On Thursday, Amgen (NASDAQ:AMGN) discussed first-quarter financial results during its earnings call. The full transcript is provided below.
This transcript is brought to you by Benzinga APIs. For real-time access to our entire catalog, please visit https://www.benzinga.com/apis/ for a consultation.
View the webcast at https://amgen2.rev.vbrick.com/#/events/37fa4bfc-3faf-4d9e-9952-ca9d841e7651
Watch this earnings call stream on YouTube.
Summary
Amgen announced strong Q1 2026 financial performance with a 45% non-GAAP operating margin and a 16% increase in R&D spending, reflecting investments in Maritide, Imdeltra, and Opaciran.
Strategic initiatives include advancing Maritide with new Phase 3 studies for obesity management, exploring less frequent dosing schedules, and innovations in AI for drug discovery and trial optimization.
The company raised its 2026 guidance range for revenues to $37.1 billion to $38.5 billion, and non-GAAP earnings per share to $21.70 to $23.10, citing confidence in emerging growth drivers over legacy brands.
Operational highlights include progress in cardiovascular prevention with Repatha, potential in primary prevention markets, and advancements in their oncology portfolio, particularly with Imdeltra and Zaleridomig.
Management expressed confidence in the benefit-risk profile of their products, despite challenges like the proposed FDA withdrawal of Tavnios and ongoing tax litigation, and emphasized the role of AI in enhancing operational efficiency.
Full Transcript
Peter (Chief Financial Officer)
Thank you Jay. We are pleased with our strong first quarter performance executing through a full quarter of the patent expirations and losses of exclusivity. Our non GAAP operating margin was 45%. We continue to invest in advancing our pipeline with non GAAP R and D spending increasing 16% year over year in the first quarter. This reflects increased spending on our late stage pipeline including continued investments in Maritide, Imdeltra and Opathiran. Our non GAAP cost of sales as a percentage of product sales was 19.5%, driven by higher profit share and royalty expenses and changes in our sales mix. We expect these factors will continue to negatively impact the cost of sales in future quarters. We further expect the second quarter operating margin to be in line with the first quarter operating margin. Our non GAAP OIE resulted in $480 million of expense for the quarter, including a gain of about $90 million from retiring debt through open market repurchases. Our non GAAP tax rate decreased 1 percentage point year over year to 13.6% primarily due to net favorable items in the current year period, partially offset by the change in earnings mix, we generated $1.5 billion in free cash flow in the first quarter, reflecting continued momentum across the business. We spent $700 million in the first quarter on capital expenditures driven by investments across our U.S. manufacturing sites, including Ohio, North Carolina and Puerto Rico. We continue to expect capital expenditures of approximately $2.6 billion in 2026, reflecting significant investment in our business to scale manufacturing capacity for volume growth, including for Maritide's launch. We see technology and artificial intelligence as increasingly important tools to help Amgen operate with greater speed, productivity and scale across the enterprise. Beyond what Jay described, we are also seeing tangible benefits in other parts of the business. In AI enabled automation, it has reduced production line clearance time at one of our manufacturing sites from approximately 30 minutes to about 2 minutes per batch run. We are also seeing promising results as our colleagues across Amgen use AI to enhance productivity. In addition, we returned capital to shareholders through competitive dividend payments of $2.52 per share, representing a 6% increase compared to the first quarter of 2025. Let's turn to the outlook for the business for the remainder of 2026. As we said last quarter, we expect 2026 to be a springboard year for future growth. Our strong first quarter performance reinforces that outlook and we're raising our 2026 guidance ranges for both revenue and non GAAP earnings per share. We expect 2026 total revenues in the range of $37.1 billion to $38.5 billion and non GAAP earnings per share to be between $21.70 and $23.10. These ranges reflect our confidence that the emerging growth drivers will more than offset the outgoing legacy brands. Note Our guidance does not include any potential business development transactions that may occur throughout remainder of the year. Let me highlight a few updates to our outlook for the remainder of the year. For the full year, we now expect other revenue to be in the range of 1.7 to 1.8 billion. We now anticipate non GAAP OIE to be in the range of 2.2 to 2.3 billion of expense in 2026. We now expect a non GAAP tax rate in the range of 15.0% to 16.5%. And let me remind you of prior items that have not changed. We continue to expect the full year non GAAP operating margin as a percentage of product sales to be roughly 45 to 46%. This reflects our commitment to investing in the best innovation as we continue to rapidly advance the Maritime Phase 3 program and additional key late stage assets. We expect share repurchases not to exceed $3 billion. Finally, in regard to our ongoing tax litigation, the Tax Court litigation covering tax years 2010 through 2015 remains ongoing, and while we expect a decision no earlier than the second half of 2026, we remain confident in the case we presented at trial. We are currently under audit by the IRS for the 2016-2018 tax years. In April 2026, we received a draft notice of proposed adjustment, or NOPA, from the IRS for 2016-2018 asserting significant adjustments primarily related to the allocation of profits between the United States and Puerto Rico. The approach taken by the IRS is similar in nature to our 2010-2015 dispute with the IRS currently pending in Tax Court. If sustained in full, the adjustments set forth a real impact on our financial statements. We disagree with the draft NOPA and have informed the IRS audit team that its draft calculation methodology is inconsistent with the positions asserted by the IRS and the Tax Court. Which positions were more favorable to Amgen than the draft calculation methodology taken by the IRS audit team? We firmly believe that the IRS positions are without merit and we also believe that our tax reserves are appropriate. We intend to continue to vigorously defend our position just as we have throughout our entire dispute with the irs. We remain focused on delivering sustained long term growth and creating value for patients, staff and shareholders by doing what we said we would do, executing on our growth drivers, advancing innovation in areas of high unmet medical need, and maintaining rigorous financial discipline. I'm grateful to work with all of our colleagues worldwide in our mission to serve patients. This concludes our financial update. I will now hand it over to Bob for Q and A.
Bob
Thank you, Peter. Julianne, why don't we open up the lines for questions? I know it's been a long day for many of our callers, so let's jump straight in and try to get to everybody as many questions as we can. Try to limit you to one question each, please, but let's get started.
Julianne (Operator)
Julianne, thank you. If you'd like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. If for any reason you would like to remove that question, please press star followed by one again. To ask a question, press star one. Our first question comes from Jeroen Werber. From TD Cowan, please.
Jeroen Werber (Equity Analyst at TD Cowan)
Go ahead. Your line is open. Great. Thanks so much.
Jay
Maybe, Jay, unsurprisingly, first question on the Maritite switch studies. Can you give us a little bit of a sense? Are you switching sort of one to one to one to monthly Every two months and every three months. And are you looking at superiority or non inferiority and sort of, what's a non inferiority sort of margin? Thank you. Yeah, Jerome, thank you for the interest. As I just shared, you know, people naturally very interested to know what will it take to switch from a weekly injectable to a medicine potentially quite a bit more convenient and quite active. And so the switch study is designed to provide that experience. There'll be 300 subjects on study with obesity or overweight. There'll be a run in on weekly semaglutide or tazepatide and then they'll switch Tamaritide as I said, every eight week or quarterly basis. And the primary endpoint of this trial will be a change from baseline body weight after 52 weeks of Maritide treatment. We look forward to these results. Thank you.
Julianne (Operator)
Jeroen. Our next question comes from Shelveen Richter from Goldman Sachs.
Shelveen Richter (Equity Analyst at Goldman Sachs)
Please go ahead, your line is open. Good afternoon, thanks for taking my question. Could you just comment on the meritite switching study and why it only evaluates the every two month and three month and not every one month. And then as you think about the profile today and how significant do you expect the maintenance opportunity to be for maritide? Thank you.
Jay
Thanks. Why don't I start with the question around the design of the switch study, Myrtle, and then you can talk about the opportunity thereafter. We have a lot of experience with monthly maritide in this program which is featured in to date all of the enrolling phase three programs. And we've had a really good experience in the maintenance setting in our phase two, part two. In that regard, the long term extensions that we've just described where we switch from maritide to maritide give us a chance to explore less frequent dosing after effective dosing. And comparably in this switch study we're focusing that trial on the learnings of going from weekly to to in every 8 week and every 12 week treatment regimen which can make maritide quite attractive to patients if successful.
Myrna
Thanks Jay. And thanks Salvin. Obviously the goal here for weight loss is to lose weight and then sustain it over multiple years so that you can get the full medical benefit of the treatment. And given that, you know, we are coming later into this market and there will be many, many patients already on other weekly treatments, we thought it would be helpful to prescribers, to clinicians and patients to understand how to convert how to switch from those weekly agents to as Jay mentioned, a more convenient regimen like maritide. Importantly, it'll also be necessary to describe once you reach your weight loss goal on monthly Maritide, how you would want to modify that dose interval either to Q8 week or to Q12 week for even more convenience. And so we've taken the opportunity, given the timing of our launch and order of entry, to fully describe how to start patients on maritide and then how to switch from other treatments that patients may be on and they may be dissatisfied with.
Julianne (Operator)
Okay, let's go to the next question. Our next question comes from Luca Issey from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Cassian
Hey Jane, thanks so much for taking our question. This is Cassian for Luca. We have a question for Imdeltra. The drug has clearly done very well so far in second line setting. Can you tell us more about what's next for Imdeltra? Not only in terms of the opportunity you get once you move to the frontier lines, but also now with Imdeltra selected as part of the real-time clinical trial pilot program, could you help us understand the processes, the idea basically FDA will look at your data scientists together as the study is going and for indications with no healthy volunteers, you essentially can go straight from first in human to approval without pausing for safety or end of phase reviews. And curious what made FDA pick Imdeltra as the pilot program. Thanks so much.
Jay
Well, let me please start. Luca, thank you for the question. Imdeltra is really emerged as the standard of care for patients with second line small cell lung cancer because as I mentioned moments ago, the unprecedented efficacy afforded by Imdeltra on just the most important endpoint, overall survival. As for so many medicines in advanced cancer, medicines that work in later stages of the disease tend to confer even more clinical benefit when they've moved to earlier lines of therapy and earlier stages of lower disease burden, especially when they're used in combination. And so we are advancing Imdeltra quite actively and aggressively into frontline induction as well as frontline induction and maintenance. The maintenance experience with Indeltra and the frontline experience will be in extensive stage small cell lung cancer. And these studies are rapidly progressing further. We have the Delphi 306 study which studies terlatimab versus placebo after chemotherapy and radiation in frontline limited stage small cell lung cancer. We're so hopeful for these trials and just cannot wait to read them out. As you've described, we have had a chance to collaborate with Commissioner Makary and members of the FDA on imagining what a clinical study might look like in the real world prospective practice. And we have a very fine design coming together with the FDA that will give them EMDELTRA in a clinical trial setting. But in the real world leveraging things like electronic health records and real time data capture as opposed to the way the clinical trials are conducted today. And this could be a very important experiment for us and for others because so many clinical trials initiated don't complete enrollment is very challenging. Managing data and packaging it and submitting it to regulators is quite a bit big book of work. And if there's a way to do this in more real time, we would all benefit from having this learning. So we're looking forward to working with them on that. Myrtle?
Myrna
Yeah, thanks Jay. The other thing that I would add here is we've seen very good progress in where patients are treated for their small cell lung cancer with mdeltra and we've seen really good uptake in the US in community oncology. We've seen a very expected launching in the second line indication across multiple markets this year. And then as Jay said, we have a nice randomized clinical program reading out through the balance of this year into next to further expand the use of this product. Imdeltra seems to have very durable survival as we've seen in our phase one data and importantly in these innovative trial designs that the FDA is in discussion on. This will further help the physicians, primarily those in community settings, in regional hospitals or in community oncology practices, better care for their patients closer to their homes, which is a really exciting opportunity.
Julianne (Operator)
Thank you. All right, let's move on. Our next question comes from Michael Yee from ubs. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Michael Yee (Equity Analyst at UBS)
Thank you. Maybe a question on old pasture and obviously you guys have a well designed study and potentially superior drug. I'm wondering if you think that background therapies such as GLP1 or PCSK9 either would impact your trial design or your competitor trial design and how you think about that impacting the overall results of what we might see from a competitor soon. Thank you.
Jay
Jenny, why don't you answer that?
Jenny
Yeah, thank you for the question. And we see it the same way. The Ocean ACE study is a very well designed study. A randomized controlled trial of almost 7,300 patients with L.P. over 200 and a medicine ELPAS ran with best in class performance characteristics as you cite 95% reduction in LP with every 12 week dosing. So we're really looking forward to reading out this event driven trial. We have built this study around a very High risk group of patients. Elevations in Lp are genetically defined and as such, 1 in 5 individuals will have elevated Lp. Unfortunately, to your question, you can't take a GLP1 medicine or a statin or even Repatha and meaningfully reduce levels of lp. This independent risk factor maps to a very atherogenic and inflammatory characteristic of the LP containing particle, which is actually six times more inflammatory and atherogenic than than the LDL C containing particle, which of course we and others have shown to be a dramatically importantly modifiable risk factor. And though we observe improvements in the standard of care for patients with cardiovascular disease and we contribute to that with Repatha, we're very confident in the study as defined, which focuses on a high risk, high leveraged elevated LP population treated with direct and targeted therapy to LP itself.
Julianne (Operator)
Okay, thank you. Let's move on. Our next question comes from Terrence Flynn from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Terrence Flynn (Equity Analyst at Morgan Stanley)
Thanks for taking the question, Bob. I was just wondering, we've seen a pretty active MA year thus far in the sector. Just as you think about Amgen's needs, potential size of opportunity, how are you thinking about the BD and MA right now given your current needs, but also your strength of your balance sheet? Thank you.
Bob
Yeah, I think, Terrence, I would not sure I'd use the word needs the way you have in your question, but we're very active in business development, as we always have been, looking for innovation that we think we can add value to. So that remains the case. I think the areas where we're interested are very clear to you and to our investors. And we'll continue to see if there are things that, that again that line up in a way that we can take over programs and still add value to our shareholders. Thank you, Julian. Next question.
Julianne (Operator)
Our next question comes from Jeff Meacham from Citi. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Jeff Meacham (Equity Analyst at Citi)
Thanks for the question, guys. Myrto Repapa has been consistently strong, but I want to get some perspectives from you on penetration into primary prevention and where could it go? And as you look to the elpasterone data, how do you think primary prevention looks as a key market within the LP segment? Thank you.
Myrto
Thanks for the question, Jeff. We're really excited about what's happening in primary care. As you'll recall, we expanded the promotion and coverage of our primary care sales team at the beginning of last year. We expanded our medical teams in and some of the news flow that we've seen new data from the Visalius CV trial that we presented last November at the AHA meeting and then as Jay mentioned, the subsequent sub study in diabetes patients without atherosclerosis also showing significant benefit with a 31% reduction in three point mace and a 31% reduction in four point mace. So we have a clear opportunity to help these patients who are in the care of the primary care physician. The average diabetes patient without documented atherosclerosis is someone who's not being referred to a cardiologist. Since the change in our label, which occurred actually just prior to the Visalius trial being presented, we've been out there talking to primary care physicians. We've seen really, really good uptake in the quarter. We had strong overall growth in Repatha globally. But if you look at new to brand prescription evolution in the U.S. we were up 44% in the quarter. And that's being driven by increased depth of prescribing by cardiologists and increased breadth of prescribing by primary care physicians. So very strong foundation, very pleased with the momentum, but we still have a huge opportunity ahead of us in primary prevention promotion of repatha, the only PCSK9 with that data generation now. So real opportunity for us now when we look at lp, the one thing I will say that helps us is the new treatment guidelines that came out from the AHA cc. They have recommended that everyone who is at risk of cardiovascular disease be tested. As you know, this is a genetically determined level, so you really only need to do the test once it's affordable, it's accessible. And so that bodes well for having some population of patients who will know their LP level. And I do think that primary care physicians will play a significant role in treating those patients in lowering their LP levels with hopefully a product like Opacir. And should the data bear out.
Julianne (Operator)
Okay, good. Let's move on to the next question. Our next question comes from David Reisinger from Lee Rank Partners.
David Reisinger (Equity Analyst at Lee Rank Partners)
Please go ahead. Your line is open. Thanks very much. So my question is for Mirto, please. So congrats on the launch of Amgen Now. I think that occurred last fall. Could you provide some quantification on the uptake of Repatha by cash pay patients? And I don't know if it's meaningful enough yet, but possibly the current mix of sales between cash pay and covered. Given the strong ramp of Amgen now and then, is Amgen considering leaning into offering Repatha as a cash pay product? Ex us, thanks so much.
Myrto
Thanks for the question, David. We've been pleased with overall response to the Amgen now offering. As you'll recall, Repatha is offered at a $239 a month price point and we are seeing cash paying patients interested in pursuing Repatha now. At the same time, however, it's important to note we've opened up access substantially for Repatha and so many patients now can access Repatha without much friction and their physician can simply attest that the patient meets the criteria for the indication of the product. So I wouldn't expect the cash paying component of patients going through Amgen now to be substantial. We are in the kind of the 8,9000 patient range of patients moving through the Amgen now program and we continue to see more and more interest there. So it's been a success, but as a percentage of total Repatha, as you'll note, it's relatively small.
Julianne (Operator)
Julianne Next question please. Our next question comes from Matt Phipps from William Blair. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Matt Phipps (Equity Analyst at William Blair)
Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. I was working on some of the blinitumab updates. First off, you noted in the press release that enrollment has stopped in the SLE trial. Can you give us any updates on that status? And it also looks like you're pausing enrollment of the sub Q administration and all. Any additional reasoning for that pause? Thank you. Sure. Thanks Matt.
Jay
I'm happy to take the question. Blincyto is proving to be an important component of standard of care for adults and children with relapsed and refractory B cell hemophoblastic leukemia and its current instantiation is delivered intravenous continuous infusion. We have studied and characterized subcutaneously administered blitumumab in the past and there is a chance with this medicine for even higher remission rates. As we have previously shown at a BHA presentation, we observed 89 92% remission rates with manageable safety in adults with relapsed and refractory B all and so we're very encouraged by the efficacy seen with subcutaneous blinn and are moving subcutaneous blin to earlier lines. As you shared, we have a potential registration enabling phase two initiated in adults and adolescents. We have a phase one B2 study of subcute blinn as well initiated in pediatric patients there with relapsed and refractory and MRD positive B cell all. As you noted, we have paused some of these studies for enrollment. BiTEs are known to have inflammatory side effects. We prioritize patient safety, especially in the conduct of clinical investigation and observing a handful of inflammatory reactions. We're at this moment collecting some patient data and having a dialogue with the fda. We expect to be able to open these studies back for enrollment shortly.
Julianne (Operator)
Next question. Julianne, Our next question comes from Chris Schott from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Chris Schott (Equity Analyst at JP Morgan)
Thanks so much for the question. I just want to come back to Maritide. Sounds like some encouraging earlier stage to provide any more color on what levels of vomiting and duration of vomiting you're seeing with the three step titration from some of these earlier studies or if you can't provide specific numbers just maybe directionally where that's shaking out versus a WeGovy or is that bound? Thanks so much.
Jay
Yeah Chris, thanks. The level of nausea and vomiting observed with three step dose escalation is lower than we've seen before. Dose escalation works for GLP1 agonism based therapy that is known in our experience. One step improved GI tolerability significantly. Two step improved it further. And today we share the unsurprising but accumulating data that provide clinical confirmation that three step dose escalation further improves GI tolerability. Now we await efficacy and tolerability data from the ongoing phase three studies but we're quite encouraged by what we've seen. But Jay, on the question of duration, you may help him understand what we see. Help Chris understand what we see and how it's different from what we're observing from the weekly and dailies in terms of the side effect duration. Side effect profile? Yes. You know before we started this research we didn't know would a long acting medicine like maritide that can be delivered monitor monthly or every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks enjoy durable efficacy owing to high time on target. This antibody backbone leads to very smooth and stable exposure over a long period of time engaging GLP1 receptors and GIB receptors in the brain and peripheral tissues. Would that durable efficacy be associated when there was a side effect with a long term side effect and that we don't see when we do observe nausea and vomiting? It tends to be quite short in its duration over the course of one or several days. No different than the weekly GLP1s but different than the weekly GLP1S and different than oral GLP1s that are short half life medicines. This trough to peak spike that's experienced every time leave can be associated with intolerable side effects in the GI and otherwise and this can be avoided with a steady stable long acting medicine like maritide. We See this at Target dosing of maritide by Manhattan Plots versus what's reported in the field with more frequent dosing and so in the fullness of time, this could prove to be a very important attribute, keeping patients on the medicine for the length of time that they have these diseases, which is for many of them a lifetime.
Julianne (Operator)
Julianne, we probably have time for two more questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from Akash Tiwari from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Akash Tiwari (Equity Analyst at Jefferies)
Hey, thanks so much for Dazzlo's phase three Sjogren's programs. You're making an interesting bet splitting it up into systemic and symptomatic patients. What kind of drove that decision and which one of those trials are you more confident will work? And can you go over any of the biological difference between DASO and then the Novartis CD40 but also Sanofi CD40L, which boasts ended up discontinuing their programs. Thank you.
Jay
Yeah, gosh, I love your questions because they invite a mechanistic characterization of these molecules. But I'll try to keep this brief, though it will be hard for me. We observed in phase two very strong activity of dazodalybip, which as you comment is a CD40 ligand FC fusion protein targeting fusion protein. And the performance against the SDI score in Sjogren's syndrome is quite a unique situation. It has proven very hard to develop effective medicines in Sjogren's disease, but seeing movement in the SDI score that made us very motivated to follow this up in phase three clinical investigation. The presentation of this heterogeneous disease can be quite different clinically and so we thought to segregate in order to have clear clinical outcomes in these clinical trials into two phase three studies, patients with what we'll call systemic disease, but then also very sick. A separate study of moderate to high symptomatic disease, but there with low systemic disease activity in the case that these two populations might be considered differently to observe meaningful differences attributable to those biological patients. These studies have completed enrollment and completion of both studies is expected in the second half of this year. Dazodalibep is the product of a long sought after drug discovery campaign. Honestly, in the field of Immunology, CD40 CD40 ligand signaling is fundamental to T cell, B cell CO stimulation. CD40 ligands on T cells, CD40s on many, many different kinds of cells and that makes this molecule very different than CFC533 from Novartis. What is true of Sjogren's disease, whether or not it's systemic or symptomatic, is that T and B cell activation is the primary driver. This isn't a dry gland disease. It's enriched with inflammatory cells. And so we believe that CD40 ligand is the right lever to press on as it will impact all downstream signaling by Targeting the upstream CD40 ligand on t cell. So we look forward to reading out these studies, one with the SDAI score, another with the DASPRI score, appropriate for a symptomatic study in the second half of this year.
Julianne (Operator)
Julieann, let's take one last question and then I'll have a couple remarks and we'll thank you. Our last question today will come from Louise Chen from Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Louise Chen (Equity Analyst at Scotiabank)
Hi. Thanks for taking my question. I just wanted to ask you, if you get Maritide approved, what are you playing for here? Do you want to be the number three player behind Novo and Lilly, or are you sitting a higher position than that with your product? Thank you, Louise.
Jay
That's a tempting question to consider a softball pitch over the middle of the plate here at the end of the day. But Myrto, do you want to offer any quick thoughts for Luis and then we'll wrap up?
Myrto
Well, I think we're going to be the best monthly or less frequently prescribed age in Luis. But. But no, in all sincerity, this is a highly differentiated product. I think the opportunity is substantial to come into a market that really is a new, paradigm changing opportunity for a massive category. And our focus is going to be on helping as many patients as possible in that category, whether they are de novo patients who have yet to attempt a weight loss treatment and they'll be new to maritide, or whether they're on another therapy and they're not achieving the results they like or they're not enjoying the frequency of injections or they're having side effects and they want to try another treatment. And we will, across the business, across the company, we will be ready to go into that market and compete effectively with all of the other companies that are already there.
Jay
I know some of our competitors have risen to the bait of that question, Louise, but we'll resist and wait instead until we have data in hand. And as you know, we're working diligently to try to generate the necessary data to register this molecule and as Myrto said, help as many patients as possible. There are very many who need differentiated therapy like this. And we're looking forward to having the data so that we can appropriately talk to them. But before we wrap up, I just wanted to, as I mentioned earlier in my remarks, I just wanted to take a moment and acknowledged that Dave Reese will be retiring from Amgen at the end of the second quarter. And I wanted to thank him publicly for his contributions to Amgen over the past 20 years as a long standing leader and former head of R and D. Dave's legacy here, as you all know, includes a generation of innovative medicines. What you may not be as familiar with is that Dave has been a persuasive champion for change and new technologies at Amgen and, and recognizing long ahead of many others, the growing importance of AI and what he called the hinge moment. Dave both raised his hand to be Amgen's first chief Technology Officer and helped attract Jay Bradner to be his successor as head of R and D. So we're thrilled, excited about the progress that we made in artificial intelligence and data under Dave's leadership, as well as the other businesses that Dave has had responsibilities, responsibility for. And again, we're grateful that Jay will build on what is a very solid foundation following Dave's retirement at the end of the second quarter. Dave is both a close colleague and friend to many of us and we will all miss him and wish him well in what we're sure will be a very active retirement. So Dave, on behalf of all of Amgen, thank you. And let me thank all of you for joining our call as well.
Julianne (Operator)
Thank you. This concludes our Amgen Q1 2026 earnings conference call.
Disclaimer: This transcript is provided for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, there may be errors or omissions in this automated transcription. For official company statements and financial information, please refer to the company's SEC filings and official press releases. Corporate participants' and analysts' statements reflect their views as of the date of this call and are subject to change without notice.
Login to comment