Genmab’s Earnings Calls Reveal PETO Readout Timeline Shifts and DLBCL Data Type Contradictions

Date of Call: Aug 6, 2026

Financials Results

• Revenue: $4.3B to $4.5B for full-year 2026 (midpoint growth of 19% YOY, up from 14% prior guidance)
• Operating Margin: Operating profit expected $1.1B to $1.4B for full-year 2026 (up 7% YOY, with operating expense increase of 2%)

Guidance:

• Full-year revenue expected in the range of $4.3 to $4.5 billion, representing 19% year-over-year growth at the midpoint (vs. 14% prior guidance).
• Full-year operating profit expected in the range of $1.1 to $1.4 billion.
• Operating expense guidance increased by 2%, with a new midpoint of $2.88 billion.
• Anticipates Phase 3 readouts for late-stage programs in the second half of 2026 and potential approvals/launches in 2027.

Business Commentary:

Revenue Growth and Strategic Investment:

• GenMAP reported a 25% increase in total revenue for the first half of 2026.
• Growth was driven by continued momentum across the portfolio, including strategic investments in late-stage programs and launch readiness.

Pipeline Progress and Approval Milestones:

• Positive top-line results from the Phase 3 APCOR DLBCL4 trial demonstrated a statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival.
• This was followed by the European approval of tepkinli plus lenalidomide and rituximab for follicular lymphoma, establishing it as the first bispecific-based therapy for this indication in Europe.

Commercial Performance of Key Products:

• Epkinley achieved $312 million in sales for the first half of 2026, representing a 48% year-over-year increase.
• The growth was driven by strong uptake in the U.S. and Japan, as well as the launch of Epkinley Plus R-squared in second-line FL.

Strategic Expansion into New Indications:

• GenMAP initiated two new Phase 3 studies for pitocentimab in colorectal cancer, building on promising data from ongoing trials in head and neck cancer.
• The expansion is based on the compelling rationale of combining EGFR and LGR5 targeting, showing enhanced efficacy in preclinical models.

Sentiment Analysis:

Overall Tone: Positive

• Management expressed being "in a really good place," "super excited," and "extremely pleased with the performance." They cited "25% revenue growth," "strong performance," "promising data," and "focused execution" leading to "exciting times ahead" with multiple catalysts and readouts anticipated.

Q&A:

• Question from Zain Ebrahim: On the Petosensimab second line trial, what's driving the slight delay to the readout in Q1 2027? And any updates on recruitment? Also, on EPCOR DLBCL4, what's seen on overall survival and FDA feedback on confirmatory trials?
  Response: The delay for the second-line readout is due to the event-driven trial timing; recruitment is ongoing. Overall survival data for EPCOR DLBCL4 is immature and not yet reported. FDA engagement is active, and whether the frontline or second-line trial serves as confirmatory is still under discussion.

• Question from Michael Schmidt (Guggenheim Partners): On EPCOR DLBCL2, how to explain the one-year delay of the interim analysis given faster enrollment?
  Response: The trial is very important, and they confirm it will be based on an interim analysis with top-line results next quarter, but no further details on timing were provided.

• Question from James Gordon (Barclays): On PETA, how mature will the interim OS be for the frontline trial in Q4, and which is a higher bar? Clarifications: Will we know if the frontline trial interim fails? Will we get separate readouts for PROC phase 2 and 3?
  Response: They will not speculate on statistical maturity or success bars. They will present interim data for frontline P2 trial next quarter and have active discussions with the agency. They will provide both phase 2 and 3 data sets when available.

• Question from Xian Deng (UBS): On Appinley frontline trial, why might R12 arm perform differently from competitors? On PETL frontline trial, rationale for chemo-free design vs. Revolvent's chemo combo?
  Response: They are excited about the trial and have high confidence based on predictable phase 2-to-3 translation. Cross-trial comparisons on control arms are flawed. The chemo-free design for PETL in frontline is based on the fragile patient population and the strong efficacy seen in phase 2 combinations, aiming for high response and durability.

• Question from Rajan Sharma (Goldman Sachs): On Epkinley frontline trial, was the second-line data better than expected? On Merck's TROP2 ADC data in endometrial, will that set a bar for RENA-S?
  Response: They are super excited about frontline data based on strong phase 2 studies. Merck's data has little bearing on their strategy; they are executing plans with two phase 3 trials in endometrial and have a BTD.

• Question from Eva Forte: On CRC, how is the PETO strategy differentiated from competitors like Amiranta map? Could a RAS-directed combo be viable?
  Response: They believe PETO has higher response rates and better safety in multiple data sets compared to Amiranta map, making it best-in-class. They are actively engaging on RAS inhibitor combinations and will present more data soon.

• Question from Anne (One Last Shot Camp): On J&J's accelerated approval for Amiranta map, how does that change your filing strategy? What underpins confidence in PETO's best-in-class profile?
  Response: They are confident in their head-and-neck strategy with frontline and OS readouts, which is more comprehensive than an accelerated profile. Confidence is based on PETO outperforming Amiranta map in multiple data sets on efficacy and safety, possibly due to differences in the second arm of the antibodies.

• Question from Charlie Haywood (Bank of America): On second-line PROC data, any differences between phase 2 and 3 trials? What PFS profile is expected for the phase 3 readout?
  Response: Phase 2 and 3 trials have similar inclusion criteria but differ in size and patient choice dynamics. They are excited about potential high response rates and long durability, which should translate to meaningful PFS improvements.

• Question from Benjamin Jackson: On Rina S, implications of competition targeting top O1 resistance? Updated thoughts on Epkinley in INI diseases?
  Response: They are focused on moving Rina S into earlier lines in ovarian cancer and have more trials in the pipeline. Topo resistance is a post-Rena problem if Rina S is first in class. No specific update on Epkinley in INI diseases was provided.

• Question from Morgan Stanley: On PETO frontline trial, what might the Q4 top-line update include? Any stocking for Epkinley? IP strategy for Kinley?
  Response: Top-line results will focus on the primary endpoint; granular data will follow. No stocking issue for Epkinley. IP strategy aims to extend protection, but specifics were not discussed.

Contradiction Point 1

PETO (Head & Neck) Trial Readout Timeline

Contradiction on whether trial upsizing impacts the 2026 readout guidance.

Questioner (Name not specified) - Questioner (Name not specified)

2026Q2: The PETO second-line monotherapy Phase 3 trial will report an OS benefit in Q1 2027. - [Tai Yamadi](CMO)

What efficacy and durability profile must PETO demonstrate to remain competitive in the second-line head and neck setting amid advancing competitors? - Jonathan Chang (Leerink Partners LLC)

2026Q1: The guidance remains that one or both petosemtamab studies will read out in 2026. - [Tahamtan Ahmadi](Executive VP, Chief Medical Officer & Head of Experimental Medicines)

Contradiction Point 2

Nature of Data for Frontline DLBCL Trial Readout

Contradiction on whether the 2026 readout is for an interim or final analysis.

Michael Schmidt (Guggenheim Partners) - Michael Schmidt (Guggenheim Partners)

2026Q2: The EPKOR DLBCL2 (first-line) trial... the interim top-line results now expected in Q4 2026. - [Tai Yamadi](CMO)

Why was there a ~one-year delay in the interim analysis of the EPKOR DLBCL2 trial despite faster-than-expected enrollment? - Zain Ebrahim (JPMorgan Chase & Co)

2026Q1: The company has guided that the frontline DLBCL study will have a readout in 2026. No further comment was made on whether it is interim or final data. - [Tahamtan Ahmadi](Executive VP, Chief Medical Officer & Head of Experimental Medicines)

Contradiction Point 3

EPKOR DLBCL2 (First-Line DLBCL) Trial Readout Timeline

Disagreement on whether the trial's readout timeline has shifted.

Michael Schmidt (Guggenheim Partners) - Michael Schmidt (Guggenheim Partners)

2026Q2: The interim top-line results now expected in Q4 2026. - [Tai Yamadi](CMO)

What caused the approximately one-year delay in the EPKOR DLBCL2 (first-line) trial's interim analysis, despite faster-than-expected enrollment? - Xian Deng (UBS Investment Bank)

2025Q4: The readout for the frontline DLBCL study is expected to happen in 2026, as previously stated. - [Tahamtan Ahmadi](CMO)

Contradiction Point 4

Regulatory Strategy for Confirming Epkinley's Second-Line FL Indication

Shift from a definitive, confident regulatory stance to an ongoing, uncertain discussion.

Zain Ebrahim: - Zain Ebrahim:

2026Q2: FDA engagement is ongoing; whether the first-line or second-line trial serves as the confirmatory trial... is still being discussed and will depend on frontline trial results. - [Tai Yamadi](CMO)

What is driving the slight delay in the PETO second-line trial readout to Q1 2027 and what is the latest FDA feedback on using the second-line or first-line trial as a confirmatory trial for Epkinley? - Asthika Goonewardene (Truist Securities, Inc.):

2025Q4: The company is not concerned about the confirmatory trial issue. They have three Phase III studies... Precedent from other programs provides confidence. - [Tahamtan Ahmadi](CMO)

Contradiction Point 5

Peto Program Development in Head and Neck Cancer

There is a direct contradiction regarding the continuation of Peto's development in the first-line head and neck cancer setting.

Anne (One Last Shot Camp) - Anne (One Last Shot Camp)

2026Q2: The company's strategy is unchanged. They have a comprehensive data set (frontline combo, second-line monotherapy) that is different from an accelerated approval pathway. - [Tai Yamadi](CMO)

How is J&J's potential accelerated approval for Amivantamab in head and neck cancer influencing your strategy, and what underpins your confidence in PETO's best-in-class profile versus Amivantamab? - Qize Ding (Rothschild & Co Redburn)

2025Q3: The decision, made with BioNTech, was based on data in frontline head and neck cancer not meeting the high bar for continued development. - [Jan van de Winkel](CEO)