“we don't see a large or meaningful interaction between the two even if we do see the negotiation take place in twenty-eight.”

In context

“here. So as it relates to Botox being selected for Medicare negotiation, we're obviously disappointed that it was selected given that it's a plasma-derived product and should have been excluded. That said, we did plan conservatively that it could be selected based on CMS spend, so its selection does not impact our long-term growth guidance at all. Jeffrey Stewart: Yeah. And, also, in terms of the pricing separation, we're comfortable with how we understand that effectuation may ultimately take place if and when it does happen in 2028. Certainly, we did see that when the announcement was made, there were comments around Botox Cosmetic, but that's just more of a formulaic dynamic with the way the government looks at NDCs, but it's quite clear that, you know, there's a cash pay component. So we don't see a large or meaningful interaction between the two even if we do see the negotiation take place in twenty-eight. Scott Reents: Sure. And this is Scott. I'll address your question on pricing for SKYRIZI and RINVOQ. So we've talked about it, and we continue to expect low single-digit pricing headwinds for both of those products, both in '26 and over the next few years as well. That's what we've seen. I would tell you '25 was unique. We had some pricing tailwinds in '25. And so in the end, for SKYRIZI, we were roughly flat for pricing on the year for SKYRIZI. Had some positive price in the first half of the year, and it was negative price in the back half of the year. And RINVOQ was slightly down on a year-over-year basis for pricing in '25 as well. Pricing favorability in the first half and pricing unfavorability in the second half, netting to slightly down. That does come into play when we look at, f”