$EYPT most likely down today on piper remarks on regulatory comments at CTS further clarify views on sham mask and rescue injections

$EYPT @GS interesting if anyone has listened to Duker speak over the years - today many parts of his presentation changed -seemed like the same verbage that Pravin been saying last year - anyone else catch that or listen ??

$EYPT sues $OCUL

Guggenheim reiterated Top Pick $EYPT Buy; $68 $OCUL REGN RHHBY SRZN KOD $FDMT Guggenheim said—Based our recent conversations with the buy-side, we get the sense that EYPT's key competitor OCUL has been cherry-picking and misrepresenting EYPT's Duravyu (TKI insert for aAMD/DME) safety data. Here, we provide a detailed summary comparing the safety profiles of EYPT's Duravyu and OCUL's Axpaxli. In Exhibit 1, we list a total of 16 relevant adverse events (AEs) and the safety profile of Duravyu is highly favorable vs. that of Axpaxli. Notably, vitreous and anterior chamber opacities appear rather specific to Axpaxli, which has also shown a significantly higher rate of vitreous floaters. Importantly, there have been no cases of endophthalmitis associated with Duravyu; the three reported cases were related to Eylea injections. We note that OCUL has misrepresented this in their handout by failing to disclose that these events were not related to Duravyu. We further compiled data on vision loss (Exhibit 2), noting that significantly fewer patients experienced vision loss with Duravyu treatment compared to Axpaxli. Hence, we continue to believe Duravyu's safety profile has been a key distinguishing feature, and its overall profile continues to look remarkably clean. EYPT mgmt also reaffirmed the highly favorable safety profile of Duravyu in the ongoing Phase III LUGANO and LUCIA studies. As of last week, 100% of LUGANO patients have received the 2nd injection (40% have received the third), and 80% of patients in LUCIA have received a 2nd injection. Blinded safety data looks clean, with no safety events reported. Finally, we believe EYPT's regulatory strategy is more robust, with two large non-inferiority studies versus SoC. Given that multiple drugs are already approved for wAMD, we believe two Ph3 studies will be needed for approval. Hence, we expect EYPT to be first to market. OCUL is currently trading at almost a 2x premium to EYPT (market cap of~$1.9Bn vs. EYPT at~$1.1Bn) and we expect this valuation gap to narrow. EYPT remains one of our Top Picks.

$OCUL RBC KOL KOL Thinks Every Patient Wants Less Frequent Dosing, and Sees High Likelihood Axpaxli Gains Approval from SOL-1 Alone - In a scenario where axpaxli is approved, our KOL notes he would be an early adopter of the treatment. He is eager to see how it performs in patients, and he would probably use it in a lot of patients.

RBC Capital reiterated $EYPT Outperform-$39 and said, We Maintain Our Conviction in the LongActing TKIs and See Recent Weakness as Buying Opportunity $OCUL $XBI REGN RHHBY SRZN KOD FDMT RGNX - ABBV RBC Capital said in its note: EYPT shares are -30% YTD (vs 2% XBI), with no strong rationale for the downturn beyond investor jitters into competitor OCUL's pivotal SOL-1 readout. We think the recent downturn is unfounded, as there has been no change to the long-thesis in our view. We maintain conviction in EYPT and the long-acting TKI class given that: 1) the TKIs have demonstrated convincing Phase I/II data in wAMD; 2) EYPT is following the well-trodden path to approval with two non-inferiority studies which have a 78% historical success rate; 3) mgmt. sounded confident during our recent check-in; 4) corporate strategy including launching DME ahead of wAMD readouts and manufacturing registration batches for CMC, all suggest conviction; and 4) our multitude of KOL conversations are positive on the TKI class. On SOL-1 RT, we see 40% upside to EYPT from current levels if the study meets expectations (or -10% if SOL-1 fails). Reiterate OP, Spec. Risk.