Okay, I think we can get started here. So welcome to the third day of Wells Fargo's Healthcare Conference. This morning, we have our pleasure of hosting Pharming Group. With us today, we have Sijmen de Vries, CEO. Welcome. Thank you very much, Adam. Yeah. Very nice to be here again. Yes, absolutely. Yes. It's great to have you. Yep. So maybe we can start high level for people who are not too familiar with the story, background, and the state of the business of Pharming. Yeah, sure. Yeah. Yeah, of course, you know, Pharming is, has been on the market with Ruconest, in this country for, almost, oh, well, for 10 years almost. Ruconest was launched originally. We bought back the commercialization rights back in, the end of 2016. So we started commercializing ourselves in 2017 and never looked back. We became a profitable company after that immediately. And Ruconest is an interesting product, of course. It's protein replacement therapy for treatment of acute attacks of hereditary angioedema. We're the only one that make a recombinant version of the C1 esterase inhibitor. That's the missing protein. And it's been building a strong performance, and actually, it's interesting to see that the growth continues. If you look at the, the growth for the first half of this year, for instance, compared to last year, 16% growth for a product that's 10 years in the, in the market, tells you that there's a continues to be an unmet medical need, despite a lot of these, different offers that are now in the market. You know, you have to realize that in the beginning, there was a... prophylactic therapy was beginning, and now about 70% of the patients here in the U.S. are taking prophylaxis. But the issue with prophylaxis is it has brought a lot of better options for patients, but there continues to be the issue of, you know, that up to 50%, in some of the best cases, but also even up to 70% or 80% of patients still suffer from breakthrough attacks, for instance. That means there is always a necessity for all these U.S. patients to have, you know, acute medication at hand to actually deal with those breakthrough attacks. And that is, of course, where a product like Ruconest fits in, because Ruconest is protein replacement therapy, whereas most of the prophylactic therapies only deal with one of the three pathways, which, as I said, is good because it reduces the number of attacks very significantly, but still there's this risk of breakthrough attacks. So in other words, Ruconest serves both the patient population that needs to deal with the breakthrough attacks, but also serves the patient population that cannot get by on any of the other therapies. So in other words, if you look at the central pathway, that's the bradykinin, kallikrein pathway, where all the other products are working on, then you see that when they don't respond, they typically go to Ruconest, because Ruconest is not a product that's very convenient, right? It's slow IV. Yeah. The patients do that all at home, and we train them, and we keep them trained and confident to do that. But, you know, it's not so easy as taking a pill or even taking a subcutaneous injection. That's why, you know, we're not a convenient product, but we're a product where you can rely on, because basically speaking, if you look at the results of Ruconest, there's nothing about breakthrough attacks. It's, you know, 97% is one shot of Ruconest, it works, and it even, you know, protects patients for up to three days in 93% of cases. So in other words, the product you can rely on, and if they don't respond to those, you know, those bradykinin and kallikrein inhibitors, they will typically take Ruconest. In other words, Ruconest is a product you take because you need it, and that's, I think, is the core, the core message here. And that's why Ruconest continues to be strong. And I see nothing else actually in this respect on the horizon, because obviously there's a lot of competition coming, but they're all acting on that same bradykinin, kallikrein pathway. And even, you know, if you look at clinical trials that these products have, they test specifically patients that respond to those bradykinin, kallikrein pathway products and exclude patients that are not responding to that, i.e., exclude the typical Ruconest patient. So that means we have a very strong foundation. Sorry, it's a bit long-winded here, but we have a very strong foundation under our business that keep delivering recurring revenues and a lot of, you know, gross margin that we can invest in, you know, subsequently growing and accelerating the growth of the company. That's exactly what we did when the next step, we in-licensed, Joenja, leniolisib from Novartis back in 2019 to deal with, you know, an ultra-rare disease, activated Phosphoinositide 3-kinase Delta Syndrome, APDS, as we call it, a little bit easier, which is an ultra-rare, a primary immune disorder, where the immune system basically cannot make functioning immune cells. And that's what we just launched in the U.S. So we basically built a nice business now, centered around these, you know, rare and ultra-rare opportunities, with, you know, a relatively overseeable infrastructure here in the U.S. Great. That's where we are today. Great. That's a great overview. Thank you. Lots to dig into there. So maybe just touching on Ruconest a little bit before moving on to Joenja. So can you walk us through your thinking and current strategy of any lifecycle management, plans to extend, Ruconest's market share? Yeah. In fact, there is none of that because we tried a lot and C1 inhibitor is a unique and a very highly glycosylated protein that, you know, cannot... Actually, we tried many things, for instance, extend the duration of it, but it is, like I said, it has an... The efficacy is basically there and there is no way actually to deliver it in another way. So we tried many things, but it is an IV injection, and that's actually a very rational way, of course, to deal with an acute attack. So in other words... There is no life cycle program ongoing for Ruconest, nor is there any plans to extend to any other markets, because the U.S. market is the market where we are established with Ruconest, and that's it, basically speaking. It continues to grow, as I said before, so we're quite happy with that after 10 years. Got it. Okay, can you remind us, too, what your patent life extension is, or- Yeah, yeah. In fact, it is even better. There's no patent life anymore. It is regulatory exclusivity. In 2026, Ruconest runs out of regulatory exclusivity. But again, that we consider that a non-event because we make Ruconest out of our transgenic platform. And, you know, we're not aware that anybody else is trying to establish a transgenic platform just to make that very difficult to express, you know, C1 inhibitor protein. We tried it also in other platforms and did not succeed. Other companies tried it as well before and did not succeed. So we consider this to be quite a good hurdle for anybody to start, you know, producing this. And the product is a nice product, but it is just, let's say, $250 million, and it's not a huge product. So in other words, I don't think anybody's gonna try to set up that platform for that product. So in other words, it's a non-event, the 2026 expiry of the regulatory exclusivity in our mind. Great. And so essentially, ultimately, would you say there's no real peak sales that you have in mind, but it's just like perpetual growth that you see then with? Yes, of course, there's other competition on the horizon, but I just said, they're all tackling that bradykinin kallikrein pathway. We even see a gene editing program that is ongoing currently in early stage of clinical development. But we already also saw that at, you know, I believe out of the 10 patients they treated there, already two had breakthrough attacks, so it tells you also that's not the answer. Whereas, again, if you tackle the C1 esterase inhibitor, then you basically have none of those issues. So in other words, it continues to remain, we believe, established in this special part of the market where those patients that are not responding to the bradykinin kallikrein inhibitors. That is, I think, a subsection of patients, and especially, you know, we call that type three patients nowadays, the more severe also, and the more frequently attacking patients that continue to rely on Ruconest, and also sometimes in combination with prophylaxis, of course, to mitigate the frequency of attacks. It goes in and out, basically speaking. In other words, there is this part of the market, that severe end of the market, where Ruconest continues to address that need, and I have not seen any sort of, you know, answer to that, including that gene editing program, for instance, that is ongoing, nor any of the other bradykinin kallikrein inhibitors. Although they, you know, in case of prophylaxis, significantly lower the attack frequency, there still is this part of the population that continues to have those breakthrough attacks. So I think it's a quite unique product for the time being, I would say, for a time to come. Sure. Got it. Thank you. So then maybe moving on to Joenja. So you've been, I believe, it's 15-16 months into the launch in Activated PI3K Delta Syndrome, APDS, we'll shorten that one. Walk us through the first year. How's that been going? What have you learned and, you know, what are your anticipate for growth-wise? Yeah, it's an interesting and a totally different story here, right? This is a new disease. APDS was only described about 10 years ago for the first time, so it's not a disease that's yet fully described. According to the literature, it will be about one and a half patients per million of population. So let's say for the U.S., we expect it to be about 500 patients. The good news is it's the test, there's a genetic test available, part of the typical panel in immunology panel, one of 600 mutations you can test in those standard programs. So it's easy to diagnose, in fact, if you think about it. And that's why, in the U.S., for instance, we have identified already, let's say, about half of those patients, that, according to the literature, should be there. And I'm saying according to the literature, because more and more it becomes clear that there may be more actually, like when you discover new diseases, very often is the case. So in other words, of those two hundred and thirty patients that were discovered already and confirmed in the U.S., we have about 150 that are immediately eligible because the label is twelve years and older, and because we are in a pediatric program still to actually clear. To actually get the clearance for the pediatric uses as well going forward. Of those 150, we reported 91 of those patients already on therapy at the end of the second quarter of this year. So we have we're making good inroads into that. As you know, ultra-rare launches is not going very fast often, and it's a case of finding the patients and actually then getting the patients enrolled. But 91 out of 150, roughly speaking, is not a bad score, I would say, for the first five quarters that we are in the market. It means that also we reported $20.7 million of sales in the first half of this year, which was an increase, I believe, of 44% compared to the second half of last year. So it continues to grow very nicely. Having said that, of course, you know, I think we have the most, we covered already most of the, let's say, the low-hanging fruit, the patients that were quite eager to go on. And of course, in every population, you have people that take a little bit longer to convince, and that's what we're hitting now as well. So you see, of course, the continued growth and the continued new number of patients that we are adding to this, but it is so much slower. But in addition to that, because of the extensive testing that we did and the extensive, the big numbers of databases that we bought, we also have now amassed about 1,200 counting, so-called VU.S. patients. That means-... These patients had a test, and the test was basically saying, yes, you, they had all the symptoms of APDS, right? And they did a test, and then the test says, yes, you have a, you have a mutation in the relevant gene, but that, specific mutation is not yet classified as APDS. So you basically have to classify, have to test those again and have to basically check whether those patients have that hyperactive pathway, pediatric and adult pathway, and therefore then have a diagnosis of APDS. That's just because it's a new disease. So we're basically working very hard on testing those patients, and we recently had a first batch of 25 patients that we tested, and we found five of them to be positive, so it's about 20%, which seems to be typical for the literature according to the literature for VUS positive responses on in those cases. Which means that if you translate that to that 1,200 patients, there could be another you know roughly speaking 250 patients available out of that, i.e., you would hit pretty close to that 200 to 500 already number that you expect in the U.S.. Now, how are you going to do that? So we have a number of initiatives ongoing there. So we, as I said, we tested the first 25 in a small test batch. We have a bigger batch at the moment that we're building up for individual testing, but we have a combinatorial experiment going on at the moment, which will clarify it and map out the entire gene in its totality. So in other words, that experiment is ongoing, and that will report at the end of this year. So by the end of this year, we will have full clarity on which of the VUS.s are going to be classified then going forward as APDS or not. So in other words, we expect therefore, if we just stick with that 20%, that by the end of the year, we will have clarity that those 500 patients are identified in the U.S. and can be actually then found. Now, that's another matter, of course, because in many cases, then you still need to reach out to those physicians and actually find those patients. But in other words, there is a bigger pool than from the beginning of 25, of about 500, that we would expect in the U.S., where our sales force and our medical... our medics can go and find them. And of course, we know in many of the cases where the physicians are. So in other words, we do expect an acceleration of the number of patients again, in 2025 and 2026, coming in, in the U.S. And that's an important one, of course, because that basically means that you get the momentum, and of course, these patients have been tested, so they should be more motivated and they to actually get a therapy. Those physicians will all also be notified when the public database will be updated as a result of that, that new outcome of the test. And of course, this goes about the whole world, right? Because it means that everywhere, because the public database is updated, when a patient comes with a specific mutation that was formerly classified as VUS, this will be automatically classified as APDS. So in other words, that's how you fully map out disease and will find those patients. In addition to that, we're also looking at the current patients that we have, and we already found, you know, in a great percentage of patients that we currently have, because they're all virtually always patient zeros in their families, we found family members that also have positive tests. So we're quite confident, in other words, that the effects of the VUS, plus the effects of the family testing that we're doing, because it's an autosomal dominant mutation, so there must be family members there, that we will hit easily and go beyond that 500 patients in the U.S. Now, if you think about the pricing that we have here, the price is relatively middle of the road for an ultra-rare disease. It's $5,66,000 per annum. So if you think about, you know, Medicare, Medicaid, discounts, the average yield is about $500,000 per patient. You can see why this will become a very significant product, or... and we're talking only in the U.S. here. Outside of the U.S., we're also working very hard on that. We had some CMC issue with the European authorities, where we were granted an 18 months clock stop, basically speaking, to sort out something about the regulatory starting materials, which is actually ongoing. But once we're in the European markets, beginning of 2026, there is a lot more patients directly available there because there's a lot more centralized testing ongoing in many of the European markets. For instance, France, there's already 70 patients there that have been confirmed by diagnosis, that which equates, you know, to 1.1 per million, and that in the U.S., if you make the calculation, it's only at 0.6 at this point in time. So those patients are already there. So they're waiting, basically speaking. In some cases, you also see that some of the sales that we're booking outside of the U.S. is from the early access programs that are already ongoing. For instance, France is a good example, where patients are on paid therapy in those access programs, so we start making some revenues there. And then there is the United Kingdom, where we actually submitted the FDA file and where we expect regulatory action in the Fourth Quarter of this year. So we can see that we could go probably in the U.K. market in the first or second quarter of next year and get reimbursed there as well. So in other words, there's starting to come momentum outside of the U.S. from the paid access programs from an expected U.K. launch next year. And if you then look a little bit further afield, we see in the Middle East. We see some of the named patient program, and patients coming up. Last but not least, we have an agreed strategy with the Japanese meda and the Japanese authorities, and we expect to bring the filing to the Japanese authorities in the beginning of next year, so that we could also see that, you know, we could enter the Japanese market in 2026, which means, you know, the second market in the world that it is important step for our company to also expand our geographic presence there. In other words, Joenja is going to be a very different product than Ruconest. It's going to be a very significant product outside of the U.S. for the reasons that I just described. That's going to be a very significant growth driver for the company going forward. And that's only talking about the first indication, APDS. Wonderful. Got it. Lots to unpack there. I'd say not only did you answer my next question, I think you answered my next 10 questions. Oh, that's good. But actually, I, you know, going back to this, 500 patient number in the U.S., it sounds like then if you have 91 patients on drug treatment, you're already at 20% market penetration in the first year. I think that's amazing for ultra-rare indication. Can you walk us through? So was there, like, a bolus of patients waiting to come on drugs? Or, like, did you discover them throughout the year? And then, like, how are they distributed among physicians? Are there, like, centers of excellence throughout the U.S. where, you know, once you target one physician, they have, you know, 10 to 20 patients? Or is it like one physician, one patient? Like, how do you find the next, you know, segments of- Yeah patients in the U.S.? Yeah. And what you just described is the one in one physician where you have 20 patients is more typical for the European markets, where it's a lot more centralized. In the U.S., it's a lot more decentralized, so it's, you know, one physician, you know, maybe one, two, or three patients that we have found. To answer your question, we had, of course, a number of patients in the trial. We had about 30 patients in the trial, to start with. We had, you know, a couple of tens on early access programs in the U.S. as well, so there was a bit of a bonus. We got the approval back in March last year. We were, we had the product available within a week after the PDUFA date, and we had immediate reimbursement. So we had it in the hands of patients reimbursed, I think, within a couple of weeks, so that was pretty quick. That was a good start, of course. That meant that we, in the first quarter, we already booked some significant sales in the U.S. market. And yes, that bolus of patients very quickly came on board. And then, of course, you start to look for those other patients. And APDS is a disease that has, you know, quite a big array of symptoms, so the majority of them would be found with immunologists, of course, because it's primary immune deficiency. But since the, you know, the symptoms can vary, and especially, of course, when you don't have a functioning immune system, you have a lot of infections, for instance. You can also see an early lung damage, for instance, bronchiectasis in fairly young people. You can also find some of those patients with pulmonologists, for instance, where they are hiding, if there wasn't sort of a thought about a primary immune deficiency yet. They can also be having unexplained, very severe gastrointestinal symptoms because a lot of, you know, swollen lymph nodes, because the immune system is in overdrive and produces a lot of dysfunctional immune system. So you have huge lymph nodes, sometimes even blocking the gastrointestinal tract, so that can be a source of some of those patients. You can also have the patients that are hiding with, you know, autoimmune type of symptoms, cytopenias, with hematologists, for instance. And unfortunately, in a great number of cases, they will end up, this lymphopathy that they have will end up in malignant lymphomas. So you can find them with hematologists as well when they are very young, relatively young patients that have a history of huge, you know, of significant infections and then lymphomas. So basically, if somebody thinks about it and tests them, they're sometimes identified. But the majority of those patients can be found typically in the immunologist clinics, of course. However, our sales force does cover some of the tertiary centers where, you know, these highly specialized physicians are practicing in the U.S. Got it. We'll circle back to a couple questions, but just going on that topic with immunologist and mentioning this currently approved for 12 and older, what's the distribution of patients coming on drug as far as age? Are you working then mainly with, like, pediatric immunologists or immunologists that are treating adults? Essentially, your trial that could extend the label into 12 and under, you know, what... How impactful would that be to to- Yeah -sales of? Yeah. About 25% of the patients that are currently diagnosed not yet eligible because they're younger than 12 years of age. We have two pediatric programs, one for the four to 12-year-olds and one for the young one to six-year-olds. And the majority, the vast majority of those patients are in the older group. That trial is almost completed and will be submitted to the FDA, I would say, probably early next year. So we can pretty quickly see the majority of the pediatric patients becoming then, you know, eligible for treatment as well, following the approval of the label down to four years of age. The other trial is slightly slower, but it's a couple of months, I believe, or maybe a quarter or two. So in other words, it's not that long before we will see the pediatric patients also becoming eligible. So in other words, if you look at the growth trajectory of Joenja, you can see that acceleration in 2025 and 2026 from the U.S. patients coming on stream, the 20%, for the sake of argument, of the 1,200. That's a 2025, probably, and 2026 growth story, and from 2026 onwards, you can expect the other 25% bolus of pediatric patients becoming available. And that adds then all up... to that 500+ pool, and growing, of course, because we continue to discover those patients with our genetic testing programs, buying databases, and of course, the family testing is expected. That's why I'm saying, you know, we're confident that we can go well beyond 500 patients in the U.S.- Got it. Here in this case. Opinion leaders tell me that there we should expect a lot more than that, because, you know, they suspect there's a lot more hiding in the wings. Got it. Okay, and that leads into my next question was actually, is this a disease that is potentially underdiagnosed? Yes. It's a disease that was only described ten years ago, so by definition, everybody that we talk about says that, you know, is, of course, underdiagnosed because there was nothing there and nobody looked for it, and now you start looking for it, and you find it. So for the time being, we'll stick to that one and a half per million, but as I was already explaining, we see a way through that one and a half million fairly easily coming on. Following that, I think there will be many more coming out of the woodwork going forward. Got it. And how has, like, the trends been with prescribers? Are they essentially, once it's been approved, are they putting all their patients on drug, or are they starting with one or two, getting experience, and then ramping up on scripts? I would say all of the above. Okay. Some of them are very keen to immediately bring their patients on. Some of them are a little bit more waiting and putting one or two on. That's correct, but you know, don't forget, some of them have only one or two, right, or most of them, so yes, there is a mix of that, of course. But we got quite a few physicians have brought their patients on very rapidly. And in fact, the clinical trials, because the clinical trials have been going on for a long time, and Novartis was never that much focused on doing it very quickly, we have already got patients up to eight years on drug by now and still on drug, and you know, still reporting improving symptoms and being very happy with the tolerability of this product. And that's unique for a PI3 kinase delta inhibitor, right? Because they're, they're mostly not known for their good side effect profiles. And then maybe circling back to pricing and extend on to reimbursement and percent free drug. But so cost is $566. Sounds like net pricing then is currently $500. About $500. Yeah. Is that pretty stable moving forward, you think? Um- Maybe walk us through what reimbursement has looked like and percent free drug that? Reimbursement was actually very straightforward. We did a lot of research in the beginning, and we got fairly positive feedback, and we decided to, as I said, price it sort of middle of the road. We could price it higher, I suppose, but we didn't wanna do that. We thought it's a decent price here, and we will. We expect to take, you know, a cost of living type level of price increases going forward on an annual basis, like we do with Ruconest and like everybody does, but no more than that. So I think it's a good, nice, decent price, actually, in the middle of the road in this market. Got it. And then can you just walk through what steps remain to fully commercialize in Europe and capture some of these patient populations, the 70 patients you- Yeah ... mentioned in France at the top? Yeah, it means that, you know, we expect the regulatory action in the first quarter of 2026 for Europe. U.K. is earlier, as I said before. That means that, you know, from the second quarter of 2026, you could expect Germany and then subsequently, you know, France and all the other European markets to become reimbursed, but that also takes a while in some cases, right? And I think there's another important aspect that is waiting in the wings, that is the fact that we have found a second indication for Joenja as well, right? We're working on that as well. Great. We can shift gears into that, if you allow me one more question then on APDS. Yeah. Just maybe walk through the competitive landscape there and how that's shaping and how you see that in the next? There's no competitive landscape. Okay. That's the good news. Okay. I don't see anything appearing, but no doubt, if the product could become a commercial success, people will start looking for it, but that will be a while, I suppose. Wonderful. Okay, then, like, then maybe, expanding into other potential indications. You announced a phase 2 trial that you're currently running. Can you walk us through that trial, the status and the indications and the market opportunity there? Yeah. Yeah, Yeah, so it's a PID, it's a primary immune deficiency with immune dysfunction. Same symptomatology as APDS, but it's linked to three well-known mutations that are associated with the hyperactive PI3 kinase delta pathway, CTLA-4, PTEN, and ALPS-FAS, for instance. That is five per million. That's so much more than three times the population that is thought to be of APDS. That trial is about to start. It's a dose-finding study that we do at NIH, which was where APDS was developed as well. It's the same principal investigators as well. That is a dose-finding study where we will test in an open label fashion, the right dose and then go back to the agency we have agreed for, to define the, the phase III trial for the, for the PID with immune dysfunction. So I would say that study is about to start. Study will roughly run for a year, I suppose. Then we go back to the agency and define the phase with a defined phase III program, which, if it is something like similar as Joenja is, you know, was it 30, Joenja was a 30-patient, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 20 on active, 10 on placebo, which was a 12-week treatment period. So, we're not speculating, of course, on how the treatment will look like, but that's the type of trials that are not atypical for these kind of rare diseases. So it's not a huge trial and something we can all finance ourselves. That's also the good news. So basically speaking, we look forward to expanding, significantly expanding the Joenja franchise with that. So you can see why Joenja, only in APDS, already is shaping up to be significantly bigger than Ruconest. But in addition, the secondary. In the second indication, is going to be two or three times larger than APDS. So you can see why it's a game changer for the company going forward, and why we have embarked with the you know with the start of commercialization of Joenja on a very long trajectory of growth of the company that will make the company very very profitable and enable us to yet invest even more. And we are already defining a third indication for Joenja, another primary immune deficiency. We shortly will announce the start of another phase two trial. But in addition to that, we're also hunting for new assets to actually further leverage our commercialization infrastructure. So we're hunting for other rare disease opportunities with clinical proof of concept, so that we can actually add to the launches going forward, to actually, you know, expand our, you know, commercial footprint, as it were, both in this country, but also given that we will, in that time, have developed the commercialization infrastructure in Europe and in Japan. You know, for instance, we'll build a pretty unique rare disease company over the coming years on the basis of what we currently have. Got it. Okay, so just going back to just the timeline, I guess. So if you're looking to start a phase III study in PID sometime early next year, 12-week study, that could put out a potential launch of early 2026, is that right? I would say so. That's not unreasonable to assume, yeah. And then we go back to the agency and discuss with the agency the phase III. So the phase III could then start, probably. We're speculating a little bit here, of course. This is a forward-looking statement, obviously. But and then the phase III can start around that somewhere in 2026 or maybe, you know, late 2026. And then we see something like, you know, an answer by 2027, 2028 and could file, basically speaking. So it's not too far away anymore. Got it. Okay. And because the overlap with PID and APDS, so do a lot of the same physicians that treat APDS treat PID, and so would imply that you have relationships already? Yeah. And if so, how would you look to leverage that with a PID potential? Yeah, I would say that's almost 100% leverage, right? Because it's the same symptomatology, it's the same physicians. It is. The advantage here is that there is already defined, as I said before, mutations that actually are associated with the hyperactive pathway. So I think that's a very good leverage opportunity, both that second and actually also that third indication, because that's it's also a primary immune deficiency. So we're looking to build a very nice franchise in that immunology space, where there's very little, you know, competition or no competition at all that we know of, actually, in fact. Got it. Okay. And then, maybe in the last few minutes, we can circle back to the business development you touched on. It sounds like you're always open to opportunities. What would an opportunity look like for you? Is this going to be, like, an early asset, product or something that's close to commercialization? And would it continue to be, I guess, in rare disease? I would say. You know ... rare disease, obviously, because that we are well structured for, you know, for both the back office and the supporting functions that we have for to deal with very individualized treatments and high touch approach to patients. And we're looking really for those rare diseases where, you know, there's a real unmet medical need in terms of, you know, patients that are really unserved, and I think APDS is a good case in point. But even, you know, our hereditary angioedema patients, of course, despite all the competition, have a very unique profile that cannot be helped with anything else. So that's what we're really looking for. Timing-wise, you know, the closer to market, the better, of course, because we have launch capacity, and we have possibilities to leverage and build on additional sales forces like we did for Joenja. We hired 24 additional sales reps on top of the 24 we have for Ruconest. So it's also fairly easily done. I would say that, you know, at least the clinical proof of concept is what we're looking for, because we don't want to be too far away from being able to launch the product. So the launch window, three to four years from now or earlier. We also have looked at products that are already in the market, for instance. You know, we're really hunting, and there's a good number of incoming that we have, actually, because, you know, the world is not looking that great at the moment for most of the biotech companies. And when you are, you know, creating revenues, and we have, you know, we're expecting revenues between 280 and 295 and not burning a significant amount of money or at all, and we have to have a view of becoming very profitable in the not-too-distant future, you're in a good position, I would say, at this point in time, to actually start looking for those new opportunities. So you know, I think we're on a journey, like I said, like with a nice growth trajectory, with a view to becoming a significantly profitable company over the coming years on the basis of our existing business already. But even adding more acceleration by getting new products is making it even nicer. Got it. Wonderful. Well, Sijmen, thank you. It's been a pleasure hosting you. Thank you, Adam. I think we can wrap it up there. Thank you very much. Yeah. Thank you.