course, not everything will work. I'm very pleased with how the transformation has progressed. But I think you're right, by the way, that is, for some, the jury remains out that the progress is one thing, but it's revealing itself in successful Phase IIIs. And I think I said this, I think maybe it was you that asked me a question for reflection on a previous call. I'd like to think these things could have been done faster, but I've learned a few things about being patient. So we have to do good work, be diligent, be accurate and factual. And then we just have to turn the cards over, and we recognize that we're better just to keep our powder dry, get the results, share them, and confidence will be built from there.

The next question is from Richard Vosser from JPMorgan. Richard?

First question, just on development of spend, a little bit higher in the first half on both SG&A and OpEx, obviously, ahead of new launches on SG&A. Just how should we think about the development of that, probably also thinking about '26 as well? You potentially have some interesting launches maybe at the least -- latter end of that year and in '27. So should we think SG&A goes up from here, R&D as well? Have we reached a level? Or with the trials that you're starting, should we expect that and Blueprint to go up as well? And how should we think about the margin in '26? Is that sort of at a similar level of '25? And then just a quick bit on Dupixent, a little bit weak in China, maybe, and we've seen that with some products in -- who have NDRL (sic) [ NRDL ] listing in China and some pressure in that market. Just thoughts about China, Dupixent and the rest of the portfolio and how we should think about the growth there going forward?

Thanks, Richard. I think -- and it's a couple of questions we've had throughout the day or morning. SG&A, R&D spend, of course, a little bit higher in the quarter. François, where do you think -- how can you guide? François-Xavier Roger: No, Richard, it's a good question. François speaking. On R&D, obviously, I mean, we reported an increase of 17% in the quarter. But if you put aside the exceptional item, that exceptional revenue that we had from Sobi last year, it's 7% underlying. As I said earlier, we expect to be probably around flat, maybe slightly up in R&D in the latter part of the year. So we will be, for the full year, where we said we would be, which is slightly up for the full year. There might be a little bit of additional cost as well coming from Blueprint, but I mean, again, the guidance that we gave initially at the beginning of the year, we will be there. So there is a little bit of a phasing issue between H1 and H2. I have no concern whatsoever. On SG&A, you can see some increase as well. Just to give you a perspective, I mentioned it earlier, we have a rate of increase of SG&A, which is half of our increase in sales, which means that we are benefiting from growth leverage. Do expect that to continue in the future. And if you look at it, 70%, 7-0, 70% of the increase that we experienced in the first half went to an investment in sales and marketing to get growth, which we have, and to prepare for future launches. So I think it's very healthy because we are in an investment position. Do expect that to continue as well. To give you a little bit…

Thank you, François. I think -- and well said, attractive growth profile, tight management on OpEx, R&D broadly flat depending on successes or the opposite in R&D, up for this year and a little bit beyond. We'll see. And we overlaid that with the -- being one of the companies with the lowest genericization profiles over the next 5, 6, 7, 8 years. So it's important that we advance the medicines that drive the growth and then fund the launches. But I think we've come a long way as a team reshaping the business, but we have to be extremely prudent with how we deploy those investments because we want increasingly profitable growth. It's just obvious. Brian, Dupixent in China.

Well, thank you, Richard, so much for the question. And I'll come to China in just a second. As you probably know Dupixent is a pretty diversified product now around the world, a bunch of different indications. So we're in 8 as Paul alluded to already in the United States. And so while China is a very important marketplace, it is one of many where we're actually seeing continued underlying volume growth. And so I'd first start there. Actually, in China, we've seen more than 30% volume growth in China. So really positive in China right now. Of course, as you mentioned, we will have pricing pressures from time to time in market as is normally the case and as we planned for. And we will grow through the NRDL actually eventually. But as we get more access to more indications in China, this is going to be a really important marketplace for us moving forward, but one of many.

Next question is from Matthew Weston from UBS.

Two questions for me, please. One is on amlitelimab, and Houman, if I'm a leading AD prescriber, I'd love to know what you think I want to see from amlitelimab. Do I want more efficacy from -- than dupi? Do I want more efficacy than dupi and subgroups? Or is it really about looking for the same efficacy as dupi but with that better duration of treatment? And then just one finance question. The additional comment on tariffs. I think the comment was that there was a lot that was unknown. Have you assumed [ something ] in guidance for 2025? Or have you assumed the basic level that's being discussed in the current EU-U.S. trade deal or just you've moved so much inventory, it doesn't matter this year?

Let's start there, François. François-Xavier Roger: Yes, Matthew, anyway, it's difficult to comment on what we don't know. But we have run different scenarios, obviously. And we have -- based on what is widely reported in the media, we have looked at the impact that it could have on 2025, given that we're already fairly well advanced in the year. And we confirm -- we did not factor it in our guidance, but it will have a limited impact on 2025 because we already have inventory in place in the U.S. So I don't think that it will -- in fact, with what we know today and what we read in the media, we don't think that it will impact our guidance in any way for 2025.

Thank you. Houman, what are you expecting to see?

So taking -- thanks for the question. Taking a step back, I think it's important to think about the atopic dermatitis landscape. And it remains a matter of some concern to me that only 15% or 16% of patients with atopic dermatitis, which -- who are biologically -- biologic eligible are currently receiving therapies, both from our own molecules and those of other pharmaceutical companies. We welcome new molecules in the space. And I think a leading KOL in the atopic dermatitis space and beyond will welcome more options for their patients. Speaking specifically about amlitelimab, the value that we see in this space is that there are a variety of patients that are highly heterogenous and need a variety of solutions, including the fact that agents -- patients who are refractory to current agents demonstrate an upregulation of OX40 ligand in skin biopsies. What does that lead us to believe? All in all, the distillate of that is that I think that a new agent that comes in, consistent with our STREAM-AD work that we've previously published, that provides both a longer interval of treatment, coupled with magnitude of treatment consistent with the standard of care would be significantly and hugely favored in the marketplace. One other final comment, newer agents that have significantly lower efficacy than the standard of care have already garnered substantial interest. So a molecule that is comparable to the standard of care will be, with a longer interval, very substantially of value.

Yes. I think -- thanks, Houman. I think if you look at STREAM-AD design, we had another arm to explore longer intervals. I think we'd love to see what that could look like. We'll see. The data will tell us.

Next question from Florent Cespedes from Bernstein. Florent? Okay. Let's take the next question in between. Next question from in Shirley Shin -- Chen, sorry, from Barclays.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

So I have a question on flu. You guided mid-teen decline primarily due to price pressure. Could you please provide more color on how Sanofi plans to mitigate this aggressive pricing dynamic across multiple markets? And how are you thinking about the longer-term pricing dynamics in flu? And also, on top of that, how do you find so far RFK Jr.'s leadership impact on the flu business in the U.S.? And maybe on top of that, just you guided high single digit for the top line, given the slow headwinds that you have already flat. I think it actually shows a resilient business on the top line at least. So can you please walk us through your confidence to reach that top end? And like what -- which franchise will be doing the heavy lifting in the second quarter? Any color would be appreciated.

Thomas?

Thanks for your question, Shirley. On the second part of your first question, so I don't have any specific comment on the new administration view on flu. But I can give you a bit more color on how we are seeing the full flu year in 2025. As we've mentioned and you were making allusion to it, we foresee in 2025 a decrease of our sales in the mid-teens percentage range, with a Q3 to Q4 split of 75%, 25% split. You completely understood that it's linked to competitive pricing pressure with -- let me give you some color around it. First of all, there is a one-off impact in Germany. So it's a one-off effect of 2025 only and will not replicate it moving forward, which is the fact that within the flu recommendation for elder in Germany, there is the addition of an adjuvanted competitor, which automatically reset the price at approximately half what the price was in the previous year. So there's a one-off there in 2025. The second part of that overall decrease for the year is linked to competitive pricing pressure, mostly in the U.S. and a little bit in the international zones. I think there are a couple of points that are important here to highlight. First of all, we are a significant leader in the flu market. And let's be very clear, we expect our market share in flu to have -- to be a solid market share performance in 2025 despite this declining market in value. Again, maintaining our flu leadership position, which obviously comes from the fact that we have a very strong differentiated portfolio with Fluzone High-Dose (Influenza) and Flublok. As for the long term, well, I think that's quite in line with what we had in view, and that's why we've made the deal with Novavax and Nuvaxovid because the way we foresee the market to evolve is, first of all, to keep evolving towards more differentiated flu vaccines like the ones we have, but provide strong efficacy and good safety profile. Then on top of that, moving forward to flu-COVID-19 combination, where again, you will have -- you will be able to meet the quality in terms of efficacy of the differentiated flu vaccines, but of course, also the tolerability profile. And I think that with our flu-COVID-19 portfolio in development, we have a good chance to get there.

Thank you. François? François-Xavier Roger: Yes. And Shirley, on the question about landing in terms of sales growth for the full year, indeed, we confirm our confidence for the high single-digit level for the full year. First and foremost, we did 9.9% in H1. It does help for the full year. Second, we will continue to have a strong growth with Dupixent. Don't forget that we were at 21% of value growth in Q2. It's amazing. By the way, it's even in the mid-20s by volume 8 years after the launch, really impressive. It's not only Dupixent. We are not Dupixent dependent. Launches, they contributed 10% of sales, but they also contributed, in Q2, almost 1/4 of our growth and is gaining traction quarter after quarter. And we have a resilient Gen Med business. Our established product are very resilient as well. So we do confirm our high single-digit guidance for the full year. Let's be careful with Q3. We have flagged it already since the beginning of the year. We had very high comps last year in Q3. So do expect to see a little bit of a slowdown in Q3 in terms of growth versus what we have experienced in H1, but once again, full confidence with high single digit. By the way, I take the opportunity to say it. It's high single digit with and without Blueprint. So it's not coming from Blueprint. High single digit, it's coming from the base business.

Let's try again with Florent Cespedes from Bernstein. Florent?

Two, please. First, on Dupixent, could you maybe give a little bit more color on the ramp-up in COPD as now we have the product available in certain countries and 6 more to come? Could you share with us if -- where you see the best adoption in this disease? That's my first question. Second question for Paul on M&A. With the recent Blueprint acquisition and really late-stage products, is it fair to assume that in the future, you will look for earlier-phase assets and a transaction that's more on what you used to call bolt-on, around EUR 2 billion to EUR 5 billion? Any color on that would be great.

Thank you. Brian?

Yes. So thank you so much for your question. And first and foremost, the double-digit growth that we've seen, just as François just said, really comes from across indications, across geographies. Our base business -- actually, our base indications of atopic dermatitis, asthma, nasal polyps, some of the first indications, we continue to see strong growth there. But it is really exciting to see also growth coming from new indications, such as COPD, CSU and, even recently, BP. Now specifically as it relates to COPD, about 9 months into the launch, we continue to see excitement from customers. And again, as a reminder, these are customers, these are really largely pulmonologists that have had a great deal of experience with Dupixent in asthma previously. So the best way to look at this is if you really look at the pulmonologists community and you look at how their prescriptions have changed, our volume has really grown strongly in the pulm's offices, thanks to the launch of COPD in combination, of course, with asthma. And of course, that is, again, really positive and will continue to develop over time. So really, really positive start to the launch of COPD, and we're seeing this pretty consistently across the markets, as you mentioned, 13 and 6 more to go before the end of the year for launching in COPD.

Thank you, Brian. On the second part, we've guided for quite a while on the EUR 2 billion to EUR 5 billion range. We had said for maybe the last year or 2, we'd step outside for the right opportunity, but prefer single digit. The Blueprint opportunity was right in the sweet spot for us on this immunology-rare axis. And we felt like we were quite uniquely positioned to be able to build on the great work the Blueprint team had done and to really move quickly based on our experience, one of the world's leading rare disease companies. And I think -- don't forget that it's literally just in the launch phase. And of course, with elenestinib behind that and perhaps even more of a -- out of the -- more of a complicated but intriguing step is 808. Further back, it could be a game changer. Of course, these things could disappear quietly into the night. But we feel like it really matched what we were trying to do. As for deals going forward, we sort of reiterate -- I know you might say, well, you just did Blueprint, but we get back into the EUR 2 billion to EUR 5 billion range, not because of the financial piece, but because we continue to look early, early, early, and they tend to be in that range. And we want to maintain our AA rating or at least we have flexibility there to do that. François said it that our growth profile for the next 5-plus years is in the top group of the industry. So it's really -- the emphasis remains early, early, early, but in the areas that we are strong in, where the marginal cost to deploy new asset would be modest. We just want to keep adding to that because as we get into the early '30s, depending, that's when we need to be in launch swing for some of these assets, so it's better to go early. So I think we're trying to be disciplined. We spend a lot of time on this. And we're very particular about what we think meets our bar. And I think we're happy with how we sit.

Next question from Sachin Jain from BofA. Sachin?

A couple of product ones and then one clarification for me. So on amlitelimab, the answer to prior question, you flagged the importance of less frequent dosing. We haven't seen, I don't think, in the Q12-week asthma data. So just any color you can give on the strength of that data and read to AD. I just wanted to be clear that you put the Q12-week data in the AD press release as, I think, it's a secondary endpoint. That's the first question. Second question on tolebrutinib in SPMS. As you approach approval, just what should our expectation for the REMS be? And how that might impact launch? And then just a quick clarification on a prior question on the BOI for '26, '27. So in no doubt, should we see BOI margin growth as well as absolute growth? I heard the answer as a comment on absolute BOI, and I think the question was on the margin.

Okay. Thank you. Let's give this to Houman, amli.

Sachin, thank you for the question. Firstly, on amli, when I was referring to longer interval earlier, just for clarification for everyone on the call, I was talking about Q4W, which is a differentiated interval currently for patients with atopic dermatitis, point one. Point two -- and of course, an ongoing theme through our AD trial, starting with STREAM-AD, which was a Q4W dosing and then into COAST 1 and COAST 2, et cetera. So point one is that when I was asked about what a KOL would expect, I meant the Q4W dosing for an abundance of clarification. The second comment was your comment to Q12W, and there are 3 data points that I would direct you to. Number one is the cessation study of STREAM-AD, the off-drug study component, as it was described. As you know, over 60% of patients had a maintenance of their response at 24 weeks, which is what the inspiration was to have both the induction and maintenance Q12W dosing. And as you'll know from the corpus of studies, 9 studies in the OCEANA's program, we will see the red thread of QW go through at least 4 of those studies, which include COAST 1, COAST 2, SHORE and AQUA, running into ESTUARY. And the final part of that amli question was, thank you for noting on the asthma study that the Q12W dosing in asthma was promising, and that adds to our understanding that OX40 ligand modulation of T cells in disease does have the potential to have a longer interval traction. On SPMS and tolebrutinib, the only comment I'll make -- and thank you for noting the importance of the REMS. The only comment I'd make is it's a subject of active regulatory discussion, and our practice is not to disclose any specific comments around it, especially this delicate stage of discussions with the regulator. So we found the collaborative interaction with the regulator extremely gratifying, and that's important.

Thank you. François? François-Xavier Roger: Yes, Sachin, on the increase of BOI, you're absolutely right that what I said, we will see our BOI increasing in absolute value in '26, '27 and in the following years as well. And you're right. I said in absolute value. That, I'm very confident. That being said, I don't want to commit at this stage as a percentage of sales. Don't forget this is what I mentioned in my presentation earlier. We had to absorb EUR 1.1 billion of BOI that will not disappear, but that will go to a certain extent because of the end of the Regeneron reimbursement of R&D. So that's quite a significant amount. Even if we grow at a high rate, and we will continue growing, I don't want to commit at this stage. We are working on it in order to try to make it valid as well as a percentage of sales, but I don't want to commit at this stage.

Next question from Seamus Fernandez from Guggenheim. Seamus?

So just wanted to check in on patent estates and the patent portfolio in terms of how you're thinking about the opportunity there. And then maybe just as an extension to that, life cycle management opportunities that you see on a go-forward basis with your partner, Regeneron. And then just a quick second question. Houman, it seems like you're commenting on the orthogonal combination potential that might exist with OX40. Are you really referring more to the potential to combine amlitelimab with other assets? Or are you talking about the prospect of whether it be nanobody or other OX40 ligand combinations, in particular, in HS, at least, we know OX40 and the TNF will be presented, I believe, at EADV. Just trying to get a sense of your thoughts around how broadly the OX40 mechanism could be applied in various disease states.

Roy? Thank you. Roy?

I guess the question was about Dupixent. But in general, also for Dupixent, I remind you that the compound patent expires in the U.S. in March '31. In Europe, it expires in March '33, with all the exclusivities, extensions attached to them. As Brian said, we've got 8 indications. We've been spending a huge amount of money on development. You can rest assured that we have ensured that we protected all the innovations that the company prepared around Dupixent. And we have a number of patents going well beyond the composition of matter patent into the '40s, and it's too early to speculate. As and when, we'll keep you updated on the relevant developments.

Thank you. Houman, fast, if you can, LCM with our partner, Regeneron?

The LCM in discussion with Regeneron, active, ongoing discussions within the alliance. We work closely with them. We are excited by the ongoing relationship, which is active across the existing molecules like dupi and itepekimab, but also potential new opportunities that we're seeking to get.

Thank you. On amli, combos?

Firstly, let me just say on our dashboard at the moment, amli mono is very much in the headlights, windscreen and every other part of the front of the car. Our focus is 100% on executing on delivering those studies over the next year or so, at large, OCEANA program. And in terms of -- so that is absolutely our focus. In terms of combination therapies, OX40 ligand is an important biological node. Licensing, B-cell biology and far beyond, the opportunity to do combination therapies, as we've already demonstrated with a positive result in brivekimig in HS, as you say, which is about to be presented, is going to open a whole new vista.

Next question from Simon Baker from Redburn. Simon?

Two quick ones, if I may, please. Firstly, could you just give us an update on the current trends and your outlook of the Beyfortus in the U.S.? And then moving to Blueprint and BLU-808. The literature has been peppered with reports on KIT inhibition in inflammatory disease for, I think, under 20 years. So I just wonder if you could give us your thoughts, Houman, on the -- on why you see KIT inhibition in that setting as an interesting area? And specifically, what appeals to you about the Blueprint asset?

Thomas, Beyfortus?

So Beyfortus, we -- as discussed before, we see some growth for Beyfortus overall in 2025. This will come from market expansion as Beyfortus is going to more and more geographies. You know very well that there is further competition entering into the field. I just want to take the opportunity that while the new product is also a monoclonal antibody, both monoclonal antibodies are very different, extremely very different half-life. Beyfortus has a half-life of 71 days. The other product has a half-life of 42 days. And very, very different real-world experience, with Beyfortus being studied in 0.25 million of babies with outstanding results. Due to that, we expect that overall U.S. this year will keep increasing this year and next year. It takes 3 to 5 years for a pediatric intervention for vaccination coverage rates to reach their peak. So overall, RSV prevention will increase, and Beyfortus will remain the dominant player, thanks to its data set.

Thank you. Briefly, Houman, on 808?

Yes, Simon, I guess you can never take the chemist out of you when you speak. We're -- firstly, let's start by saying we are honored and privileged to have the Blueprint team join us. They really are the experts in ecobiology, and our industry is characterized by experts being able to achieve outstanding results. Speaking very briefly about mast cell biology, as you know, based on your background specifically, targeting wild-type c-KIT has been a sort of holy grail of the industry for decades. You know very well from the time of William Osler -- Sir William Osler, mast cell and their role in inflammation diseases -- classical diseases, such as asthma, COPD but far beyond have been important. If we can target wild-type c-KIT with an adequate therapeutic index, then it will open up a whole number of inflammatory diseases.

Yes. I think -- well, I think, ultimately, it's a nice shot to have in the pipeline. It's been around a long time. If we get it right, it could be great. And if it doesn't, then it's early enough for us to make the tough call, but we're optimistic. Let's see.

Next question from Sarita Kapila from Morgan Stanley. Sarita?

Sorry to come back to margins, but maybe should we think about '26 margins being flat as a floor? And you provided more color on refunding income and Amvuttra royalties, but should we expect divestment income, I believe it's EUR 500 million this year, to continue into '26 and 2027? And then just a quick one on Blueprint and Ayvakit competition from Cogent's bezuclastinib. Maybe you could have some words on the molecule given the liver tox. I'm sure you diligenced the landscape, but do you believe Blueprint adequately factored competition in the EUR 2 billion peak sales guide?

Thank you. François? François-Xavier Roger: So on the '26, I don't want to guide for '26. It's too early to do that. And so we'll do that in due time. But once again, I confirm the fact that we are working towards an increase in BOI next year that will start with the benefit of growth leverage and the strong growth on the top line again. I do confirm what you said, which is we do expect to get probably EUR 0.5 billion. Why not potentially more, by the way, from disposal -- in terms of capital gains from the disposal of assets? We regularly had about EUR 0.5 billion, might be a little bit more in the future, but at least that amount.

Okay. I want to -- actually, Brian, competitiveness of Ayvakit?

Yes, I think it's a fantastic question. And I'll start kind of the same way we talk about a lot of the disease states across immunology, which is, first and foremost, this is a very underpenetrated marketplace. They've just launched into the space. And if you look at the growth for Ayvakit, it is because they are finding new patients, getting new patients on therapy, keeping new patients on therapy. So as we've said before, new competition into any space like that is actually good for the space from a noise level standpoint, finding these patients. It's a really symptomatic disease state that presents itself in a lot of really important specialists that we call on, on a regular basis today, and we'll continue to call on in the future. That said, I think that they have done a very nice job of factoring future competition into the mix, not only for market growth but also for leadership share. So we feel very confident with Ayvakit and its profile, especially in recent light of the readout that we just saw from bezu.

Next question from Peter Verdult from BNP.

Pete Verdult, BNP. Just a couple for Paul. Number one, interested in gauging your level of enthusiasm around IL-17 becoming part of your pipeline or portfolio in line with the growing opportunity in HS and competitive data this week showing very promising efficacy in atopic dermatitis. And then secondly, Paul, sorry about the obligatory question on U.S. pricing reform and the potential for Europe to step up and share the load. Just interested in what your latest thoughts are. And just a very quick third, if I could squeeze one in for Houman. Just when should we expect to hear about next steps and plans on your go-forward strategy on itepekimab or whether it will get terminated? Is that something that we should expect to hear about this year? Or are you still doing the work?

Okay, Peter, thanks very much. I'm not sure what the question was on IL-17. Was it -- I can't read that. So you have to tell me what was the question. It was in AD? François-Xavier Roger: Yes.

Okay. I'm not -- sorry. Let's go to another question -- another part of the question. Houman, maybe itepekimab. Then I'll answer pricing. And then we'll come back to that question.

Okay. So itepekimab, we were obviously hoping for better results than our mixed result. We're working closely across the alliance with Regeneron, working through the basis for the difference there, AERIFY-1 and 2. And once we figure that out, we have to recognize that AERIFY-2 failed. We will go back to the regulator for next steps.

Okay. So then Peter, maybe it was just us here, but you really broke up on the first part. I think the question was about IL-17 for sure. The UCB, I think, had some early data. I think that's what we've cobbled together here. Look, we believe the assets we have in AD will be the difference. There's no surprises there. We'll get COAST 1, see how that looks, decide how competitive it is. I think in immunology, there's always an opportunity to show an impact, whether you can really make a difference. We will see. I'm very familiar with IL-17s, but I think our emphasis has been on breakthrough technologies and opportunities and intervals to try and really improve the patient outcome. U.S. pricing, I think you said at the second part of it and the relationship between Europe and the U.S. But just very quickly, we don't know the final voting from the White House on how we'll look between the 232 investigation, MFN and tariffs. And tariffs once they are established -- and we know them, important step. Then we'll know what the relationship is like with the other 2 components and know whether it's a 15% tariff with a caveat or 15% plus or 15% less. We don't know. And nobody knows. But we prepared for delivering the guidance this year. That's a minimum. So don't feel we're casual about it because we're absolutely not. I've been on record as many CEOs now about innovation access in Europe. And there's part of me as a parent and as a member of society would still concern that more than 50% of medicines approved in Europe are not available for patients in Europe. I think the value of a medicine should be paid for. And I think there's a lot of people who could contribute to economies in GDP if medicines were made available to them. I'm as interested in budgets for health care, giving access to innovation for more patients as I am in the pricing conversation. We will see where it nets out, when we have the facts, we will share them. But we're a health care company. We'd like to see more patients get access -- excuse me, more patients get access to more innovation.

Next question from David Risinger from Leerink. David?

Yes. So I just have one question, please. Could you discuss your expectations for tolebrutinib in PPMS, Houman? And if you could just comment on efficacy expectations and also what you're anticipating from the liver toxicity data in that trial.

Thank you, Houman?

Yes. So thanks for the question. Succinctly, there's a significant biological overlap between SPMS and PPMS. There was a Nature paper around genetics of progressive disease a couple of years ago from Australia. Our view is there is at least some biological reason to believe that smoldering inflammation and brain compartment inflammation are important in both diseases, and there may be some read-through. We look forward to seeing those results later in the year. And with respect to toxicity profile with the liver, we expect it to be commensurate with what we see in SPMS.

Okay. I think maybe we have time for one more.

One more question and final from Ben Jackson from Jefferies. Ben?

Great. Just one final one for me then on amlitelimab. If we think about the efficacy that we've been talking about in several questions here, what is it specifically that you think physicians and patients are looking for in terms of which endpoint? We've obviously had a lot of noise recently about perhaps how an itch benefit is helping to drive penetration to the market. And clearly, within your Phase III designs, you have built in some itch endpoints into that. So I guess which of the endpoints we should be paying most attention to? And then secondly, is there any reason to believe that the OX40 mechanism could perhaps have a beneficial effect on itch?

Houman?

Yes. So again, briefly, I think that -- your second question first, the OX40 ligand biology that Kymera had already worked out, specifically the ligand is likely through its effect on T cells and neuroinflammatory access have an effect certainly on the atopic dermatitis and possibly itch. There's a literature on that. Happy to discuss off-line. And with respect to the endpoints, I think the key here, both regulatory and from a community perspective is IGA 0/1 and EASI-75, obviously, the things that are the entry ticket in a disorder which has significant low biopen rate. I think that those would be the entry ticket for what we do.

Okay. Ben, thanks. The last question. We delivered strong performance in Q2 with 10.1% sales growth, refined our 2025 sales guidance. At the same time, we confirm our guidance, strong business EPS rebound. Our pipeline continued to make progress despite the mixed results for itepekimab in COPD, and we eagerly anticipate several important Phase III data readouts in the second half of the year, including amlitelimab, tolebrutinib. Augmenting our own pipeline, we closed the acquisition of Blueprint in rare diseases. We'll remain focused on strategically redeploying capital towards pipeline and growth as we continue to advance our strategy. With this, I wish everyone a good summer. We'll close the call.