Good afternoon, welcome to this Nanexa webcast. Many thanks for joining us today. My name is Göran Ando, and I'm the Chairman of the Board of Nanexa. We had our first webcast a few months back and received very positive feedback on the format, so we see this as a good way of communicating. It is also for us, a way to get a little more feedback from our shareholders, and we like that, and we intend to have at least one more during the autumn of this year. With me today is our CEO, David Westberg, and our CFO, Björn Svanström. We will start with a short presentation to recap our strategy and progress, as well as the capital raise that we've announced recently, and then we will open up to questions. We've already received a number of questions and appreciate that. Please feel free to send in more. We will do our very best to answer as many as possible during this time. If there are questions we haven't had time for, we will be sure to email an answer back to you in due course. Hopefully, we will have a lot of questions in this respect. Then, without much further ado, I'll ask David to start the presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Göran. Hi, everybody. I'm David, and I think you've seen me before, most of you. I will do my best to present Nanexa, where we are today, and some information also, of course, about the rights issue that we just announced. Nanexa. As you know, we have been working on the PharmaShell technology for some time and now feel very confident that PharmaShell actually has a very good position on the market going forward. We have set up a mission for the company to actually become a world-leading company for long-acting injectables to develop a new generation of innovative parenteral drug products. That enabled by the PharmaShell technology, and that is based on, as you know, the atomic layer deposition technology as such. This picture, just to show our board of directors, which has grown with two persons this year after the annual general meeting this year. We now have Birgit Stattin in the board as well as Eva Nilsagård. We welcome them very much. As you understood, Göran is the chair of the board, is chairing the board. As you see, the board is filled with people with a lot of experience from the pharma business, and we believe that is crucial, actually, for taking Nanexa on this journey to become what I showed in the vision. Where are we then? As you know, we are a company that was founded from Uppsala University way back, and we have some strategic partnership with AstraZeneca since many years ago and also with Applied Materials since last year. Applied Materials I'll come back to when it comes to upscaling of the process and the possibilities that will give us. We're working, or we're active I should say, in a very expansive market that is about to reach about $900 billion globally by 2025, and that's not too far away from now. We have this PharmaShell platform, and we are working on two different business legs, so to say. One is the product licensing with the products that we actually develop ourself and fund ourself up to proof of concept study in clinical studies. Then, of course, what we started off with is the technology licensing to outlicense the technology as such to pharma companies. Both of these business legs, so to say, we will work intensely with going forward. The PharmaShell technology then. What is that? Well, we're building extremely thin shells on top of API particles, and that shell material is dissolved very slowly. That is actually what controls the release of the API in the body. That is the technology that we have developed ourselves, and we have patents regarding that technology and products created by that technology. As I mentioned, we have started projects, we have started two projects, I will come to them later on in this presentation. Some of the features and key benefits of the PharmaShell technology when it comes to long-acting injectables are the ones that we have put on this slide, I will just mention a few of them. If we look at number two, for instance, the control of initial drug release, that's extremely important when one develop long-acting injectables and depot formulations. It's very important that not 30% or 40% of the dose is released the first day or first two days. We need to really eliminate or at least reduce the initial burst release or drug release. That is something that we have proven that we can, and that, I think, is really unique for our technology compared to many other technologies that are out there. Also, next one, number three, the high drug loads, up to 80% or sometimes even higher, is really a good number. We normally can see drug loads of maybe 30%-40%, but we have 80%, and that gives opportunities and benefits in products that are formulated by PharmaShell. One can minimize the injection volume, for instance, and that leaves room for actually having longer depot formulations. It's better when we have an injection to inject just a small volume compared to a large volume, and that goes without saying, I think. Also, looking at the next one, versatility. Yes, we have proven that we can work with small molecules, and we can also work with biologics. The biologics side is, of course, very important since a lot of the new drugs that enter the market are biologics. Number five, in situ stability is a bit special maybe, but what we're talking about here is stability of the API after it has been injected into the body. A lot of APIs are sensitive for body fluids. They degrade in time. What we do with PharmaShell is that since we have encapsulated the API particle, body fluids don't reach the API particle until it's released and should act. That's extremely good and unique, I would say. The patent portfolio, I've talked about that. We have a strong patent portfolio with patents granted in the U.S., three of them in the U.S. We have patents granted in Japan and also now China. We have patent applications ongoing, and we have the process of getting the products granted in all major markets. Looking at Applied Materials that I mentioned in an earlier slide. We have a collaboration with Applied Materials, and they are a huge company from the U.S. They're focusing on equipment for manufacturing using the atomic layer deposition technology. They have entered the pharmaceutical business since they've seen that it's a great possibility for business in that market, and of course, we know that from many years. We have started this collaboration. Applied Materials bring to the table the possibility of upscaling the process to both pilot scale and later on also large scale for manufacturing to the market. We are together with them building a new facility in Uppsala, the pilot facility, where we will be able to manufacture clinical trial material for both the phase I, phase II, and phase III studies. That brings down the risk for other companies to enter this technology and bring it into their product development pipeline. Like I mentioned, we are in a business that is rapidly growing. It's growing in many different indication fields that you see in the middle. We have chosen to start two projects in the oncology field. That is one of the bigger fields that uses drug delivery. We have started now two projects within the hematological cancer indications, myelodysplastic syndrome and multiple myeloma. I'll come to that later. Both of them are quite big markets. What then drives the development of long-acting injectables? If we look at patient groups, FDA, healthcare system, and payers, maybe we should start with the payers. They would like to see cost-effective drugs on the market. For such drugs, they're willing to pay a premium price. The healthcare system would like to have products that minimize the resources needed for treatment. You'll come to see what I mean when I explain the NEX-18 project. FDA has actually started a guideline, an initiative called patient-centric product development, where they actually promote us as being the pharmaceutical industry to develop products that are more patient-friendly. The patients, of course, they would like to have as good quality of life as possible. If you have a chronic disease or if you have a cancer treatment that is prolonged for many months, you really don't want to feel sick every day and take your pills every day. Having a long-acting injectable with a shot every month or every three months, that is what the patients want to see. How does the pharma industry then make money on this? Well, one can, of course, improve the products that are already on the market from once daily injections or once daily tablets or three tablets a day or whatever, to just one shot every month. That is a big improvement for these kind of products. One can develop the diversity of the product pipeline and the products on the market, and by that increase the revenue, of course. One can also work with the products or APIs that have not really entered the market yet due to formulation problems. There, the PharmaShell technology can come in as an enabler for such projects. Looking at our product pipeline, we feel that we have a strong product pipeline with two projects currently ongoing in development that we found ourselves up to what we call proof of concept in phase I-B/II. We have the NEX-18 project that we, as you know, have started the clinical studies with, and we run them here in Stockholm and in Uppsala. In NEX-20, the lenalidomide project, we have started ALD process development and formulation development. We will take that into pre-clinical this year to be able to enter phase I next year. We have also announced that we will start a third project later this year, and I will come to that during the fall, what that indication is. In addition to that, we have the partner projects and the partner evaluation projects that's ongoing. We have AstraZeneca, and we have a number of other companies that we work together with and that evaluate the PharmaShell technology. We have the last one, partner E there, that we started this year, actually. That has actually entered into in vitro proof of concept and is just about to come into animal studies as is. When we then look at NEX-18, what we then do is that we, with a product that today is taken seven days in a week, and then the patients rest for three weeks, and then there is this treatment week again with the injections every day. This is an azacitidine-based product that is meant for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome. That is, of course, an indication that mostly is elderly people that gets it. It's, of course, very troublesome for these people to go into the hospital each and every day for a week to get this treatment. What we will do is to exchange those seven injections with just one at day one, so they will need to come into the hospital just one day each month, and that will make a huge difference, of course. In that project, the development timeline, we're into phase I-A now. We are aiming for getting the study results by Q3 this year. We will start the next study by next year, which will be the phase I-B/II proof of concept study. After that, we anticipate that to end in the beginning of 2023 or first half of 2023. After that, out-license it to a company that will take on phase III and approval phase and marketing. That is the timeline for NEX-18. With NEX-20, we're about one year behind because we started it a little bit later. This is a project for multiple myeloma, and it's a reformulation of Revlimid, which is really a blockbuster product on the market today. Lenalidomide and also azacitidine will be base treatments even for new coming products on the market. One can see that the sales figures for these compounds will increase throughout the years, many, many years ahead. What NEX-20 will do is that we will exchange once-a-day pill with just one injection day one each month. One can say that once-a-day pill would not be a problem for patients to take, but actually, patients don't have so much symptoms actually from the illness as such, but they will get side effects from the treatment. Since that is the case, many patients and in studies that have studied that, we have seen numbers from about 30%-40% of the patients are poor adherers. That is the patients group that we are looking at actually to get them treated properly, to increase the effectiveness of that treatment, of course. If you look ahead, some what we call value inflection points going forward has a lot to do with our projects. Before going into that, I would also mention that, of course, we are marketing and discussing also partner projects throughout this timeline and hopefully get in some of those projects also starting within the timeframe of until 2023. I would also mention in that sense that the results that we get from running the NEX-18, NEX-20 projects going to clinic will actually benefit that process as well. We will have, like I mentioned, the results from the NEX-18 first study later on this year, and we're aiming for Q3, like I mentioned. We will start the next study for NEX-18 early next year, and we'll anticipate to have top-line results by early 2023. In parallel to that, we will also start the clinical program for NEX-20, starting that first study next year. We have phase I data by 2022, and we'll go on into phase I-B/II proof of concept for that indication as well later on. We have a lot of very interesting and important value inflection points going forward. Before getting into the rights issue details, this is sort of a summary picture, what legs we are working with. Of course, the product portfolio, our partner projects, the patent portfolio is, of course, very important, and also the GMP and scale-up. All that together will really build Nanexa towards the vision that we are anticipating to reach. Now I will actually leave the floor for Björn, who will talk a bit about the offering. Please, Björn. Thank you, David. Yeah. A few comments on the offering and the general terms surrounding it. We have a rights issue now, primarily on SEK 126.7 million, to be exact, with the preferential rights for the current shareholders. It's one to one, i.e., the right to buy one new share for one existing share, the share price is set to SEK 5. I will come back with comments on the terms later on in the Q&A session. We have also an overallotment issue, where if we receive interest above what we have in the rights issue, we can allocate that in a directed issue to other shareholders as well. In the rights issue, we have subscription commitments of around 17%. It's primarily from Rutger Arnhult and M2 Capital Management, Jan Petersen, who's a big owner as well, and our new industrial partner, Applied Materials, through their venture capital firm, Applied Ventures. We also have quite substantial commitments also from the board of directors and management. Above that, and in between that and the full rights issue, we have fully guaranteed from a consortium of guarantors the rest up to 100% then. It's fully guaranteed. By the way, I got a question on the guarantors, and they have no lockup we can say right away. Well, we have this whole schedule for the process, mentioned also to the right in the picture there. We have already published the prospectus a week ago, and we have started today, actually, the subscription period. That will go on for another two weeks, until the 1st of July. We expect to be able to announce the final outcome of the rights issue and the potential overallotment issue by July 7th. Maybe, David, you can mention something on the use of proceeds. Okay. Absolutely. Okay. How will we use the money or the capital that we will get from this rights issue? Well, we'll put a lot of focus on the NEX-18 project, of course, to really get that into a phase I-B/II results so that we can increase the value in that project substantially before out-licensing it to a pharma company. We will put a lot of money into the NEX-20 project as well, to have phase I data from that project during this time period. We feel that that is also improving or increasing the value of the company substantially. We will start the NEX-21, that we will start later this year and take that through the preclinical development. After this time period, until beginning of 2023, we'll have three projects in our own project pipeline, and we believe that is a really, really strong step going forward into the vision or towards the vision that we have set for the company. Apart from that, we will also, and or in addition to that, I would say, we will have investments in our GMP facility that will actually be an enabler for doing what I just mentioned and enabler for also putting trust in the technology for the big companies that this can actually be manufactured in big scale, which is, of course, essential for companies that want to invest in this technology. Then we will further develop the features of PharmaShell, the PharmaShell concept, expand the patent portfolio, and expand the use of the PharmaShell technology as such. We will put a lot of money as well on general corporate purposes, like, for instance, marketing activities, go out and present the technology and talk to potential partners and market our both technology and our projects. That is what the rights issue is about. If we then get some money from the over-allotment, we will be able to accelerate what I just mentioned, and possibly also open up for starting the NEX-22 or NEX-23 project in preclinical phase. We have a number of other projects to take into clinical phase as fast as possible, actually. This is, I think, what we would like to mention in this presentation, and I think we open up for questions. Absolutely. Good. And we have- You have the questions. We have them coming here, quite a few actually. Maybe we should start a little bit back from the beginning here. Well, actually, I think I can elaborate a little bit because quite a few of the questions concern the offering as such, the size, and the terms. We got the question, how did you arrive at SEK 5 per share? I think it's a function both of the general market expectations and the market conditions where we are now, with doing rights issue and also having it fully guaranteed. That's one part, and the other part is that the capital need is quite substantial for us in relation to our market cap. That also makes the dilution pretty heavy and the relation to the current share price is therefore this big, actually. It's a function of both those terms. Then we arrive at the next question, why this size of a rights issue? It is big. We fully understand that it's quite a big piece of meat to swallow for a lot of shareholders. First of all, I think we have to mention that we're now entering into a phase of clinical development, which is a capital-intensive area where each clinical study costs quite a lot. When going into clinical studies, you cannot enter them without having them fully financed as well. That makes us look quite far, not very far, but maybe one and a half year, two years into the future, and we have to fund the company for that whole period. That's one thing. Then I think the other thing is the alternative maybe then to make smaller issues along the way. I've already basically answered why we don't do that, because we can't start a big study without having it fully financed. One could argue that we could do a very small one now and a little bit later on now the same year or early next year, another one. We think that we need to be able to focus on the business, and we need to have this financial risk, if you like, removed, also. If everyone knows that we would start a big study that needs to be financed early next year, and we don't have it financed by a few months from now, it will continue to put pressure on the shares, like we've seen actually already. That's our impression. I think we have discussed this a lot among ourselves with different investment banks before taking the decision where to go, and we feel quite strongly that this is a good way of doing it. I don't know if you want to comment. I can say from an operational perspective that this gives definitely room to actually expand into the activities that are really value creating. Doing so, we hope to improve or increase the value of the company, of course, to a position that is a lot more attractive than what we currently have actually. We see great opportunities in doing that with the program that we have ahead of us. I think that is maybe one of the reasons as well. Yeah. In a way, we are changing the company from a preclinical company to a clinical company, not only with NEX-18, but also with NEX-20 and hopefully with the next project as well. Thus we're going into, oopsie daisy, multiple clinical programs that, as Björn said, needs to be fully financed before you start it. It's not ethical otherwise, and it wouldn't be acceptable. That's why suddenly we come in terms of a totally different spending pattern, and we need a more long-term plan in this respect. Exactly. I think we commented in that respect also to the timing, why we're doing it now. I can just mention that obviously, we still have money in the bank, but of course, we need some margin, and we don't want to do this just before we see the money runs out. We think this is a good timing, actually. I got a question on our own shareholding here, or the board of directors. Why do you own such a few shares? Don't you believe in the company? Well, as you've seen here, I've only been with the company for one year. I will continue to slowly increase my position in this respect. My job is not primarily to be a shareholder, although I obviously will continue to do so and continue to build a position. It's to chair the board and make the company successful, which is obviously the focus. I wouldn't be here if I didn't believe in the company, that's for sure. Yeah. I think also we can mention that, apart from the shareholding that's visible in the lists, we invested, a few of us, and quite substantially also in an incentive program last year, which continues for the management this year. The new shareholders, or the new board members I should say, that are now joining, they're also investing in this rights issue right now. Okay. We had some questions also regarding the VitriVax process, if we can comment on that. How is the negotiation proceeding? Well, right now we're in a position where it's sort of a waiting position after we have submitted the complaint to the court. We anticipate to starting negotiations or to talk with VitriVax any day or any week actually now. We're not in a big hurry doing that, but we also would like to keep the negotiations ongoing. For the moment, I don't have any specific news on that. We're looking forward to the negotiations and see that this is a process that could benefit Nanexa in a good way. We're confident in our patent position. Absolutely. Part of our responsibility is to defend what we have. Absolutely. That's what we're doing. Yep. There were some technical questions here that we got. Is that something that we more from a development perspective? Okay. Or is that easier to take on an email? Yeah, maybe. A long- Yeah, it's a long one. Maybe it's better that- I can reply on that. Okay. It's about the technical issue or how does the PharmaShell work. The shell material as such, has a very low solubility, and that will be dissolved when you enter it into the body. The water, fluids in the body will slowly dissolve the material and then let the API be released into the bloodstream, actually. There were some other questions about the proteins, if one can protect proteins from denaturation in humidity or in room temperature. Potentially one could, since the PharmaShell acts as a barrier for moisture. Absolutely, one can do that. Mm. Yep. I think I can go into the other questions and answer in an email. Yeah. As I say, we will pick up the questions and answer them all. Regarding the issue again, we had some questions about the value and that it's been mentioned that the value of the subscription right can compensate the owners who are not able to participate or don't want to participate. Of course, that is function also of the market interest and the value of those subscription rights. It's not a given that they go down to zero, as some of you have commented. We hope they can stay with some value, so that we can realize some value from it. That's nothing that can ever be guaranteed, of course. We can stress that again, that we strongly believe in the long-term business plan. Absolutely. With this issue, we can embark on a road, on a journey, we could say, with the company that really creates long-term and big value. I think even for those who don't participate fully or at all in this rights issue, this will create substantial value if you're with us in the future. That's important to stress really. That we see a great value in this size of a financing and the possibilities to do what we're now aiming to do. I fully agree. Good. Yep. There's a lot on the same themes. Any other? Nothing new as. Oh, are you currently working with APIs that are not yet gone through phase I, II, III, and been approved? I mean, new substances. New substances and new chemical entities. A few of the partner projects are using the PharmaShell as an enabling technology, as I mentioned in one of the slides. yes, we are, and that's of course, very exciting. Our own projects will be focused on products that are on the market to go through the short 505(b)(2) regulatory route, where the clinical program are shortened to a minimum, where you can actually enter the market as soon as possible with those projects. I don't anticipate that we will do any new chemical entities on our funded projects. The partner projects absolutely, that could be so. Sure. Another question regarding. Is there a chance of eliminating, reducing the burst in the ongoing phase I in NEX-18? Yes, absolutely. Read the question a little clearer. Okay. Sorry. Yes. I can read it. Yes. Is there a chance of eliminating, reducing the burst in the ongoing phase I with NEX-18? Yes. Yes. Okay. The NEX-18 formulation with PharmaShell, one of the main objectives is to flatten out the plasma profile. In doing so, we will not get the high peaks that the Vidaza product gives. Yes, we will definitely eliminate the burst, using our NEX-18 formulation. Absolutely. Not only will it give you convenience in terms of much fewer injections, but also we hope it will give certainly less side effects, because a lot of the side effects are actually related to this high peak that you get. Yes. That one should maybe mention also, having such a flat curve or flat plasma profile during a long time could potentially actually increase the effectiveness. Yes. Of the substance as such. Yeah. That's something that we will come into a bit later. We'll have to prove that obviously. We have to prove that obviously. Yeah. It can be from two sources. One is, because of side effects, a lot of patients actually have to drop the dose into a much lower dose, and suboptimal dose, if you like. That's one way where you could actually get, at least in some patients, a better efficacy. The other one is obviously that you will be able to continue to have an effective plasma level for a longer period of time. Yes. Rather than this up and down, up and down like a yo-yo. Yes. Absolutely. That I think is something that we will find in many of the projects going forward as well. Absolutely. That is one of the big advantages of PharmaShell, where we actually have the possibility also to work with really, really potent drugs. Since we have the possibility to really eliminate the burst effect, one can actually do depot products out of products that you really don't dare to do now because of the burst effect. There are a number of really, really nice possibilities with new products. Yeah. That's really something we are looking forward to. Clearly when we select new products, the NEX- 22s, 23s, 20 whatever, you'll be looking for products that have what we call a narrow therapeutic window, i.e., the difference between effective dose that is needed to have effect, and the level where you have toxicity, side effects is either non-existent, which is quite common, especially in cancer drugs, or it's very, very narrow. It's really, really difficult to stay within that little window. Yeah. That's right. Okay. Any more? Yeah. I have some more about Well, one that has come quite from different angles, when is the next capital injection planned for? I.e., how long will the money last? We have this plan now for primarily financing the business until we are done with the phase I-B/II, i.e., proof of concept in NEX-18, which is expected early 2023. With some margin, obviously, we need also to have it financed a little bit after. A good way into 2023, say, at least two years from now, we should be funded. The next capital injection. We think we can realize quite substantial values from NEX-18, when we get that far. Depending on the decision from the board then, what to do with that project, we can also opt to go Go further on with NEX-18, although that's not the big game plan as we see it right now. We have a potential big capital injection from the NEX-18 project that could fund the rest of the, say, for instance, the next phase II study in NEX-20, et cetera. Absolutely. We can't say now, but within this two year period, we are financed. Yeah. That's an obvious target for us to actually reach such a point that we can get funded through license agreements. Absolutely. To be honest, you can never guarantee anything. Clearly, as David said a little earlier in his presentation, we are also very hopeful that we will have a couple of partner projects that will. They may not give huge money, but it's non-diluted money, and such money is good money. Yes. Yeah. That's right. There's a long question. As a comment on the discount level, et cetera, and the doubt that we have got the best terms that we can get, and we cannot comment more on that than that we have done absolutely what we can, and we have talked to several banks, and we have also looked at similar transactions in the market. The discount levels are quite high, actually, in this kind of rights issues. I don't know if you want to comment any more. No, I think, like you mentioned, this has been discussed, and we have also talked to neutral advisors. We strongly believe that this is something that will gain all of us, all shareholders, going forward. Of course, do we like the heavy discount? Of course we don't. We realize the pain that all existing shareholders, including us, ourselves, are facing in this respect. Yes, absolutely. If we can expand on the costs and current plans for the phase I-B/II study. The costs, we have a cost for the phase I study that's currently ongoing. There are, of course, the cost for the phase I-B/II study. That is substantially higher than the phase I study, definitely. That will, of course, then increase the value of the project substantially as well. Apart from the specific cost for the study, there are also costs for manufacturing process. We will do regulatory activities with FDA as well, what is called Pre-IND meetings, to get their input on our study plan and so on and so forth. There are a number of costs also outside of the clinical study. I don't know what more. No, I think in total, we estimate that we need around half, maybe not quite, but around half of the proceeds from the rights issue directly to NEX-18. Right. Yeah. We also got an interesting question about the Applied Materials. Do you see a future where Applied Materials take a more active part in sales and marketing? I suppose they have a substantial sales force taking into account the size of the company. Regarding sales and marketing, actually, that's something that we are discussing with Applied Materials since we are acting as one unit on the market when it comes to ALD in the pharmaceutical business, where we have sort of the exclusivity when it comes to parenteral products and parenteral use. We will have a common marketing activities going forward also because we act on same conferences and so on and so forth. That is something that's ongoing already with preparing such material and so on. Definitely, that's going to be more in terms of finding partners. Yes. Absolutely Not go out to physicians [crostalk] I need a classical sales force. No. That's right. That is something that our partner companies are the ones that take the products to the market will do. Exactly. That's right. Applied Materials is a giant company with a very strong balance sheet, et cetera, but they're not a pharmaceutical company. They're not. In a way, it's a good synergy in that respect. They know a hell of a lot, quite frankly, of ALD. We think we know quite a lot in the pharmaceutical markets in terms of what products to look at and to cover and to develop. Right. Yes. Absolutely. A technical question on NEX-20. How important is the burst in the NEX-20? Is compliance main focus, I guess that's the question. The burst effect is important there as well because we are looking for a one-month depot. That's quite a long time, actually, so in that respect, it's important to eliminate or at least reduce heavily the burst release. It's important in that project as well. I think we're through most of the questions that have come. Yeah. We will clearly go through all the questions again and make sure that if we haven't answered something, we feel [crosstalk] that we are embarrassed. There was one. Yeah. Sorry, there was one that I missed. Yeah. Okay. We'll find one. The latest one. Is the production capacity of the in-house factory with Applied big enough to accommodate all partner projects' need for materials? I would like to answer, hopefully not, because we would like to have. Yes, there is a good capacity we're building in the GMP facility together with Applied. We will cover the needs for many years from now, I'd say. Yeah. Should that be the last one or are there any ones? Okay. Yeah, there was a connection between the market size and that we aim to be a key player. We expect the market size of the entire drug delivery market to reach $900 billion in a few years, and you aim to be a world leading player in that market. That implies that we aim quite high. The drug delivery market that we act on is quite broad, not all of it is long-acting injectables. What is important when you look at those numbers is that a trend is going upward. Why it does that is because the pharma industry is looking for new products, new products are not just new chemical entities. Reformulation has become more and more important, so that's part of the drug delivery. Drug delivery is increasing, that I think is the most important key message with these numbers, that it's an increasing market. It's huge numbers, of course. We definitely aim at being a world leader when it comes to long-acting injectables. For developing long-acting injectables, that's the aim. Good. Shall we? Yeah, I think we can close that. Exactly. And we have- Yeah. I forget a lot of more question. We will go through them and answer anything that we missed, which could be because they just sort of come in here, so it's a little difficult to sort them quickly. Okay. Really, thank you for your attention and appreciate it, and look forward to another webcast, and communicate in various formats in the meantime. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you.