Good afternoon, and thank you for joining PeptiDream's 2025 R&D Day conference call. This is Yen Ting Chen, Head of Business Development at PeptiDream. With me today on this call are Patrick Reid, Chief Executive Officer of PeptiDream, Masato Murakami, Chief Medical Officer of PeptiDream and President of PDRadiopharma, and Christian Cunningham, Chief Scientific Officer of PeptiDream. During today's call, Patrick, Masato, and Christian will provide some recent updates and perspectives regarding our research and development programs. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session where the participants can ask questions either through the call or using the chat function. I would like to remind you that this call will contain remarks concerning PeptiDream's future expectations, plans, and prospects. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. In addition, any forward-looking statements represent our views only as of the date of this call and should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date. We specifically disclaim any obligations to update such statements. Today's call is recorded and will be disclosed on the PeptiDream website, and with that, I'd like to turn the call over to Patrick. Good afternoon, good morning, and good evening to everybody. Greatly appreciate everyone taking the time to attend our 2025 R&D Day presentation. At PeptiDream, our R&D efforts are focused on five core therapeutic areas: Radiopharmaceuticals, Peptide Oligo Conjugates, Peptide Cytotoxic Conjugates, and Multifunctional Peptide Conjugates, and across these five core areas, we are focused on creating a robust clinical pipeline of innovative programs. In today's presentation, we will touch on the current status of these efforts and the exceptional progress we've made across these areas in fiscal year 2025. On slide four is an overview of our current Radiopharmaceutical Clinical pipeline. In 2025, we had an exceptional year with our Curium PSMA partner program entering registrational trials in Japan, and the first wave of PeptiDream discovered peptide-RI conjugates for both collaboration efforts and in-house efforts progressing forward. With our Glypican-3 program partnered with BMS and our FAP programs partnered with Novartis, we had four programs Phase I studies. We also recently filed INDs for our wholly owned in-house CA9 programs. Additionally, our second in-house Claudin 18.2 program announced last year is progressing through IND enabling studies while we in parallel are planning a Phase 0 imaging study. Today, we are very happy to announce our third in-house program targeting Cadherin-3. These results are the product of the last five years of discovery efforts, and these programs represent just the first wave of programs entered the clinic for us. We have a robust preclinical pipeline of peptide-RI programs following, and we're on course to move more programs into the clinic in 2026 and beyond. It really represents a very, very exciting time for us in the radiopharmaceutical field. Today, we'll start off providing more detail on our efforts in the radiopharmaceutical space with our CMO and also President of PDRadiopharma, Masato Murakami, highlighting the exciting progress and efforts happening at PDRadiopharma. Murakami-san. Thank you, Patrick. Hello, everyone. I'm Masato Murakami. I'd briefly introduce our company, PDRadiopharma. We have been Japan's radiopharmaceutical leader since 1968 and advancing nuclear medicine for society and delivering the new era of the radiopharmaceutical impact to the patients. First, our position. We are Japan's only domestically owned pure-play radiopharmaceutical company with more than 50 years of continuous experience in nuclear medicine. Over that time, we have built nationwide manufacturing, logistics, and technical support that are difficult to replicate, and this gives us a unique role in the Japanese ecosystem. Second, our commercial foundations. We already have a profitable cash-generating portfolio of approved nuclear medicine products. This stable base allows us to invest in new growth areas. Finally, our future growth drivers. Our midterm strategy is centered on Radiopharmaceutical Clinical with some launched products and late-stage assets that I will walk you through today. In particular, Amyvid is now entering a multi-year high visibility growth phase and will be one of the key contributors to our next stage. Next slide, please. Today, I will walk you through five key highlights for fiscal year 2025. First, Amyvid, our amyloid PET tracer. Second, Raiatt MIBG for PPGL and neuroblastoma. Third, the Copper-ATSM program in malignant glioma. Fourth, our Copper and Lutetium PSMA targeted program in prostate cancer. And finally, our total nuclear medicine solutions. I will touch on each of these. Next, please. Let me start with highlight number one, Amyvid. The key message here is Amyvid is putting amyloid PET at the center of Alzheimer's care. And we are driving adoption of amyloid PET as a standard tool of the treatment decision and follow-up. In other words, Amyvid is evolving from the diagnostic sector into a critical piece of modern Alzheimer's treatment pathways. Next, please. Over the past few years, Alzheimer's disease has changed dramatically. Antibody therapy such as lecanemab and donanemab has made disease-modifying treatments a clinical reality. But they require accurate patient selection and response assessment. In diagnosis, Aβ tracer imaging with Amyvid is now in routine practice, allowing physicians to visualize amyloid PET directly and to evaluate how patients respond over time. Together, these advances are moving the field from simply seeing the disease to active treatment and monitoring Aβ. Next, please. On this slide, I'd like to highlight three growth drivers for Amyvid. First, the launch of the lecanemab and donanemab is expanding the pool of the patients who require amyloid confirmation and on-treatment monitoring. Second, our [Amicruze] and [Amiflow II]. These applications provide standardized and quantitative PET assessments, including centiloid scale scoring, which supports consistent treatment decisions and follow-up in daily clinical practice. Third, PET imaging offers direct visualization and quantification of the brain amyloid distributions. These three elements together support study structural growth in amyloid utilizations. Next, please. This slide shows how the demand is translating into real numbers. In 2024, Amyvid sales were roughly seven times higher than 2023, mainly driven by reinvestment and the first wave of the disease-modifying therapy use. In 2025, we expect about two and a half-fold additional growth versus 2024, as both lecanemab and donanemab roll out and PET become standard for the treatment initiation and follow-up. Importantly, 2026 is positioned for continued high double-digit growth as 12-month monitoring scan after therapy initiation. This became routine. Amyvid is entering the multi-year high visibility growth phase, generating increasing cash flow for PDR. Next, please. To highlight number two with the Raiatt MIBG. Here's a story about the transforming care in PPGL and pediatric neuroblastoma. Raiatt combines imaging and therapy and has evolved from one of the earlier nuclear medicine pairs into a modern standard for rare endocrine childhood cancers. I'll touch on both of the medical value and our effort to expand access in Japan. Next, please. Raiatt MIBG consists of I- 123-MIBG for imaging and I-131-MIBG for treatment. This matched pair enables precise patient selection, treatment planning, and then target irradiation of the tumors. Raiatt is indicated for MIBG-avid pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma, and more recently for MIBG-avid neuroblastoma. It built on decades of the clinical experience in Europe and the U.S., but only recently became available in Japan, closing the long treatment gap for this rare but devastating disease. Next, please. Slide 14 brings this to life with a pediatric case example. On the left, you see the child with high MIBG uptake in metastatic neuroblastoma, especially multiple bone marrow metastases before the treatment. On the right, marked reduction in tumor uptake after the Raiatt therapy. For children with high-risk neuroblastoma in Japan, Raiatt changed what was previously a very limited treatment landscape into a real accessible therapy option. For family and pediatric oncologists, it means moving from hoping for MIBG to actually being able to deliver MIBG therapy in Japan. Next, please. Of course, approval alone is not enough. Access is critical. MIBG therapy has been used overseas for many years, but Japan approved Raiatt for PPGL in 2021 and then for neuroblastoma in 2025 this year, after roughly 30-year drug lag. This is a rare cancer, not a high-volume market, but it is a high-impact commitment to patients with endocrine tumor and childhood cancers. We are, therefore, working to expand the number of the certified MIBG treatment centers across Japan. The solid circle on the map shows current size, and the open circle shows planned expansion next year. Our goal is simple. No child who needs Raiatt MIBG should miss the chance to be treated in time. Next, please. Highlight number three is Copper-ATSM in malignant glioma, a program led by our partner, LinqMed. This radiopharmaceutical targets hypoxic tumor microenvironments and has already advanced into Phase III registration trial. For PDR, this program represents a discreet way to participate in a first-in-class opportunity while respecting the clinical development driven by our partners. Next, please. Here, you can see the program overview and STAR-64 results. Copper-ATSM is a small molecule radiopharmaceutical that selectively activates in the hypoxic tumor tissue, a key feature of the recurrent malignant glioma, where prognosis remains poor and treatment options are very limited. Phase I STAR-64 trial in Japan, a total of 18 patients were treated across multiple dose levels. The maximum tolerated dose was identified at 99 mBq/kg, with no serious treatment-related adverse events, showing the drug was generally safe and well-tolerated. In glioblastoma patients, median overall survival reached 17.7 months, with one-year survival of 64.8%, compared to the historical expectation of around 30%-40%. This is very encouraging data. Therefore, authority PMDA allowed to start the STEP-64 Phase III registration trial directly. Next one, please. STEP- trial directly. Next one, please. STEP- 64 is a randomized Phase III study comparing Copper-ATSM to best physician choice in recurrent high-grade glioma. Enrollment is ongoing, with overall survival as a primary endpoint and findings in Japan anticipated around late 2027. In this program, LinqMed leads clinical development and overall strategy. PDR is in charge of the regulatory strategy and filing in Japan, and we are preparing domestic manufacturing and distribution infrastructure to ensure timely supply once product is approved. This structure gives PDR exposure to a potential new therapy in malignant glioma, while also showing the win-win partner-oriented approach, where each party focuses on each strength. Next, please. Highlight number four is Cu and Lu- PSMA- I&T. And this is for prostate cancer developed together with our global partner, Curium. Here's a story about building a scalable radiopharmaceutical platform that combines PET imaging and target radiotherapy to reach the large PSMA-positive patient population. I will first touch on the market opportunity and then on our development strategy. Next, please. Prostate cancer is the second most common male cancer worldwide, and the prevalence is expected to roughly double between 2022 and 2040. More than 25% of prostate cancer express PSMA, often at a level 100 x higher than normal tissue. On the left, you see global PSMA PET imaging market projected to grow from about $1.5 billion in 2024 to $3.5 billion by 2033. On the right, the PSMA target radiotherapy market is expected to grow even faster, from $1.4 billion to over $6 billion in the same period. Clinically, radioligands with high sensitivity and specificity are enabling earlier detection and better disease monitoring, and PSMA PET is now incorporated into the NCCN guideline as a core imaging modality. At the same time, Lutetium-based PSMA therapy has shown strong anti-tumor activity in mCRPC, establishing PSMA radiotherapy as a new treatment option. Next, please. These slides illustrate where PSMA-targeted radiotherapy fits along the prostate cancer journey. With PSMA-targeted radiotherapy, eligible patients, the post-ARPI, pre-taxane mCRPC segment is a large and fast-growing group. Patients in this setting typically receive multiple cycles of the PSMA radiotherapy, which translates into substantial and durable radioligand demands. This means we can effectively serve this segment. It provides long-duration, high-value opportunity for our Lu- PSMA -I&T program. Next, please. Finally, let me explain our development strategy in Japan with Curium. Globally, Curium is running the Phase III trial that provides a core efficacy and safety dataset for both imaging and therapy. In Japan, we are pursuing a compact, capital-efficient approach. For Cu-PSMA -I&T, we are conducting an open-label multi-center study in newly diagnosed prostate cancer, aiming to position both as a standalone diagnostic and as a companion imaging tool also. For Lu- PSMA-I&T, a single bridging study in post-ARPI mCRPC is designed to leverage Phase III ECLIPSE results, which have already met their primary endpoint. PSMA imaging and Lutetium therapies, supported by a small Japanese bridging trial and PDR nationwide infrastructure, create a differentiated PSMA platform, not just a single drug, and a major medium- to long-term growth engine for PDR. Next one, please. To highlight number five, and this is our radiopharmaceutical ecosystem. Beyond the individual product, we are building the defensible end-to-end platform that combines radiopharmaceutical hardware, software, and service. This strategy deepens our relationship with hosts and makes it easier for new sites to adopt nuclear medicine. Next one, please. Delivering nuclear medicine safely and at scale requires far more than innovative compounds. On this slide, you can see our total solution platform. A portfolio of diagnostic and analytics, radiopharmaceutical injection system, dispenser system that automates complex workflows and improves safety, software solutions for image assessment and radiation dose management, and information systems that support compliance with international standards. By combining these elements, PDRadiopharma lowers barriers for new sites, improves efficiency and safety for the staff, and enhances the patient experience, while at the same time building long-term strategic partnerships with hospitals. This ecosystem, together with the pipeline I have just described, positions PDRadiopharma to lead the next era of the radiopharmaceutical innovation and growth. This is from my side, so I hand over to Patrick. All right. Thank you, Murakami-san. Next, I will discuss our partner and in-house discovery and development efforts in the radiopharmaceutical space going on at PeptiDream. On slide 26, as I mentioned previously, in the last 12 months, these are both discovered programs at PeptiDream in collaboration with Novartis for FAP and Glypican-3 for BMS, what was RayzeBio and has become BMS. On the left, a FAP program, which is related to a variety of different tumors. This is overexpressed on fibroblasts in a variety of different types of solid tumors. The program FXX489, with the therapeutic using Lutetium and the diagnostic using Gallium, entered into Phase I clinical trial earlier in the year, the end of 2024, early 2025. Novartis highlighted some of this work at an oral AACR presentation in 2025, highlighting the program as a best-in-class potential for radioligand therapy, a program we're very excited about. On the right side is the Glypican-3 program, which also initiated Phase Ib study earlier in the year. This product is being developed for hepatocellular carcinoma, liver cancer, in a wide range of patients. Again, being run by BMS, and we're very much looking forward to future updates to come for these four exciting programs, two diagnostics and two therapeutics. PD-32766 is our first in-house peptide- RI program targeting CA9, carbonic anhydrase, which is highly expressed in the majority of clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients. We have previously highlighted the strong preclinical evidence for this program in selectively targeting CA9 and showing clear anti-tumor efficacy in animal models. To further de-risk the program, we coordinated with the National Cancer Center Japan to run a physician-led imaging study using this Cu-64-based diagnostic in patients with ccRCC, referred to as a Phase 0 study. The study, conducted in just a few patients, demonstrated clear CA9 tumor targeting with strong tumor-to-background ratios. We saw no dose-limiting or unexpected safety signals. These findings provided us validation in humans of the tumor-targeting ability of our CA9 program, both potentially as a new diagnostic for kidney cancer, but also potentially as a powerful therapeutic. These results really gave us confidence to take this program forward into the clinic ourselves. We conducted IND-enabling studies since last year through much of 2025, culminating in the recent filing of two INDs, IND for the diagnostic and an IND for the therapeutic in the U.S. We are on course to initiate Phase I trial in the U.S. in 2026. Phase I trial, similar to most targeted RI compounds, will consist Phase Ia dose escalation part where we image patients for CA9-positive tumors to enroll to receive the therapeutic agent, which we then give in escalating doses to confirm tumor targeting, dosimetry, and safety. From this data, we will select the recommended best dose to take forward and expand patients at that dose in the Ib portion or the dose expansion portion of the study to better clarify therapeutic activity as well as pharmacokinetics and safety. We are very much looking to get this study underway in 2026. On slide 30, we announced our second in-house program at our R&D Day last December 2024, targeting Claudin 18.2. Claudin 18.2 is a member of the Claudin family of tight junction proteins. In gastric and pancreatic cancer, the growing tumor causes cell morphology changes that result in the exposure of Claudin 18.2, making it accessible for a drug to bind to and target. We leverage this biology to create PD-29875, a peptide-RI conjugate targeting Claudin 18.2. Similar to the CA9 program, we're developing a diagnostic therapeutic pair, and so we'll be able to identify patients with the diagnostic agent that would most likely benefit from receiving the therapeutic agent. At our 2024 R&D Day, we share the exciting preclinical data showing strong tumor-killing efficacy in animal models for this program. Currently, IND-enabling activities are ongoing and progressing on schedule. We are additionally, of course, planning for Phase I study in patients with gastric and/or pancreatic cancer in the future once those studies are completed. In parallel, we are again coordinating with the National Cancer Center Japan to run a Phase 0 imaging study to generate some initial human tumor-targeting validation to both de-risk the program and also assist with planning the most Phase I study we can do. So very excited about next steps for our 18.2 program as we head into 2026. This year, we are happy to announce our third in-house peptide-RI program targeting Cadherin-3. Cadherin-3 is a member of the cadherin family of cell-adhesion proteins. Its overexpression of Cadherin-3 is strongly associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition, or EMT, where epithelial cells lose their structured characteristics and acquire mesenchymal traits. EMT is a major driver of cancer metastasis, allowing cells to break away from the primary tumor and colonize distant organs. Cadherin-3 is highly expressed in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, as well as cervical cancer, lung cancer, and a variety of other solid tumors, making it an attractive target for a targeted peptide-RI approach. Our Cadherin-3 targeting peptide-RI conjugate shows high affinity and selectivity for Cadherin-3. It shows specific accumulation in tumors expressing Cadherin-3. When chelated to either therapeutic lutetium-177 or Actinium-225, it shows strong tumor-killing efficacy, all of which, as a preclinical package, supports our decision to announce this program as our third in-house program and take this program forward into IND-enabling studies going forward. That concludes the radiopharmaceutical portion of our presentation today, and we will next move on to our four non-radiopharmaceutical focus areas, of which we will provide various highlights on each of these. On slide 35 is an overview of our current non-Radiopharmaceutical Clinical pipeline. In subsequent slides, we will touch on some of the exciting advances we have made across these areas in 2025. I would just note on this slide that for the two Merck programs Phase I, we remain limited in what we are actually allowed to say about these two exciting programs. We'll start off initially with our peptide therapeutics and oral peptide therapeutics efforts. A major clinical highlight of 2025 was seeing Alexion advance our GHR program, ALXN2420, into a Phase II study. The study is being run in 11 different countries across a large number of sites, testing ALXN2420 in combination with somatostatin analogs in adult patients with acromegaly. The study, of course, follows the Phase I study completed in 2024 by Amolyt Pharma before they were acquired by Alexion AstraZeneca that showed excellent safety and dose dependency in reducing and maintaining IGF levels in healthy volunteers, which bodes very well for the success in this Phase II study. We're very much looking for the results, the future results around this program as it progresses forward. We also had our sister company PeptiAID complete Phase I safety study of PA-001 in healthy adult and elderly volunteers. PA-001 was found to be both safe and well tolerated and exhibited excellent pharmacokinetics, and we are now considering next steps for this program to potentially address an unmet medical need around long COVID and/or elderly individuals that still have certain challenges. As we mentioned recently in our announcement earlier in the week, partnering activities remain ongoing for our oral myostatin program. While these activities have been ongoing, we have continued to build a strong preclinical data package supporting the program. In 2025, we ran numerous additional animal studies showing that our peptide alone could actually induce lean body mass growth by itself and that when given in combination with semaglutide, animals lost more fat and less muscle compared to semaglutide alone. We also showed clearly that our peptide has a unique dual mechanism of action and that the peptide binds myostatin, and the peptide-myostatin complex can still bind to ActRII, but when ALK is recruited for signaling, the peptide blocks that surface on myostatin, and no downstream signaling can be sent through the SMAD pathway. But because the peptide-bound myostatin is also capable of occupying the ActRII receptor, it is possible that it is therefore also blocking the activin signal itself indirectly. This unique dual mechanism of action is significantly different from the other biologics out there targeting this pathway. Also, in 2025, we conducted additional safety studies, oral absorption work, human dose prediction, synthetic route analysis, and COGS assessments and optimization, further adding additional data to the already strong package. This program is progressing toward IND-enabling studies as they continue to drive this program toward the clinic while we continue in parallel our partnering efforts and activities. Next, I'm going to hand it over to Christian to present more of our non-radiopharmaceutical program efforts. Thank you, Patrick. This is my second year as Chief Scientific Officer at PeptiDream, and as you've seen, we've had an incredibly exciting year and significant progress across our late-stage clinical portfolio, including the addition of our third RI-PDC development program. And obviously, as Patrick just discussed, the continued progression of our myostatin inhibitor program towards GLP tox in parallel with partnering discussions. Throughout the year, I've had the honor to work with our research and development teams. I've had an excellent time and working with our development teams across our R&D organization to really drive on an exceptional year for both our internal and collaborative preclinical portfolio. Now I'm going to provide updates on the remaining core focus areas of PeptiDream, starting with our oral peptide therapeutic updates other than myostatin. For us, oral peptide therapeutics represent a very strong area of future growth. As you know, peptides can achieve similar or better efficacy as compared to a biologic. Their much smaller size facilitates better tissue penetration as well as target engagement, delivering much more efficacious approaches. Importantly, by delivering our compounds orally, we are able to enable combination therapy approaches in many indications where single treatment alone is not enough to see complete responses. Peptides offer synthetic manufacturing, and that route of administration allows very easy access, especially in chronic disease settings where patients may be taking these daily for the rest of their lives. This is incredibly important, especially in immunology indications in terms of this field where patients live with some of these diseases for their lives. The synthetic nature of these also offers greater shelf life stability and reduced costs associated with cold chain storage, enabling wider access for many patients. Here at PeptiDream, we've now been leveraging our rich collaborative experience as well as our strategic investments in AI/ML and next-generation PDPS technologies that I spoke about at last year's R&D Day to really unlock high-value oral macrocyclic peptide therapeutics. And with this, I'm truly excited to announce our second wholly owned oral peptide therapeutic program targeting IL-17, a clinically validated and high-value target for the treatment of psoriasis. As you may know, psoriasis affects just over 41 million patients worldwide, which accounts for 2%-3% of the world's population. The current market is valued at about $28 billion as of last year, with IL-17 biologics earning about 30% of that value. There are numerous indications in the immunology and inflammation space that inhibitors of IL-17 can be truly a radical treatment for our patients. But importantly, the current offerings are biologics that are administered by subcutaneous injection. And therefore, oral delivery is highly desired for these chronic disease treatments and these combination approaches. Our proprietary and wholly owned macrocyclic peptide is not only an inhibitor of IL-17A, as is done with Cosentyx and Taltz, but also inhibits IL-17F, similar to the biologic Bimzelx. Clinical data has shown that inhibition of all three forms of IL-17 are important for the depth and durability of response in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Internally, in our preclinical research, we have shown equivalent efficacy to a commercially available biologic in an inflammation mouse model as compared with our peptide being orally administered in that same model. We also see greater distribution and tissue penetration into the skin as compared to antibodies, where over 24 hours, our peptides are located almost twice as high in skin as they are in plasma compared to antibodies, which show a significant reduction in that tissue accumulation as compared to plasma. This offers us a significant differentiation over current biologics. We are very excited about this program and are rapidly progressing this program into IND-enabling studies moving into 2026 to accelerate clinical entry while we are also exploring the potential partnership opportunities in parallel. Moving on to our next target focus area is peptide oligo-conjugates. Oligonucleotides are a very fascinating class of drug modality as they have the potential to drug the undruggable targets through not only instead of going after the protein side, but targeting the expression and degradation of the mRNA that then enables their translation. This therapeutic area also enables the pharmaco evolution against mutations that can be rapidly adapted due to the fact that this is a genetic-based medicine. There's been a lot of success in this modality over the last several years. There are now six approved RNA-based drugs using siRNA or ASO technologies. However, all of these therapies are targeted to the liver. The next frontier in this space is being able to deliver oligonucleotide therapeutics to target tissues beyond the liver. The benefits that we see by using PDPS-discovered peptides is to enable this precision targeting through their ability to generate high affinity and specific peptides against tissue-specific targets, enabling also the speed of discovery to enable rapid in vivo proof of concept, as well as then having the fast systemic clearance and exposure to reduce things like immune activation and off-target toxicities. Importantly, as mentioned, our peptides and this modality is enabled through chemical synthesis, allowing easy modification of the linker and payload stoichiometry. A really exciting aspect about this platform is that when we have tissue-specific peptides, each peptide can truly enable numerous therapeutic applications as we can attach a variety of different cargoes in order to tackle some of a variety of different diseases, as shown here. We have several disclosed and undisclosed tissue-specific collaborations with a variety of large pharma and biotech. Importantly, at PeptiDream, we have our own suite of peptide-specific molecules that target specific blood-brain barrier carriers that are also available for the licensing on a specific payload basis, allowing us to get at truly unmet medical needs in the neuroscience space. We do expect some very exciting announcements on our oligo delivery portfolio coming very soon. Moving along, I'll touch briefly on our cytotoxic PDC platform. As you know, there has been a significant amount of investment and growth over the last several years in the antibody-drug conjugate space. Currently, there are 19 ADCs approved worldwide with over 200 ADCs in clinical development targeting over 50 different antigens. Last year alone, there were 27 R&D partnerships signed totaling $9.4 billion. However, antibodies also have significant liabilities, including long systemic circulation, on-target and off-tumor toxicities, as well as complex manufacturing, which are still significant hurdles for this field. We believe that the peptide offers significant differentiators as compared to an antibody modality for delivering these cytotoxic cargoes, including enabling the high affinity and selectivity towards tissue targets of interest, that smaller size enabling tumor penetration, but also importantly, higher payload delivery per dose, and that fast PK reducing that off-target toxicity while maintaining tolerability. Renal clearance offers us that reduction of hepatotoxicity. And again, by being synthetic, we can actually play with things like linker, payload, as well as stoichiometry with ease. We also expect to have very exciting announcements on this portfolio to share with all of you in 2026. And finally, as the last focus area, I will speak to our multifunctional peptide conjugate platform. We've had some very exciting and significant preclinical data generated internally around this, making this a very exciting new, or not new, but exciting area for growth in the future. Really, the idea behind this is to replace the next-generation multispecific biologic area. There are currently 16 bispecifics with over 600 candidates in clinical trials right now. As you can see on the left, there's a wide variety of formats that are being used in order to try and get at these multispecific functions, leading to what can lead to very complex manufacturing. At PeptiDream, we have created a variety of proprietary novel linkers, allowing us to utilize peptides that we have already discovered across our variety of different platforms in order to really engage this platform in terms of conjugating these together and enabling us to generate multispecific peptide conjugates in rapid speed. The data we have been generating this year is allowing us to form a platform so that we can actually begin to start thinking about how we are going to move these programs internally, but also for potential partnering opportunities in 2026, and with this, I'll turn it back to Patrick. Thank you, Christian. On slide 51, as we wrap up our 2025 R&D Day, I just want to highlight that 2025 was simply the most exceptionally productive year for us in our history. We had 12 clinical programs or 12 clinical portfolio transitions. You saw a number of programs that we've been working on for some time in the preclinical setting advance Phase Is, programs move Phase IIs, and also partner in-license programs moving into registrational studies in Japan. It was simply a transformative year as far as in regards to our clinical pipeline. As we focus across all five of these modalities, at current, we have clinical candidates for three of these modalities, but we expect to see the peptide oligo and peptide cytotox areas also yield clinical candidates in the near future. These efforts are the result of years of hard work by all of the people here at PeptiDream, by all of the team at PDRadiopharma, and across all of our fantastic and phenomenal collaboration partners. I fully expect that this progress and the successes of 2025 are going to carry over to 2026. And going forward, this robust clinical pipeline that we've been working to create will simply expand and grow further. As a closing, I just want to end today's presentation with all of that excitement, of course, is the rationale for us to invest further in PeptiDream and PDRadiopharma. We have high confidence in the business, and we've undertaken two large capital programs here. On the left is building PeptiDream 2.0. This is at our currently existing site where we hope to double the research R&D available space, adding new state-of-the-art functions to our already existing facilities. This is progressing nicely through the design phase. You can see a nice illustration on the lower left of how this looks. And we're very hopeful that we'll have shovels in the ground in 2026 to get this underway. On the right is a new manufacturing facility for PDRadiopharma for us to house launch in-house radiotherapeutic programs. This is located in Chiba, strategically located between Haneda and Narita Airport to give us the best domestic coverage and allow these exciting products to be brought to hospitals and patients across Japan. Additionally, this is actually progressing very, very nicely through the design phases, and we also hope to get shovels in the ground in the coming year, so two big programs for us. These are both extremely motivational for employees across both organizations to see that the successes we're having in our R&D and efforts are translating, of course, into company growth, so with that, I'm very happy to take any questions and very much look forward to the future for us. Thank you, Patrick. We're now open for the questions. If you have any questions, please tap the raise hand button, and after we call on you, please unmute and ask your question. You may also ask your question through the chat function in English or in Japanese. The first question comes from Dion Büchner of Pathology Associates. Your line is open. You can unmute and ask your question. Thank you very much for taking my question. Can you hear me well? Yes. Fantastic. Patrick, thank you very much for a very exciting presentation. And my apologies, I'm traveling, so I cannot stay too long on the call, but I wonder if I may ask three quick questions. The first, and you alluded to this, and I'll stick to science today, but in terms of your IL-17, can you speak a little bit more about the oral bioavailability or relative to the UCB program and specifically also regarding the specific subtypes that you are targeting relative to bimekizumab? That's the one question. And then I just wanted to confirm also your Claudin 18.2 regarding the IND. Are you on track for maybe a 2026 or 2027 IND, and will that be in the U.S. or China? And then finally, apologies for many questions, but I wonder if you can make any comments on oral peptides and oral macrocyclic peptides and the food effect, specifically with regard to your own PD-L1 program, but also other global programs, notably icotrokinra, the J&J IL-23, and of course, semaglutide as well. Thank you. And I'm happy to repeat those. Sorry for many questions. Thank you. No worries. Thank you, Dion. Of course. First, initially on IL-17, yeah, the goal was, of course, to get Bimzelx-like activity. As I know you're aware and we've discussed, Bimzelx is becoming probably the more compelling product in the space because it hits FF instead of just hitting the AA and AF versions that the Taltz and the other competitors, Stelara, in this space do. We spent additional resources, of course, on the peptide optimization to get there. We think we have best-in-class compounds, certainly from that perspective, I would say, and it's really potent. I mean, basically, we have efficacy equal to Bimzelx, even with an oral delivery. As far as the percent oral bioavailability, I won't speak to any specific numbers, Dion, and I probably shouldn't comment on what other companies have done or not done, but as you well know, most of the other oral peptides out there are in the circa 1% or lower realms. We are normally targeting something that is much closer to the 3%, 4% range, is normally for our kind of goal range for taking things forward that we've seen. I think we feel very, very comfortable with actually where we currently are and where we currently be. There are certain aspects left around our IL-17 program that we'll have to investigate. Of course, final formulations always come down to potentially pushing those numbers a little bit higher. And that's something that we'll certainly be looking at, as Christian alluded to, as we get into the first half of 2026. So a very much exciting time. I do think we're the preeminent company in developing oral macrocyclic peptides. We certainly have a wealth of experience of doing this across multiple partner programs and applying those learnings, as Christian mentioned, to our in-house efforts such as myostatin and IL-17. So very excited about where things will be. And certainly, as we're able, we will communicate more to the outside market. At this stage, we don't know how to necessarily give anything away that would help any of our competitors understand exactly where we are yet. In regards to the 18.2 program and timing for an IND, I don't have a definitive date of IND filing. Certainly, it would be late 2026, early 2027 would probably be where we sit. That's going to, of course, depend on a couple of factors. IND enabling studies will be done by then, so that's not an issue. There's a part that is we're considering the Phase 0 study, of course, or well, largely everything's underway to start that study. We don't know how long it will take to recruit the handful of patients that usually go into these imaging Phase 0 studies here in Japan. If that's a fast recruitment, we could get lucky and have these patients done in maybe a half a year. Or if that's protracted and takes longer to recruit, that could extend. It's also going to be depending on the quality of the data. They'll only be in gastric cancer patients here in Japan. We won't do pancreatic, and so we'll have to see what those data look like, but if the first one or two patients look extremely compelling and good, we potentially could speed up our efforts. That would give us more confidence, right? We're hoping to use the Phase 0 basically as human validation. I mean, 18.2, there's actually already an antibody drug, as you know, from Astellas against 18.2 on the market. So it's a validated target, I would say, but certainly hasn't been drugged with a peptide approach to know yet, so fingers crossed that the Phase 0 is going to show exactly what we hope it will, and then we'll use that to accelerate the design of Phase I study, of course. We don't have the hugest clinical development team in the world here. We're working on expanding that. They have their hands full with the CA9 program. And so certainly, that's also playing into it as we look to kind of grow the team to be able to handle 18.2 and accelerate that program also. But I don't think I'll see anything slow down. We'd just love to see the Phase 0 studies to gain more, say, more confidence, right, before we go put the $25 million-$30 million it takes to do Phase I in the radiopharma space. On the last one, on the oral peptides and food effect, yes, there's a food effect on oral peptides. Both the IL-23 receptor, J&J Protagonist peptide, both the Merck peptide do have certain label listings on those when you can take the drug and when or when you're not supposed to eat. Usually, you're taking the drug in the morning on an empty stomach, and then you're not supposed to eat anything for, say, 30 minutes after you've taken the pill. That's the most common approach. So I think that fits very well with patients, at least from a compliance perspective. I'm certainly not a first-line clinician to be dealing with patients, but from everything I've heard, there doesn't seem to be any necessary concerns or challenges with that. The food effect, interestingly enough, while it varies, both J&J and Merck, I think, are taking certain steps that the dose that they're using is slightly higher to actually account in part for any food effect you could actually have, Dion. I think this maybe speaks to the simple safety of the peptides to begin with, right, that if peptide is simply just passing through your gut, or even if it is absorbed at certain different rates, as long as you get enough on board to be efficacious, you really have very little safety concerns to be worried about, right? That would, of course, be a little bit on the mechanism dependent, right, and the type of drug you're creating. Understood. Patrick, so do you think that the company you mentioned, that they added some additional dosage to compensate for the food effect? Do you think? I can't speak for those companies, Dion. You should ask them. I shouldn't speak for them directly, but let's leave it at that. I do know they know that they have a good idea what that percentage is. You can lower it with peptides. So also, just so you know, the rate is not the same for all peptides. This isn't just a universal phenomenon, right? So you can certainly optimize the peptide in a way to a certain extent that you can reduce the likelihood of that. But I'm not sure you can ever make that zero. So there will always be a patient compliance aspect to it, but. I understand. Patrick, thank you very much. That's helpful. On the Claudin 18.2, can I just follow up? How many centers, just to speed that up, given, as you mentioned, the success that Astellas is having with their 18.2 targeted product, how many centers are you planning for Phase I? is that something? Yeah. So we don't know for Phase I yet, Dion, right? That's early days. So again, I didn't get to that part of your question. You asked if we're going to do the U.S. or someplace else. We are investigating, right? And right now, I think the U.S. is plan one or plan A, but we're very much investigating other countries to potentially run Phase I study in also in evaluating the pros and cons of those routes, right? So as you I know you well know, we've discussed before, China, Australia, certain European countries, there's certain steps of these processes that can be sometimes truncated. And so we really have to kind of review the pros and cons of those aspects. I think we have a good six-month window here to kind of really do that type of evaluation that really won't slow down anything around the program per se. So I would say by summer, we'll have a good idea of where we're going to take the 18.2 as far as Phase I in what country. I get it. Thank you very much, Patrick. Very helpful. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Büchner. If anyone have any questions, please feel free to tap the raise hand button. And after we call you, you can unmute and ask your question. Or you can also use the chat function to ask a question. Please unmute and ask your question. This is Miyabi Yamakita from Jefferies. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for taking my question. I know this is a R&D meeting, but if I may, I'd like to ask about the impact of recent U.S. government action on your myostatin inhibitor value. Some large pharma companies decided to reduce obesity drug price in the U.S. as a result of discussion with President Trump. On the other hand, this improves patient access. So there are both positive and negative impact. And do you believe my question is, do you believe these changes in the U.S. market could impact the out-licensing value of your myostatin inhibitor? Yeah. Thank you, Miyabi. I mean, I guess you could never say no, right? I mean, I don't know to what extent they would, but my guess, my feeling is largely there's very little impact at this stage, right? Most of the companies in obesity are chasing the top two, chasing the Lilly and Novo, and are largely looking for what is going to be their competitive strategy. What is their differentiating strategy versus the two kind of main market players, right? You've seen that play out over the last 24 months with the various acquisitions and various licensing deals that have happened in the obesity space as everyone kind of positions themselves for what this future is going to look like. From where we sit, we have high confidence that the future goes toward healthy weight loss, right? And healthy weight loss means managing the lean muscle mass losses that happen with the current generation of weight loss agents, right? Because as far as we still know, we're the only oral myostatin pathway inhibitor. We have a unique dual mechanism of action. And as you're aware, over the summer, from the competitive biologics out there for this pathway, they showed really human validation for those drugs or myostatin activin pathway inhibitors being used in combination with the weight loss drugs and showing significant benefit to patients, right? So we think we're actually ideally positioned to find a partner for this program to be a part of someone's next generation healthy weight loss strategy. And then, again, that's what we're really going for. I think this is so far away from being on the market yet that I don't necessarily see, say, the pricing considerations coming into play, right? If we were maybe later Phase III at this stage, I'm sure that's very relevant possibly to their financial calculations for any type of deal. But given that this is still a preclinical asset, I don't think that's probably overall too factored into the equation at this time. But again, I can't speak for the big pharma companies specifically, and I'm sure some of them are more concerned than others potentially about the most favorable country pricing aspects that are being suggested globally. Thank you very much. I'm looking forward to the announcement of the out-licensing deal. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Yamakita. Our next question is from Hidemaru Yamaguchi of Citi. Mr. Yamaguchi, please unmute and ask your question. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes, can hear you. Okay. Thank you. So this is Yamaguchi from Citi. Sorry to bring up this question, but I have to ask because the time is, the other day is the earnings revision call. So the only thing I just asked on the myostatin itself is I got a lot of questions from the investors that timing is fine, but the probability of success itself are not changing. That's my understanding. But can you confirm from your current perspective, timing has been delayed for various reasons, but the deal itself is coming anyway. Do I say that is correct? Thank you. We have high confidence that we're going to be able to do a partnering deal. I'm not sure I could use the phrase a deal is coming. I think that one's. Sure. Sure. Of course, I don't know. We don't know when a deal will be signed. So I don't think we can comment on any specific guidance for timelines as far as, say, quarters, etc. We're hopeful that a deal is going to be in place by 2026. But I think, as everyone knows, right, until it's actually signed, there's no guarantees. Right? A partner can walk even the discussions we have ongoing over the last eight months. Some of those companies have increased in interest and then also dropped in interest, right? And so it is, I think, unlike our IL-17 or some other programs, I think the myostatin is a very fluid situation. Largely, as I described at the meeting earlier in the week, Yamaguchi -san is our drug that is going to be combined with somebody else's drug. Yeah. And so because of that, right, then there's a lot more layers of factors to consider than if we were just licensing our asset only, right, if this was a monotherapy, right? The fact that it is going to be combined means we have to be worried about what the partner has for their own oral strategy, right? If they have no oral weight loss strategy, that's probably not a good partner for us to combine an oral myostatin agent with, right? Sure. As As you know, it's still relatively early days for oral weight loss agents, right? Even Rybelsus, which is actually on the market, but that's for diabetes, not for weight loss yet, right? And that has very low bioavailability to begin with, right? But regardless, I think the oral strategy, the next-gen strategy for healthy weight loss is very much an evolving strategy at this stage globally. That, I would say, had the biggest impact on slowing down deal signing, not anything related specifically to the program, right? All the companies, I think, are still very much navigating how they're going to compete with Lilly and Novo and then how they're going to with what strategy are they going to do that. Okay. Thank you. The second one is a very quick, more general question, but yeah, I see many, many programs because it is expanding every year on the non-peptide and peptide area and the radiopharmaceutical as well. So it's hard to cover all those programs, but it's good things. One thing I would like to say, I would like to ask is that peptide strategy is trying to be more peptide or radiopharmaceutical best-in-class sort of strategy rather than best-in-class. But like Claudin 18.2, which is kind of a popular target itself because lots of companies are doing it. So in a sense, it's kind of a red ocean target, it looks like. So do you have a strategy to go for, how you say, more of a fast-in-class target, not necessarily a crowded best-in-class target? Because you are peptide, the modality is different. So you have an advantage, but at the same time, it is highly crowded. It might be difficult to run a clinical trial in the future. So do you have any sort of strategy changing or not necessarily the case? Thank you. Yeah. So I think, I mean, it's a fair question, Yamaguchi-san, but I think you'd have to go through each program to look at the positives and negatives of that. For example, in 18.2, yes, there is an antibody drug to 18.2. It is far from perfect, right? There are ADCs being developed in the clinic, right? There is no RI conjugate against 18.2. Because 18.2 is in solid tumors, it becomes exposed as the morphology changes. We actually think that a smaller molecule like a peptide might diffuse much better or more rapidly into these solid tumors. So kind of that differentiation of going from a peptide, right, that we're using a peptide and the competition is largely large biologics, we think has significant favorability. When we talk about our Claudin 18.2 for an RI drug, one, if we're successful, which we of course believe we're going to be, an RI drug could be combined with an Astellas' antibody drug and probably give you more efficacy. Our peptide-RI drug could be combined with anybody else's ADC and probably could show greater efficacy. So we actually believe there's an approach there specifically in the RI side, right, where we actually have combination. RI makes almost every drug better. And so we do think there's still an avenue there that isn't necessarily the red ocean you're kind of suggesting. Yeah, we think it's very much navigable. I'd also layer on that because, at least on the RI side, we're developing a therapeutic and a diagnostic, right? So we actually have two shots on goal at the same time in one package, right? So there is not an 18.2 diagnostic agent. There is not. They're still using IHC, right, to judge these. So there's even that avenue. As a worst-case scenario, we have the chance to have a compelling diagnostic agent against 18.2 if for some reason the therapeutic didn't give us the results we wanted to. I would also layer on one other aspect of this risk hedge that we're approaching, which is for like 18.2, what you see right now is the 18.2 peptide targeting peptide attached to an RI. We have the ability to also attach this to a cytotox compound. Or we have the ability to take this 18.2 peptide and attach it to another, say, immune-recruiting peptide like we have, say, under the MPCs, right, or some type of additional functionality you could add under our MPC umbrella, right? So with a very high-class good tumor-binding peptide, we actually have three different approaches here in the wheelhouse that we can actually go after that with. RI is the ultimate way to start that because we can visualize the tumor. We can visualize that our peptide accumulates and goes to the right places in these patients. So that's really kind of the first step for validating any of these peptides like our 18.2. And then for some reason, if RI doesn't give us the efficacy we're hoping for as a payload, we could expand to the cytotoxin and/or to other types of conjugates. So I think we have a multi-kind of risk hedge development strategy, which is very unique to peptides, right? This is not something you can do with a biologic by any stretch of the imagination, which is why we have such high confidence for our CA9 program, our 18.2 program, and our Cadherin-3 program that we announced today. On, I guess, some of the other sides on the oral peptides, oral peptides, it's still a huge field, as you know, right, with Merck's PCSK9. There was a lot of doubts around that product ever getting to market number one and then, two, actually being efficacious. And there's a lot of drugs against PCSK9, as you know. And at least if you listen to Merck, of course, this is going to become a billion-dollar blockbuster for them. They think this is significant. It's extremely safe. It's extremely well tolerated. And patients respond extremely well to it. The same for the Johnson & Johnson Protagonist IL-23 receptor, right? That had doubts along the way. And now it looks like that's also going to be a major. So I think sometime, again, if we were developing a biologic, I'd 100% agree with you that what are we bringing that's differentiating. But I think because we're in the macrocyclic peptide space, we're playing a very smart strategy here that I know we can be successful with. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Yamaguchi. Our next question is from Kazuaki Hashiguchi from Daiwa. Mr. Hashiguchi, please unmute and ask your question. Hello. I'm Kazuaki Hashiguchi from Daiwa. Thank you for taking my question. My question is about the IL-23 inhibitor. I believe it is also conducting a Phase II study globally, including Japan, on the oral inhibitor obtained from the DICE acquisition. What differentiators do you expect to see in your product? Also, what do you think is the best timing for licensing this product? What do you think about the possibility of conducting a clinical trial in-house for a while? Thank you. Yeah, so these compounds, of course, are interesting, right? Those are set of small molecule compounds that are now with Lilly. Those do not have IL-17F cross is one of the, I'd say, differentiating factors of those small molecule compounds. While they're running the trials, there hasn't been that much news from Lilly around this compound class, so I do think some potential questions remain, right? But regardless, I think if we just believe the Bimzelx data that hitting AA and AF is so much more effective for these patients, then that's the profile that you really need for any next-gen compound, right? I think because they don't have that, while they might be further advanced than us, that could be a significant challenge for them in the future as far as getting any type of regulatory approval or any kind of actual adoption, even if it did get regulatory approval by physicians. What Lilly is doing is what Lilly is doing. I don't think we can necessarily worry too much about that. We know from all of our big pharma collaborations and discussions, there is very much a high level of interest in an oral IL-17 peptide that hits all three isoforms of AA and FF. We're very comfortable, I think, in what the market really is looking for. Even if Lilly doesn't want one, we know there's enough hands up that would certainly take it from us. As far as partnering goes, yeah, that's always the question for us. We've made it. We've already informed some of our partners that we have an oral IL-17 program. So they're very much already aware of that. With today's announcement, of course, for those who didn't know, who aren't collaboration partners, they'll also slowly figure this out. We'll probably be talking about it at JPM to some extent. I think our partnering strategy for something like IL-17 is we're always willing to listen to somebody. And if someone's going to give us some ridiculous amount of money to license it, I think we'd have to say yes. But it's something that I think internally we'll have to discuss. I really do think we have a blockbuster on our hands. From all of the data that we're yielding internally, there's nothing to suggest otherwise at this stage. I think from a personal standpoint, I'd love to take this all the way to clinic myself. I think our job at PeptiDream should just be continuing the scientific teams continue to push us to the clinic as fast as possible with best efforts. And then we'll allow the BD side of the business will allow us to entertain offers for the program. And if we find somebody that actually fits and can accelerate that development, again, in a way that's best for stakeholders of PeptiDream, then yes, of course, we'll consider that. But yeah, I think partnering activities from Japan, we're going to start listening to what people have to say. I don't know if that will mean that translates into a deal in the short term or not, but we certainly will be listening to offers. Thank you. That's all. Thank you, Mr. Hashiguchi. Our next question is from Fumiyoshi Sakai of UBS. Mr. Sakai, please unmute and ask your question. Hi, Patrick-san. This is Sakai from UBS. Two questions. One is kind of general, high-level, related to Yamaguchi-san's question, first-in-class or best-in-class argument. The thing is, I mean, your PDRadiopharma business is fine as far as I'm concerned. However, peptide side, you don't have a product yet. And we're still eagerly waiting for commercialization from this technology. Now, how do you respond to this if it's not pushback, but observation from the investment community? That's my first question. You mean as why? I mean, PeptiDream doesn't have an oral macrocyclic peptide on the market yet. And so somehow that suggests that we can't make a macrocyclic peptide drug? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I've heard that for 20 years, Sakai-san. So, in fact, actually, I think it sometimes gets asked. I mean, that's every biotech on the planet who ever generated any new modality, right? They said the same thing about siRNA. They say the same thing about ADCs in the early days. And now look where these fields are. So I don't think there's just because we don't have a macrocyclic peptide yet on the market that originated from PeptiDream per se, there are still many macrocyclic peptides already on the market. And there are many in late-stage development. And we have many in clinical development now too. So I don't, that's not something that I would really concern myself with. Macrocyclic peptides are clearly a very viable drug. They might be wonder drugs in some cases here, especially for the modalities that we have highlighted, right? The five modalities that we're or five core areas we're focused on. As far as best-class versus first-class, right? I mean, you're first-class until you're not. So I'm not sure that that's a winning strategy in the global market anymore either, right? So I mean, you'd love to be first, but I would certainly want to be best is something that we should always be shooting for. I do think, at least if you're going after best-in-class like an IL-17, it's a very well-validated target. And we actually, as you're developing this program, you know what's wrong with the existing therapies, right? And you know what solution or what challenge you're actually trying to solve for. And so I do think that, in fact, gives you some advantage as you're developing your strategy because you actually know what the players are actually already doing. You know where the gaps in the therapy are. You can guess what the future is going to look like. And you can approach that, I think, from a very smart process. I think it's hard to always consider yourself first-in-class. But I guess I'd also say the argument I don't know every time what first-in-class means. If we're the first oral macrocyclic peptide in the clinic, does that still make us first-in-class if it's against the same target that other people have done? For 18.2, we're the first peptide-RI if that goes into the clinic, right? We'd be the first, right, for that modality. But just not the first drug against that target. So I think I might look at what I call first-in-class maybe from a modality standpoint as well instead of just saying broadly anything that targets that specific target, I guess. Yeah. Okay. That's fine. That's fine. Thank you. Second question, just make it brief. I'm really interested in this oligo project. So what do you have in your mind to go beyond liver target? Yeah. So as you know, we've been collaborating with a number of players in the space for some time now, right? We have partnerships with Alnylam, with Takeda, with Lilly, with Novartis, with Shionogi in this kind of BBB oligo delivery kind of space. It's a very exciting space, of course, to move beyond liver. A lot of those collaborations started in 2020 onward, right? And so as Christian alluded to today, we're expecting some exciting announcements soon as the product of those efforts over the last four, five years here. We know, just to say generally, though, we know that macrocyclic peptides now are extremely effective at delivering an siRNA or an oligo drug payload to target cells. We've already seen this across a couple of different organs here. Some of these organs are easier than others, I would say. But it certainly is yielding effective knockdown and effective cell organ delivery of therapeutic oligo payloads. So we think we're going to see multiple clinical programs come out of these efforts. I can guarantee you're going to see multiple clinical programs, shots on goal, coming out of our collaboration efforts. Yeah. It's something to look forward to. Okay. That's probably next year. Thank you very much. Yep. Is the line still open for questions? If you have any questions, please tap the raise hand button or ask a question through the chat function. Yes. I I guess that's the last question. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect and have a wonderful rest of the day.