Good morning, good afternoon everyone. Before we start, let me remind you our strategy. Please move to slide number four. Our strategy centers around three key priorities, where we look to create value from our early pipeline through later stage partnership where it makes sense to do so. First, we look to create near-term value driven by our lead proprietary asset, lacutamab, which as you know, is in clinical development for T-cell lymphoma, with readouts during the second half of this year. Two ongoing trials in the larger indication of peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Second, mid-long term, we continue to fuel our pipeline and create longer term value, leveraging our antibody engineering capabilities to develop innovative molecules with a primary focus on our multi-specific NK-cell engager platform called ANKET. Sanofi have the most advanced ANKET in the clinic today. They have selected another candidate, and we are nearing the clinic with the others. On the adenosine pathway, we have also announced plans to progress our anti-CD39, IPH5201, to phase II in partnership with AstraZeneca. Last but not least, we are building a strong and sustainable foundation for our business, leveraging the various partnership across both industry and academia. Here, our AstraZeneca partnership with monalizumab is continuing in lung cancer. Our focus is to leverage the value of our products as much as possible, and we want to ensure that if we can gain valuable competencies via a partner agreement, we will consider that in our development plans for the product. This will further validate our science and offer capital that we can reinvest to advance our early portfolio. Before I hand over to Joyson, please move to slide five, which is an overview of the pipeline. It shows how we have translated our science into a robust portfolio of proprietary and partnered assets. It also illustrates how we are executing against our strategy with our lead proprietary asset, lacutamab, supported by partnered and earlier stage product, in particular from our NK-cell engager, ANKET platform. We're also pleased to see the progress throughout the portfolio, with several clinical assets continuing to progress from phase I through to phase III trials. At this update, we announced that we have regained the right to four preclinical molecules from AstraZeneca, and we look forward to updating you on our development plans and progress on these molecules in due time. We anticipate a series of potential clinical readouts and catalysts in the upcoming couple of years as our R&D engine looks to leverage our scientific know-how to create a sustainable business. I would like now to pass the call over to Joyson, who will review the progress made in our portfolio, starting with lacutamab, our most advanced proprietary asset. Joyson, over to you. Thank you, Mondher. On slide six, let me start with our first-in-class humanized monoclonal antibody that targets the immune receptor KIR3DL2. As you may remember, KIR3DL2 is an inhibitory receptor found in approximately 65% of patients across all cutaneous T-cell lymphomas. In the TELLOMAK trial, Cohort 1, including Sézary syndrome patients, could potentially be a pivotal cohort. For mycosis fungoides, we have Cohorts 2 and 3, which have been presented previously and are testing the hypothesis of non-expressers and expressers of KIR3DL2 using the frozen companion diagnostic assay. As expected, our scientific hypothesis confirmed in Cohort 2 a high global response rate in comparison to the benchmark in the non-expressive cohort, which had a low global response rate. As promised, on September 23, we are pleased to announce that we will be presenting preliminary data from the mycosis fungoides Cohort 2 in a few weeks at the EORTC Congress in Madrid. On slide seven, let me summarize the progress we are making with lacutamab. We are pursuing a fast-to-market strategy for lacutamab in the niche setting of Sézary syndrome, where lacutamab was granted U.S. Fast Track designation and EU PRIME designation in 2020. We have expanded past Sézary syndrome to mycosis fungoides, where we have seen encouraging preliminary data from our phase II trial. For Sézary syndrome and mycosis fungoides, enrollment is on track. For Sézary syndrome, we will be presenting the initial data from the potentially pivotal cohort in the second half of 2022. Finally, we are continuing to enroll into peripheral T-cell lymphoma in the monotherapy and combination trials in the relapsed setting. On slide eight, I would like to update you on monalizumab. To remind you, monalizumab is an anti-NKG2A which acts upon the checkpoint pathway to potentiate NK cell activation that we have licensed to AstraZeneca for oncology. Although we are disappointed with the results for monalizumab in head and neck cancer over the summer, we are pleased to see the early lung cancer program is underway with further proof points being presented this year. There are currently two ongoing AstraZeneca-sponsored early lung cancer trials underway with monalizumab in combination with anti-PD-L1 durvalumab. On slide nine, you can see an overview of the late-stage development plan for monalizumab in lung cancer. As mentioned, based on the AstraZeneca-sponsored phase II COAST data, AstraZeneca has commenced PACIFIC-9, a phase III trial evaluating the combinations of either monalizumab or oleclumab plus durvalumab in the unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer setting who have not progressed after concurrent chemoradiation therapy. In the phase II COAST study, the three arms evaluated the combinations of durvalumab plus monalizumab and durvalumab plus oleclumab, AstraZeneca's anti-CD73. As published earlier in the year in the Journal of Clinical Oncology by AstraZeneca, after a median follow-up of 11.5 months, the results of the interim analysis showed a hazard ratio of 0.42 for durvalumab plus monalizumab versus durvalumab alone. The results also showed an increase in the primary endpoint of confirmed overall response rate for durvalumab plus monalizumab over durvalumab alone of 36% versus 18% respectively. Although small numbers in the PFS exploratory subgroup analysis, monalizumab with durvalumab demonstrated a trend favoring the combination in tumors with high HLA-E and NKG2A expression and supporting the mechanistic rationale for the combination. We were also pleased to see that further analysis from the AstraZeneca sponsored NeoCOAST data was presented at the ESMO Congress in Paris this week. NeoCOAST-2 is a phase II study in stages II-A to III-A non-small cell lung cancer. That includes a treatment arm with monalizumab in combination with durvalumab and chemotherapy. The presentation provided the importance of ctDNA in the neoadjuvant setting in the monalizumab arm by demonstrating a decrease in ctDNA. On slide 10, I would like to highlight the progress of our assets targeting the adenosine pathway, which is increasingly recognized as critical in the tumor immunosuppression and two approaches we at Innate are taking. For our anti-CD39, IPH5201, we have announced that we are progressing to phase II trials in collaboration with AstraZeneca in lung cancer and received a $5 million milestone payment. The phase I in collaboration with AstraZeneca has concluded in solid tumors in combination with durvalumab, and AstraZeneca expects the data this year. For our anti-CD73, IPH5301, an investigator-sponsored phase I trial is underway, where the IST is exploring a differentiated approach, combining our anti-CD73 with trastuzumab and chemotherapy in HER2-positive cancers. We look forward to further updates from this clinical program next year. I will now hand over to Yannis to cover our ANKET program. Thank you, Joyson. On slide 11, I wanted to highlight the latest update from our proprietary multi-specific NK cell engager platform that we call ANKET. ANKET standing for antibody-based NK cell engager therapeutics. We are pleased to have presented our latest innovation at major scientific and medical conferences, including ESMO last weekend by our CSO, Professor Eric Vivier, as well as AACR and SITC last year. ANKET is a versatile fit-for-purpose technology made of various building blocks that is creating an entirely new class of either tri or tetraspecific engager to induce synthetic immunity against cancer. This technology platform, which is leveraging our scientific expertise in the NK cell space, will be an engine for our pipeline, creating value via multiple drug candidates addressing multiple tumor targets. Our excitement for this ANKET platform is supported by preclinical data we have to date. First, the ANKET platform allows for optimal harnessing of the NK cell effector functions due to the unique engagement of the activating receptor NKp46 and CD16 that are both expressed on NK cells. Second, this preclinical efficacy can be further increased by the addition of IL-2 variants which target the IL-2 receptor beta gamma complex, which is constitutively expressed on NK cells, inducing their proliferation within the tumor microenvironment. Overall, this platform demonstrates better preclinical antitumor efficacy than we have seen preclinically with clinically approved benchmark antibodies against the same tumor targets. On slide 12, you can see our most advanced ANKET program is a CD123 targeted trispecific molecule, IPH6101 or SAR443579, that we are in collaboration with Sanofi, which is now licensed to them and currently in phase I trial. We also announced over the summer that Sanofi have selected for further development a second ANKET candidate. It is called IPH6401 or SAR445514, and it is a BCMA targeted tri-specific ANKET molecule using Sanofi's prototype format, which shows the versatility of our platform. We now have announced EUR 13 million in milestone to date from this partnership with Sanofi. Our most recent generation of ANKET molecule is a tetra-specific version incorporating a cytokine to support the NK cell proliferation, is also progressing toward the IND study with the first IND filing expected in 2023 for the IPH6501. As Mondher also mentioned, we will provide update on next step for the other assets from our preclinical portfolio in due course. I will now hand over to Frédéric for an update on the financials. Thank you, Yannis. On slide 13, as usual, you can find the consolidated financial statements as of the six months ended June 30 this year, and including our press release for further information. I will cover the highlight on this slide. Cash and cash equivalent, short-term investment and permanent share assets amounted to 158.2 million as of end of June this year. This does not include the $5 million and EUR 3 million announced from AstraZeneca and Sanofi for the IPH5201 H2 progression and the ANKET BCMA target selection, or the expected EUR 10 million of research tax credit due in H2. Revenue and other income from continuing operation amounted to EUR 45.6 million in the first half of 2022. There are EUR 14.7 million versus EUR 14.7 million in the first half of 2021, and mainly comprised revenue from collaboration and licensing agreements. These mainly resulted from the partial or entire recognition of the proceeds received from payments under the agreements with AstraZeneca and Sanofi, and which are recognized on the basis of the percentage completion of the works performed by the company under such agreements. Governmental funding for research expenditure were EUR 4.3 million in the first half of 2022. Operating expenses from continuing operations were EUR 37.1 million in the first half of 2022, of which 67.3% or EUR 25 million were related to R&D. R&D expenses from continuing operations increased by EUR 3.7 million to EUR 25 million in the first half of 2022. This change mainly results from an increase in direct R&D expenses related to programs, notably for lacutamab on our proprietary tetra-specific ANKET, IPH6501, and an increase in personnel expenses mainly explained by the increase in the share-based payments. General administrative expenses from continuing operations decreased by EUR 0.5 million to EUR 12.1 million in the first half of 2022. I will now turn to Mondher for summary of the catalyst and close. Thank you. Thank you, Frédéric. As you can tell, we are working consistently and diligently to execute our strategy across all three key pillars and believe that we are laying the foundation to drive near and long-term value for patients and our shareholders. Please move to slide 14. Looking at our clinical program, we expect to achieve a number of milestones over the next two years. As you heard from Joyson, our phase II TELLOMAK study for lacutamab continues to progress. We will start to report preliminary data from this month from the program. In addition, as you know, we are moving our peripheral T-cell lymphoma program into the clinic with initial data expected in 2023. For monalizumab, the lung cancer trials are underway. We continue to advance the adenosine pathway agent in the clinic, where we look forward to sharing our phase II plans in due course. In parallel, we continue to develop our ANKET technology platform with our partner, Sanofi, and we are very encouraged by the preclinical results from our next generation NK cell engagers. We believe that this represents a natural evolution of our platform with data presented at conferences last year. We look forward to updates on our proprietary ANKET IPH6101, IPH6501 later this year with the IND on track to be filed next year. Let's move to the conclusion slide. Lastly, on slide 15, as you can tell, we continue our exciting journey at Innate. We look to build our business to create value for patients and stakeholders. In summary, we have positioned Innate Pharma for the future with our strategy and made meaningful progress throughout 2021 across all three strategic pillars. We have carefully managed our resources so we can continue to invest and progress in our pipeline. I am very pleased that we continue to have a very strong cash position with a runway into the second half of 2024, with $158 million as of June 30th, 2022, not taking into account additional BD milestones. Collectively, we are driving value across our business and ultimately advancing our goal to deliver innovative medicine to patients. We look forward to keeping you updated on our progress throughout the year. This concludes our prepared remarks. We will now open the call to questions. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star then the number one on your telephone keypad. Again, that's star then the number one to ask a question. You can also email IR team if you have a question. Your first question comes from Yigal Nochomovitz with Citi. Hi, this is Carly on for Yigal. Thanks for taking our question. We had one on the design of NeoCOAST-2. Can you just clarify the rationale for adding chemo to the combination in NeoCOAST-2, which you didn't have in NeoCOAST? Absolutely. Thank you. Let me repeat the question. Is it about the design of the NeoCOAST-2 trial and the rationale to add chemotherapy to the combination, while the NeoCOAST-1 did not include chemo? I think Joyson will provide some explanation. Go ahead, Joyson, please. Hi, thank you for the question. Just as a reminder, NeoCOAST-2 is a trial that is currently being run by AstraZeneca. Currently, they have not provided any further information about the chemotherapy. It is also to utilize. I mean, but to kind of go into the mechanism a little bit about CD about monalizumab. Using the chemotherapy itself, as we've seen from the COAST study, does provide synergy and it may enhance the efficacy of monalizumab from a mechanistic perspective. Okay. Got it. Thank you. We also had a question on INTERLINK-1, I guess. Do you have a hypothesis at this point for why this study wasn't successful? Do you think it could have been a trial design issue? Are there any learnings from INTERLINK-1 that you and AZ can use as you develop monalizumab in other tumor types? Thank you. Yes. Thank you again for the question. At INTERLINK-1, we are looking further into it. Of course it is a large phase III, and due to that, we're kind of really delving deeper into the data to determine if there are any learnings that we could get from the results that we're seeing. Okay, great. Thanks for taking the questions. Your next question comes from the line of Daina Graybosch with SVB Securities. Hi. Thanks for the question. Two from me. Wondering if you could give us some more context on the TELLOMAK, like MF readout, I think, on September 23. Why MF and not also Sézary syndrome in the same readout? If you could help, you know, set any expectations for the amount of patients and the data we should expect there. My second question is, can you talk a little bit more about the preclinical programs that were given back to Innate Pharma from AstraZeneca? The mechanisms or why those were given back, if it's program specific or sort of an overall strategic collaboration change? Thank you. This is Joyson. Maybe I can start with the first question and then hand it over to Yannis for the second question. In regards to the data, in regards to the mycosis fungoides data, that is going to be released at EORTC, and due to that, we cannot give any more specifics, at least around it until the abstract release. And as mentioned in Sézary syndrome, we will be releasing the data, in second half, most likely at an upcoming major conference. It'll be by the end of the second half. Maybe I'll hand it over to Yannis for the second question. Hey, Daina. Actually, the four preclinical program that were under option with AZ. For these programs, the targets were selected obviously four years ago. As you can imagine, in four years, many things can change in a big pharma. Again, it was very early stage. I think we see that we had an opportunity regaining the full right. We see that as an opportunity to further develop these programs completely freely or even to partner with a third party. Most importantly, through our collaboration with AZ, which is very active, we really should focus on the development of actual assets. Here, like Mondher mentioned in his intervention, the CD39 is moving into phase II, and we have monalizumab now in phase II and phase III in early NSCLC, which are very important signals of the very good and active collaboration with our colleagues at AZ. Maybe one more follow-up. Those four really early programs, were those being worked on at Innate Pharma or AstraZeneca? No, these are. They are actually optioned on program that were developed at Got it. Innate Pharma. Got it. Thank you. Next, we have a question from the line of Eric Le Berrigaud with Stifel. Hi, I will read out Eric's question submitted online. It's a similar follow-up to the [AZ] four. The market looks quite disappointed by the exercise of zero out of the four preclinical assets by AstraZeneca to move forward. Can you tell us how far AstraZeneca went to assess the preclinical assets? Should we think more about a lack of strong enough profile or a prioritization exercise by AstraZeneca? In other words, are you confident that some of those will find other partners to move forward? Yeah. Thank you, Eric, for the question. Maybe to reiterate what Yannis already said. First of all, AstraZeneca continues to be an important partner and shareholder. Over the last four years, we made significant progress with assets for which we had proper development and commercialization agreement with, as you know, monalizumab now in phase III and phase II in early-stage NSCLC, and IPH5201 or anti-CD39 moving into phase II. The preclinical option was one of the many collaborations underway. AZ had, as you said yourself, a lot of other programs underway, and you can imagine for a company of that size, they do prioritization of their portfolio on a regular basis. What really important is that during the period, we have received notice that AstraZeneca will not exercise its option to license those 4 preclinical programs. This option agreement was part of the 2018 multi-term agreement between AstraZeneca and Innate. There has been no update on the progress since the agreement. As Yannis said, now that we regained full rights to develop we can further develop those four preclinical molecules, and we will share our plans for further development, either in partnership or as proprietary assets in due course. I think one important nuance that we need to keep in mind, we're talking about targets here. We're not talking about molecules and assets. It's very, very early. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Nick Hallett with Goldman Sachs. Hi there. Thank you for taking my questions. It's Nick Hallett here on, with Keir. Just one question on your cash runway guidance into 2H 2024. Can we just clarify if that includes any assumptions around, potential lacutamab revenues or if it includes any proceeds from the, ATM facility? Thank you. Thank you for the question. We are really having a safe approach on that front for the cash runway calculation. We do not include any BD procedure revenue that is not fully committed. As you know, if we would do so, we would have communicated it to the market, which is not the case so far. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line. Sorry, go ahead, please. Your next question comes from the line of Olga Smolentseva with Bryan Garnier. Good afternoon, and thank you for taking my questions. I just want to maybe touch upon NeoCOAST presentation at ESMO. I believe there were sort of more granular data on intra-tumoral immune activation by durva and two combinations. It sort of seemed like combination with durva in general, with durva with monalizumab in general showed broader change in gene expression and sort of up-regulation of selected genes, including cytotoxicity, lymphatic etcetera, were higher. I'm just curious if this provides additional basis to differentiate between durvalumab- oleclumab and durvalumab- monalizumab combinations, for you and Astra. If there were any additional learnings regarding maybe mechanism of action or patient population that might sort of, you know, benefit from durvalumab- monalizumab combination better. Thank you, Olga. This is a very, I'll say, an important question that goes a bit beyond the data that were presented at ESMO couple of days ago. Before I hand over to Yannis to maybe talk to the granular aspect of this, let me remind everyone that the ongoing phase III trial is testing two hypothesis. One is, of course, the combination of durvalumab with monalizumab. The other one is the combination of durva with an anti-CD73. I think there are already, you know, some elements that can help eventually differentiate which patient may derive what benefit from which combination. I think at this point in time, it's too early to conclude, and we have to be extremely careful because the amount of data that was presented even recently is coming from this very small end. It's very early. Nevertheless, I think it's interesting to guide to some specific signatures for the combination of monalizumab and durvalumab. Maybe Yannis you can elaborate a little bit more on this. Yes. Yes, I think you said it very right, Olga. As Mondher said, the number of patients for which we have the pharmacodynamic data is pretty limited, but it's clear, I would say reassuring and encouraging from the mechanism of action perspective because we clearly show, and I'm sure you're referring to this slide, a very strong immune activation, whether in the durvalumab- oleclumab arm or in durvalumab anti-NKG2A monalizumab arm, as compared to the durvalumab alone. The numbers are very limited. What is also important to keep in mind that this NeoCOAST data where I would say monitored after a single cycle of durvalumab plus oleclumab or monalizumab, and whereas in the NeoCOAST there will be a multiple cycle plus chemo, a bit like in the CheckMate 816 trial. It's clear, I would say, an important risking step from the mechanism of action perspective. Great. Thank you. If I may, I understand that the results for MF cohort will be presented soon, for apologies, for lacutamab. I'm just curious if you can comment in terms of patients that you're seeing in the study so far, and thinking that MF is a more indolent type of lymphoma, are those kind of having more previous lines of therapy and in general status of MF cohort versus Sézary syndrome cohort? Thank you for the question. The presentation is gonna be at EORTC, and unfortunately we cannot comment on the abstract or any of the data within the abstract. We are of course just keeping in mind the enrollment criteria that we have mentioned before. The MF cohort is integrated in two lines of therapy also. Because of that, we are treating later line patients very similar to the SS, where we are also treating later line patients. Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful. Again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star then the number one on your telephone keypad. You may also email your questions. Your next question comes from Arsène Guekam with Kepler Cheuvreux. Hi, this is a question Arsène sent in from Kepler. So first question, what is your development strategy for leucatamab? Are you looking for a partner? I'll let Laurent go first, then I'll ask the second one. Thank you, Arsène, for the question. Number one, lacutamab, as you know, is a proprietary product that is coming from our labs. We're extremely proud that you could, you know, translate the scientific knowledge around this molecule to bring it to the patient. We are even more excited to see the preliminary results coming out of phase I that led to the decision by the FDA to grant Fast Track designation and by EMA to grant PRIME. Now, we picked Sézary syndrome as a faster market strategy. It's obvious that in terms of market opportunity, this is a small niche indication. Nevertheless, in terms of market access, speed to register and potentially also premium pricing strategy, it may not be a bad idea. We need to validate this first step, and I think as you've heard from Joyson, we have the first preliminary data coming from the potentially pivotal arm of the TELLOMAK trial to be presented toward the end of the year. That's, I think, the first step. The second step in our strategy was to expand from there and see whether we can see activity outside Sézary syndrome. As Olga said, in less aggressive form of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma like mycosis fungoides. That's also something that we have disclosed early in the program last year, and precisely at the Lugano meeting, and we will be providing an update at the upcoming EORTC cutaneous T-cell lymphoma meeting in Madrid in a couple of days. Of course, the next step in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma is to go into phase III, but it's too early to really embark in that type of discussion before we see the readout from this phase II trial. I think most important, and I think that's what I understand in your question, is what's next in terms of potential and in terms of development and partnership. I think the signal that we really see or we should see in peripheral T-cell lymphoma is paramount to guide our strategy moving forward. First of all, because the market is much larger. As you know, there are close to 20,000 new patients diagnosed with peripheral T-cell lymphoma every year. About half of them express the PD-L2. Of course, there is a significant unmet medical need, not only in second line, but even in first line, there is room for improvement. I think we are at the early steps of that development and the readout from the ongoing phase I-B trial that we started and that we announce preliminary results next year will guide again our strategy in terms of collaboration. I, as I stated in my introduction, I think our partnership philosophy is to be open-minded and to consider partnership for early stage R&D efforts, but also to consider options in the later stage if it brings competencies that we do not have in-house, capability that we do not have in-house, and ability to maximize the opportunity for the asset while bringing capital that we can reinvest into our portfolio. I hope I gave you a broad answer to the question. The second question from Arsène at Kepler Cheuvreux. I brought another question on AstraZeneca. I think a more of a broader collaboration question. How is your collaboration going with AstraZeneca after the recent failures of the head and neck and the exercise option? Yeah. Again, very important question, and thanks for the opportunity to reiterate what I said in the past. AstraZeneca is more than a partner, it's a shareholder. You may remember in 2018 as part of this agreement, AstraZeneca became a shareholder of Innate Pharma. The two assets that are in collaboration with AstraZeneca, which are monalizumab and IPH5201, are progressing. Monalizumab is in phase III. AstraZeneca is investing not only in the PACIFIC-9 trial, but also in a new randomized phase II trial called the NeoCOAST-2. This is, of course, an important signal about their not just appetite or interest in monalizumab, but of course the importance of the collaboration and the relationship with Innate Pharma. Last but not least, as we announced earlier in the year, they took the decision to move IPH5201, our anti-CD39, into phase II. Despite the fact that they have progressed already the CD73 in phase III, they are still interested and involved in the development of our anti-CD39. I mean, these are two very strong signals that can tell you about the relationship and the collaboration that we have with AstraZeneca. The fact that we have, you know, negative readouts from INTERLINK-1, it's part of, you know, our business in drug development. You have, you know, ups and downs. I think we both, AstraZeneca and us, took the risk to explore the potential role of monalizumab in head and neck cancer. The futility analysis told us that this may not be the best way. As Joyson said, I think we need time to digest and look at the totality of the data and see what we can learn from these preliminary results. It does not really put into question the relationship that we have with our partner. The fact that we regained our rights for the four targets does not preclude or mean that AstraZeneca is no longer a very important partner for us. It is just, you know, part of what any large pharmaceutical company do from time to time. I think part of the priorities portfolio that they have to conduct on a regular basis. Your next question comes from Jingm ing at Evercore. Hi. Yeah, this is an online submitted question. Can you comment on the amount of potential milestones from AstraZeneca tied to non-small cell lung cancer? Thank you. Uh. Go ahead, Yannis. Yeah. Actually, we did not disclose the breakdown of the milestone. We may be but just to remind you the total amount of milestone of the deal is EUR 1.2 billion. We already cashed in EUR 450 million. The last two milestones that we disclosed were for first patients in phase III. We get EUR 50 million for the first phase III, EUR 50 million for the second phase III. We still, I mean, there is a total of EUR 400 million in regulatory and development milestones, as well as EUR 425 million in commercial milestones. At this time, there are no further questions. Are there any closing remarks? Thank you for your participation to this call. As I said in my concluding remark, we continue to consistently execute our strategy and make sure that we create value short term with lacutamab. We are very excited to see that this work is coming to you know the light now, and we will be presenting data in the second half of this year. We are also very excited with the progress of our ANKET platform and seeing you know now molecules being enter into the clinic. The next opportunity we have to bring our own proprietary asset, IPH6501 into the clinic is an important and major milestone. Last but not least, as I said, we had the bad news in the summer about IL-2. We are extremely excited by the progress of monalizumab in early stage lung cancer. We look forward to update you also on the IPH5201 phase II program that we announced. Last but not least, we have a very strong cash position and a cash runway into the second half of 2024, which of course will allow us to execute our strategy and create value, as I said, for patients and shareholders. Thank you. Have a good day. Thank you for participating. You may disconnect at this time.