Hello, everyone, and welcome to today's Finwire webcast presentation with Sedana Medical. With us presenting today, we have the CEO, Johannes Doll, CFO, Johan Spetz, and CMO, Peter Sackey. We'll do a Q&A after the presentation. You can either type in your questions using the form to the right, or if you're calling in and would like to set a question, please press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute when you get the word. With that said, please go ahead with your presentation. Thank you for the introduction and welcome to our Q3 report presentation today. Let's dive straight in on page three with the highlights of the quarter, please. Thank you. The short version of this report is this. If I compare to the analysts' expectations ahead of the report, sales have come in lower than expectations, also lower than our own ambitions. Despite that shortfall in sales, our bottom line was actually better than people expected. Year to date, we are still showing a profitable ex-U.S. business, and I'm very confident that we will deliver on our financial guidance for the full year. This is exactly what I am hoping you will take away from today's call. We have now reached a scale and put in place a cost structure that allows us to keep our ex-U.S. EBITDA in the positive territory, even when we have quarters like this one where market circumstances lead to no or quite low growth. The truth is this, our business is subject to seasonal swings every year, and sometimes these seasonal swings differ quite a bit between years. Sometimes this will be in our favor, and from time to time, as we see it today, we will see quarters like this one where we have much less patients with respiratory problems in the ICUs, which will then affect our sales. What is important for me, though, is that we show consistent growth when we take a bit of a through cycle perspective and look at longer periods than just one quarter, and also that we stay so disciplined on the cost side that lower sales quarters will not affect our goal of achieving positive EBITDA levels outside the U.S. Looking at the numbers, we grew net sales by 7%, of which 1% was organic, and the rest was contributed by our acquired contract manufacturing business. This is quite a difference, obviously, compared to the strong growth in the first half of the year, but despite the low growth, we still stand at 18% growth year to date, of which 12% is organic. Again, our ex-U.S. EBITDA year to date is still positive with 1% and actually would have been 3% without the exchange rate headwinds that we had. We are fully on track to deliver on our promise to show positive ex-U.S. EBITDA for the full year. With Q4 coming up, which has traditionally been a stronger quarter for us than the summer quarters, I'm quite confident that this will happen. What we are seeing here is the result of the cost-saving measures we have implemented, especially in our non-customer-facing functions in the corporate headquarters, and also the acquisition of our main supplier in Malaysia is starting to show positive effects on the gross margin. On the U.S. side, it's very exciting times now. We are gearing up for the upcoming pre-NDA meeting. The pre-NDA meeting is a formal meeting with the FDA ahead of the submission to create alignment on format and contents of the submission and to ensure we have ticked all the boxes that FDA has asked us to tick. If we receive positive feedback on all our questions, we can move ahead towards submission. The preparations are on track and are going full steam, but if the FDA has further comments or requests, we will have a chance to address them ahead of the submission. It is an important meeting to try and reduce the risk of delays or a possible rejection during the review process, which, of course, we want to avoid. Looking at our U.S. endeavor overall, it's worth reminding ourselves that we have met the primary endpoints in both studies. There were no new safety signals. The secondary endpoint outcomes offer several results that we are hoping to convert into compelling label claims. FDA has given us fast track designation and has authorized an early access program in which we are expecting the first patient to be treated this year. It is, of course, always a bit advisable to be a bit humble in a process like this, especially when the FDA is involved, but the individual pieces are really coming together quite nicely. Let's move on. Look at page number four, please, which shows the longer-term sales development. You can see that we are now operating at sales levels that are higher than the COVID-19 years, and also this year, we are on track to set a new all-time high in sales. Even though Q3 was a bit soft in sales, it was still the best Q3 we've ever had, just like Q1 was the best Q1 and Q2 was the best Q2. Overall, in the first nine months of 2025, we saw a sales growth of 18%, of which 12% came from the core business, and the remaining 6% were contributed by contract manufacturing revenue from Malaysia. Again, the return to growth after the quite dramatic decline in 2022 following the COVID-19 period was a result of a quite decisive shift in how we use our resources away from non-customer-facing functions into the front line. Just to illustrate, our headquarter team is now less than half the size compared to 2021, and instead, we have a much more forceful frontline team in our core markets. On the next page, page five, you can see the effect on the bottom line. There is some cyclicality in our business with the winter quarters, Q1 and Q4 being the strongest ones sales-wise, and the summer quarters showing lower sales and profitability. You can see the clear trajectory of steadily improving EBITDA, both ex-U.S. and on the company level. Again, we see a positive ex-U.S. EBITDA year to date, and also the group level EBITDA has improved quite well in the quarter, 8 percentage points, which actually would have been 11 without the exchange rate headwinds. On page six, no change on how we see our addressable market. The market where we are active today represents a market potential of approximately SEK 3 billion-SEK 4 billion, and we see three times that potential in the U.S. market, which we will talk about in just some minutes. It goes without saying that the U.S. could mean a step-change for the company with a potential quadrupling of our addressable market once we have the approval. For the more short term, we have communicated a very simple financial target for the year, which is to deliver full-year positive EBITDA ex-U.S. in the low to mid-single-digit range. Year to date, we stand at 1% with the weaker quarters, Q2 and Q3, behind us now. It actually would have been 3% without the exchange rate, which gives me very good confidence that we will meet this target for the full year because, as usually, I would expect Q4 to be stronger than Q3. If we then look at the performance by country, starting on page seven with Germany, - 9% in net sales is, of course, not what we want to see, especially not after our acceleration program had delivered good results in the first half of the year with 13% growth in the first half and even 19% growth in the second quarter. Year to date, we now stand at 6% higher sales than last year. It deserves a closer look at what happened here. On page eight, what we see here is data from the Robert Koch Institute. This is hospitalization rates for severe acute respiratory infections. This is not exactly our market, which is mechanically ventilated and sedated patients in intensive care, but it's a very relevant indicator as a part of these patients will end up being relevant patients for us. What you see here is the comparison between 2024 and 2025. Both curves are higher in Q1 and lower in Q2 and Q3, and you don't have to be a visionary to predict that they will increase again in Q4. That is the normal seasonal pattern we see every year. What's also quite evident here is that the years are still quite different. The flu season this year was more extensive and longer than last year, which has given us some good tailwinds in Q1 and Q2. The situation flipped, and hospitalization rates have been significantly lower than last year since approximately May. If you look at Q3 in isolation, 34% less patients were admitted to German hospitals with severe acute respiratory infections. The Robert Koch Institute actually also publishes how many of these patients end up requiring intensive care. We don't have access to the raw data, so we can give slightly less accurate numbers, but also that group has decreased between 20% and 25% compared to last year. We also collect our own data. We are tracking a sample of hospitals, and that also shows that the ICU occupancy rate has decreased in Q3 compared to the previous quarter. The effect that this market development has on us after a quite strong beginning of the year is that less products have been used in intensive care during the end of Q2 and Q3, leading to later and then oftentimes also smaller reorders by many of our customers, which explains our sales decline. The truth is we will have quarters like this every once in a while because we cannot influence how the market develops. What's important from an execution perspective is that we stay focused on what we can control, and that is to maximize the time in the field. That is to focus on the right balance between new customers and increasing penetration in existing high-potential accounts. These measures, by the way, are also exactly the measures that are going to be helpful in mitigating some of this volatility going forward. You will never be able to fully avoid it because respiratory patients are the majority of patients in the ICU, but expanding the use in more patient diagnosis so we are less dependent on respiratory patients, opening new accounts so you're less dependent again, and focusing on big university hospitals that are typically quite well occupied even when there's overall less patients. In other direct markets, on the next page, we were up 22%, even though we saw some of the same market dynamics as in Germany, so less patients overall. The growth was once again led by our Spanish team, which has really shown fantastic growth over the last years now. That was again the case in Q3 based on a good execution, but also based on a very, very strong network of believers and key opinion leaders that the team has built on the customer side. What's worked really well in Spain is that we do not just have the academic key opinion leaders who are oftentimes not treating so many patients anymore, but we have a lot of what we call bedside ambassadors, oftentimes younger doctors who treat a lot of patients, see the benefits of inhaled isoflurane sedation in real life every day and not just in studies, and who are at the same time very influential for their peers, other doctors who seek advice on the best treatment options. In the UK, we were unfortunately hit by a temporary staff absence in the third quarter, which in a small team has a big impact because it leads to a quite significant reduction in field presence, so we could not deliver the growth that we were planning for. When you have reduced resources, you often run into a typical problem that a lot of time is taken up by responding to the very good demand from potentially new customers, and you then have to neglect a little bit to maintain and drive the growth in your existing customers. That is exactly what's happened in Q3 here. We have suffered from this phenomenon a little bit, but we'll soon have the team fully staffed again and then also focus our energy on the right balance between new customers and existing customers. What will also help a bit is that the MHRA has now also approved our pediatric indication in the UK, so we now got approval for the pediatric indication in all countries where we asked for it, which provides some upside as well. In fact, we just went live in a new pediatric unit just this week. In France, we continue to see a quite split performance with isoflurane customers performing very well, but in customers that are still using our devices with off-label sevoflurane, we continue to see sales decline following the CESAR study. Overall, this results in a rather flattish development, which is not good enough. The plan for France is quite self-evident, focus on switching remaining sevoflurane users to isoflurane. We are really making good progress. If you look at the CESAR clinical trial sites, for example, which you would imagine are the hardest nuts to crack given the CESAR results, 60% of those hospitals are today using isoflurane, so the conversion is progressing well. Overall, I see our other direct markets, so the direct markets outside Germany, as a big success story. Only a few years ago, Sedana was essentially Germany and not much else. Now we have built a business in these countries that represents more than a third of our core business sales. On the next page, on page nine, we see our distributor business. This is the smallest part of our business, and you are by now used to seeing a bit of an up and down because most distributor partners order less frequently, and stocking effects tend to influence the order patterns more than in our direct markets. In Q1, if you remember, we had seen a decline in sales because we had a big order from South America falling into the comparator timeframe. In Q2, we were up 32%, and this time we're relatively flat with a growth of 4%. From an execution perspective, we're still pushing ahead with enhancing our focus and offer the best possible support to a few select key partners where we can jointly drive the most value. Let's go to page 11 and switch gears to the United States. Before I ask Peter to take us through the details, let me briefly recap our strategic plan for the U.S. As you know, the U.S. is our largest growth opportunity. We have estimated the U.S. market potential for our products to roughly $1 billion, so SEK 10 billion-SEK 12 billion. A market entry in the U.S. would instantly quadruple our addressable market. This is because of a high number of ventilator beds in the U.S., but also a medical practice that favors intubation and mechanical ventilation much more than in Europe, and also an overall quite attractive price level. We do see a very good product-market fit, for example, because of the proven opioid reduction that our therapy has been shown to provide, because a reduction in the ICU length of stay is generally a very effective driver of adoption in the U.S., more so than in Europe, and also because the guiding thoughts behind existing treatment guidelines, such as fast wake-up, early mobilization, early ICU discharge, are quite in line with some of the benefits of inhaled sedation with isoflurane. On top of that, as we've discussed before, Peter and his team have done a really excellent job in building a network of key opinion leaders in our clinical trial sites that are very supportive of our therapy and already very active speaking about inhaled sedation at different global conferences. We have a high market potential, a good product-market fit, a KOL network eager to get started, and also an early access program that will allow hospitals to get trained and started before the actual approval. Therefore, we continue to believe that we can create the most value if we launch ourselves in the U.S., capture more of the upside, and generate proof that this therapy can be successful, while then over time keeping the option open to either scale up ourselves and take it all the way, or at some point to complement our presence with a partnership if we deem that can create more value. With this, let's move to the next slide, and I will hand over to Peter for our U.S. and medical update. Thank you, Johannes. Yes, as Johannes mentioned, we have the clinical trial sites that were very active in the trial, 31 different hospitals across the U.S. that enrolled 555 patients over the course of two years, and they continue to be very excited and interested in inhaled sedation, which of course is nice to see. We can move over directly to the next slide, please. As Johannes alluded to, we are sort of on a good track towards our NDA submission with the two phase III trials that both showed non-inferiority for the primary endpoint and opioid reduction and other benefits that we know of when it comes to inhaled sedation, such as fast time to wake up and positive data when it comes to ICU stay and mortality. These studies are being prepared now together with the pooling analysis, and it will be submitted early next year. In parallel with that, we have the early access program that is being initiated, and we're looking forward to the pre-NDA meeting later this year, and we'll get guidance from the FDA on how they want to see the submission. If we move to the next slide. The early access program, for those who haven't heard of it before, is something that you get for patients that have a life-threatening condition and where the current therapies are not successful enough. We applied for this with the FDA and got a green light for providing our therapy free of charge to hospitals who request it. The patient category is the difficult-to-sedate patient group, which is a patient group that occurs. You see these patients with different kinds of conditions, but typically mechanically ventilated and with different background diagnoses, but who require high doses and different combinations of IV drugs. In this scenario, inhaled isoflurane sedation has been shown to work clinically. It's the most popular indication across all ICUs that use our therapy. This is something that we can do until we get a marketing approval, and it's open to all interested hospitals, the expanded access program. This, besides being something that's helpful for patients that are struggling to be comfortable and safe in the ICU, also offers an opportunity for us to continue training physicians and ICUs when it comes to inhaled sedation. That, of course, can give us a very good start at launch because these hospitals will be proficient and they'll be experts in inhaled sedation. It is also an opportunity for us to refine our training and the whole supply chain, et cetera, ahead of launch. Currently, we have, I think, 11 hospitals that have expressed interest, and we're taking them one by one. We are working with the finalization of the contracts for the first hospitals and also have set up a supply chain for all our products. We expect to see the first patients treated within the EAP before the end of this year. Can we go to the next slide, please? In parallel with this, we are driving a lot of medical activities around the globe, mostly focusing on Europe, of course. A lot of different activities are ongoing, including workshops, roundtables, symposia, and webinars that we've been running. One of the activities after the CESAR study this spring was to educate people on the differences between the off-label sevoflurane and our label Sedaconda (Isoflurane). It has also been about diversifying from patient groups such as the difficult-to-sedate patient or respiratory patients to other patient categories that are intubated and require sedation. Most recently, this week, we did a round tour in the UK where we met clinicians together with one of the authors of the CESAR study, who was also helping describe the difference between sevoflurane and Sedaconda (Isoflurane), and also local ambassadors. We met the representatives from 10 different hospitals in London, Liverpool, and Bristol. With that, I'd like to move over to slide 16, which is you, Johan, please. Thank you, Peter. Yes. On the next slide here, we present our financial results for the quarter in some more detail. We report net sales for the quarter of SEK 41 million, which is up 4% in reported currency or 7% excluding exchange rate effects. If we were to exclude our contract manufacturing business in Malaysia that we acquired last year, sales would have been SEK 39 million, so down 2% in reported currency and only slightly up excluding exchange rates. As Johannes has described, we have seen low ICU occupancy during the summer months and through Q3, in particular, across our main markets. In particular, this was the case in Germany, as you have seen, where we saw sales decreasing 12% in the quarter compared to the same period last year. Excluding currency effects, sales were down 9%. Our other direct markets performed better despite some of the same market headwinds. Overall, our other direct markets report growth of 18% in reported currency or 22% excluding effects. As has been the case for some quarters now, the main growth engine in this group of countries is Spain. Our distributor markets showed essentially flat growth in the quarter compared to last year in reported currency, 4% growth if we exclude exchange rates. On the gross profit side, we report close to SEK 30 million gross profit for the quarter, which is up slightly compared to a year ago. If we look at the gross margin, we report 71.6% gross margin in Q3 this year. That's up from 71.2% in the same quarter last year. What we're seeing with regards to the gross margin is that we are now experiencing the positive effect from reduced cost of goods for our main product, the Sedaconda ACD, following the acquisition of our main supplier in Malaysia, Innovatif Cekal, last year. It is important to note that at the same time, we have, of course, added contract manufacturing to our overall business, which introduces a slight headwind because the contract manufacturing business has a lower gross margin than our core business. It is important to be aware of that. Over time, as we've discussed previously, we expect the positive effect on the gross margin to dominate. We're well on track on realizing that. If we look at EBITDA in Q3, we report for the group minus SEK 5.6 million EBITDA. That's an improvement by SEK 3 million compared to a year ago. If we look at EBITDA ex-U.S., which is what we base our full-year financial target on, we report negative SEK 1.7 million for the quarter despite the market headwinds that we are experiencing. A clear improvement also there by slightly more than SEK 3 million compared to a year ago. We are seeing a good reduction in operating costs in this quarter compared to a year ago. We continue, of course, to look for cost savings and find efficiencies where we can find them, especially in our headquarter functions, to be able to continue to reallocate resources as much as possible to the front line. If we look at the size of the staff, that has increased. It is a bit counterintuitive to show these kind of cost reductions at the same time that we increased the staff quite a bit, but that's a function, of course, of the acquisition of our new manufacturing facility in Malaysia, which is behind the increase in staff. On the next slide, we can look more closely at our cash flow and cash situation. Cash at the end of the quarter stood at SEK 112 million compared to SEK 131 million at the end of Q2. The change in cash position is negative SEK 19 million for the quarter, and that's driven very much by our U.S. CapEx. As you know, we are still spending money in the U.S. in preparation of our NDA submission. If we look at the cash flow from operations for the quarter, negative SEK 1.1 million, that's a pretty significant change relative to a year ago when it was negative SEK 29.3 million. If we break that down, we have cash flow from operations before changes in working capital, which has improved to now being negative SEK 4.7 million for Q3 this year compared to negative SEK 9 million last year. In addition to that, of course, we have some cash flow resulting from changes in working capital. That includes, as you know, changes in inventory, changes in short-term receivables, and short-term liabilities, which then add up to the remaining delta there in the cash flow operations this year relative to last. Clear improvement, which is important, of course, in the cash that we're generating from our operations in Europe. Cash flow from investing activities for the quarter, negative SEK 15 million compared to negative SEK 37 million in the same period last year. That change or the reduction in CapEx is very much a reflection of the fact that we're now spending significantly less in U.S. CapEx. There is, of course, some U.S. CapEx remaining related to our NDA submission preparations. We expect CapEx related to the U.S. now to stabilize at this new and lower level over the coming several quarters going forward. This is a clear difference, of course, to what you've seen in recent quarters and especially the recent few years when the U.S. clinical trials were up and running. Total cash flow for the third quarter of this year was negative SEK 17 million compared to negative SEK 67 million in the same quarter last year. In terms of liquidity management, we still have over half of our remaining cash in U.S. dollars, and we continue to expect to be sufficiently financed to achieve U.S. approval. On the next slide, we have our current shareholder list. We continue to be thankful for the support and hope to continue to engage with all these partners going forward as well. With that, I will hand the call back to Johannes. Thanks, Peter and Johan. We've arrived at the last slide here. For me, I see three big reasons to believe in Sedana Medical's success. Number one, and the foundation of it all, is a therapy that makes a difference for critically ill patients every day. We help them wake up faster. We help them recover faster, communicate with their families earlier, and leave the intensive care unit earlier. With more than, actually several hundred thousand patients in more than a thousand hospitals around the world treated and more than a million sedation days under our belt, we can say with some confidence that we're truly living up to our purpose, which is to improve life during and beyond sedation. Every single ICU patient has a life that is worth getting back to after ICU, and no one should be in the ICU longer than necessary. True patient benefits and cost savings for the hospital as well. Number two, we have, as you've seen, a growing core business, mostly in Europe. We've had all-time highs in quarterly sales now in 11 quarters in a row, and we are now at a point where this business is generating positive EBITDA. It provides proof of concept and also a stable platform for a future U.S. launch. Number three, as we've discussed, as you have heard, we are getting closer and closer to the U.S., which one day should become our largest market as we would quadruple our addressable market upon U.S. approval. With two successful U.S. studies, FDA fast track designation, and an early access program kicking off, there are a lot of positive indicators. We are very confident that inhaled sedation with isoflurane will benefit also U.S. patients in the near future. Thank you very much for listening, and we will now open it up for your questions. Thank you very much. Yes, let's open up the Q&A section here. If you're calling in, please press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute yourself when you get the word. The first caller in, we have Filip from Pareto. Please go ahead. You have the word. Hi. Good afternoon. I've got a few questions here, but I'll take them one by one. The first one is about Germany. We had quite strong headwinds here from the market. If we look beneath that, how has the underlying progress been? I'm thinking more about increased penetration rates, et cetera. Yes. That's a very good question. It's not always easy to differentiate between market circumstances and execution. Sometimes when you have market headwinds, it's a little too easy to blame everything on that, and then you forget about the execution. You know, of course, that after last year, we have focused a lot on execution in Germany. We've put in place an acceleration program, which has shown good results in the first half, where in the first half, we grew 13%. These were things like making sure we spent as much time in the field as possible. Let's make sure we spend the time with the right customers, so the ones that we can grow the most. Let's also make sure we have the right balance between opening new customers and increasing penetration. All of these things have been going on since the beginning of the year, and we're seeing good progress with it. It's quite striking that the same team doing the same things has grown 19% in Q2, and then it has been shrinking 9% in Q3. It's very, very obvious that the main contributor to this performance is, or the difference in performance is, the market. Of course, we need to be fully focused on execution as well. Overall, there's nothing to be concerned about on the execution side. We will carry on, but at the same time, not lose focus on the execution. Okay. Thanks. I also noticed, you know, based on the data you showed on slide eight, that by last year, 2024, there had already been an uptick in the ICU patients, while it has remained flat this year. Is it possible to give any sort of indication around the start in Q4 if the headwinds have remained or have eased? These data are publicly available, right? You can basically update them every week. What we have seen in October is a bit of a continuation. In 2024, you see that these respiratory infections, hospital admissions have started to increase. We are not fully seeing that to the same extent yet. We're still a little bit behind. For what it's worth, my own sentiment from the ICU seemed to be filling up. We see the normal seasonal increase, even though it's maybe a bit weaker than last year. Okay. Good. A few questions around the pre-NDA meeting that you have upcoming. Firstly, do you have a specific date for it yet? Can you share whether it's early or late in the quarter? Yes, it's relatively early in the quarter. We will get updated on that reasonably soon. Okay. Is it possible to also share a little bit more details around what you will be discussing? I'm thinking mostly around what sort of risk you see related to the topics that you're going to discuss, potential things that could come up that could have an impact on the submission timeline? Yeah. The very idea of a pre-NDA meeting, or at least how we are using it, is to reduce the risk because the one thing that we want to avoid is we submit a file and then we get sent into an extra round, either causing delays or a full complete response letter, as you've, of course, seen too many examples of, especially in Sweden lately, and that we want to avoid. We have asked very concrete questions that are around the format, the contents, the presentation of the data, and so forth in the file. An example is the pooling analysis that the FDA has requested. We are presenting what we've done in the feasibility studies, which of the endpoints we have pooled, the results, and so forth, and trying to get confirmation that this meets the expectations. The hope is that with positive responses on these questions, we have reduced the risk of the submission and can follow our time plan. Thanks for the preparation and progressing according to plan. Even if we have a scenario where the FDA has more requests or they want things differently or they have maybe additional wishes that they didn't have before, it's also much better to have a chance to address that before the submission because then you will put in a better file and you avoid delays and additional costs further on. You used that in your question yourself. It's a risk-reducing meeting. All right. You're also going to talk about potential fast track benefits, right? I was just also curious around what are the arguments for and against you receiving any sort of those benefits? Yeah. The decision of, so we have fast track designation from the FDA. What that means these days is mostly that we have a little bit easier access and it's easier for us to communicate with the FDA. Unlike maybe what you hear in other places, our experience is a very constructive and good dialogue. That's the main benefit now. When it comes to the review, we have the right to apply for a priority review, which would reduce the review period from 10 months to 6 months, which is, of course, a big benefit. That is a decision that the FDA will take. We will apply for this with the submission. When the file goes in, you also put your application. As you probably know, the submission is followed by a two-month validation period where the FDA is checking whether the file is complete, whether it makes sense for them to review, and so forth. As part of that validation period, they also take a decision on whether the priority review is granted, yes or no. If it is granted, then you get a PDUFA date in 6 months. If it is not granted, then you follow the standard timeline of 10 months. This is a decision that the FDA takes. An argument for receiving it is that this is a therapy that at least we believe, and based on the fast track designation the FDA seems to believe, that it brings potential benefits to U.S. patients, and it's worth bringing this therapy to the market faster. Arguments against could be anything from capacity constraints to the complexity of the file that needs more time. This is really a decision that we cannot influence. Of course, we will try to put the best case forward. Okay. Thank you for that answer. Perhaps just a question around the pooling analysis, which is now completed, if I understand correctly. My question is, have the results aligned with your expectations? Have there been any surprises, so to say? Yes, I can answer that one. Yeah, sure. Yeah. No, I would say there haven't been any surprises. Just to mention, at the time when we were requested to consider pooling of our efficacy endpoints with the SED001 study, that was a positive surprise to us because we knew the results from SED001, which were in favor of isoflurane, and we didn't know the results of the U.S. study. You could say it was a sort of insurance to be able to pool in those data in case any of the U.S. studies didn't show non-inferiority or didn't show a pure reduction, or there was something else that didn't turn out the way we'd expected. Now they did. In some sense, you could say that part of the sort of excitement about getting to pool SED001 with the U.S. studies was sort of neutralized by good data from the U.S. The other aspect is the possibility to get better power and more precision in the estimates and also to look at subgroups, and those analyses are just dropping in now as we speak. To date, there have not been any unpleasant surprises. I think that the data show that our treatment does pretty much the same if you're in Europe or if you're in the U.S., and that, of course, is a very robust statement for us to make to the FDA. Okay. Have there been any positive surprises? Any of the endpoints that have tilted into significance? No. No new, no bad nor good news. I'd say it's stronger. I'd say we have a stronger case now that we've pooled the data and we can look into the subgroups. I would say, for example, looking at subgroups, looking at opioid reduction, for example, when you look at the pooled data, you see that all subgroups have opioid reduction. That, of course, is very valuable because it shows that it's not just one patient group, for example, surgical patients that benefit from having isoflurane. It's all kinds of patients, old and young, and very sick and more healthy patients. I would say in some sense, I would say it's reassuring, I could say. No big surprises in any direction, but reassuring the data when you look at the pooled estimates. Okay. Thank you very much. That's all the questions from my end. Thanks, Philip. Okay. We will move on to Mattias from SEB. Please go ahead. You have the word. Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Perfect. Hey, Mattias. Hey, thanks for the presentation. I will stay with the previous question here for a bit and ask if you can share anything on mortality or ICU-free days or anything around the pooling analysis. Yeah. Those are areas that will be quite useful. I mean, the health economic endpoints, such as ICU-free days, that will make for a very, very useful publication, right? Because we had very consistent results between the European study and the two U.S. studies. We saw less time in the ICU across the board, more ICU for days. If we have a publication based on, "Here we pooled three randomized controlled trials in Europe and in the U.S.," and you're saving, or you have one more ICU for days or one point, whatever it will be in the publication, and that translates into, depending on the situation, between $5,000 and $11,000. That is, of course, a very powerful tool that you can use with procurement departments in hospitals. That's an example where the pooled analysis will be translated into a very valuable publication, besides the fact that hopefully it will also contribute to the FDA seeing this as very robust data for proving the point. The same approach goes for mortality, of course, as well. If there's a way for us to build that into a publication, that can be very supportive for the launch. While you answered that you do not see any positive nor negative surprises, it is still possible that something could come out of this analysis that supports those statements, or how should I? If you have a publication showing a day difference in the ICU length of stay, maybe that's not kind of a traditional FDA outcome that will make the difference between getting approval or not. We all know that the approval and the clinical benefits alone is not what is going to drive the uptake. People are going to look at the health economics in the U.S. much more. Maybe it is not surprising in that sense because we knew that our therapy will reduce the time that patients spend in the ICU, but that doesn't make the message less powerful. That will be an important tool when we launch. I can just add to what I said. I maybe didn't spell it out enough when I responded that there's nothing new. If you look at the results from the Sedaconda study and you look at the individual U.S. studies, for example, you will find that ICU-free days are more for isoflurane, not statistically significant. That means obviously that when you pool the three studies, you will find similar results. That, of course, is also very reassuring. As Johannes was alluding to, even without statistical significance, you can have something that's clinically significant or significant from a health economics perspective. If we talk about mortality, for example, we had a 5% difference in mortality in one of the U.S. studies, 4.3% difference in the other study, which favor isoflurane. Overall, I mean, we're very happy with the results. Even though many of them maybe are not translatable into a label claim, they will be very useful when we launch from a medical affairs perspective and from a health economics perspective. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. As a follow-up on the pooling analysis, when is it possible that we can see the results, or how will this be presented? The pooled results are not results that we normally post on clinical trials or anything like that, but there is an intent to liaise with an academic center and make a publication out of the pooled results. That will be a peer-reviewed publication, which I think is the strongest way that we can present the data. Perfect. Thank you. If we look at the U.S. submission, it sounds like everything is intact. Could you maybe speak a little bit about the time after submission? You talked on previous questions quite in detail about this, but it sounds like maybe you can have the product launched towards the latter parts of 2026, or is it rather 2027 that you see likely for the product to be launched in the event of an approval? Yeah. It's always, I mean, as we have discussed before, it's always if you are in an FDA process, it's always, to some extent, speculation to talk about approval times and launch timelines, right? What I can say is if everything goes optimally, so pre-NDA meeting goes perfect, we have alignment on everything, we file the submission as we have planned, and then get fast track or get priority reviews, so a six-month review time, and that goes well, then there's a scenario where we would get approval towards the end of next year, which is very soon. It's, of course, a very nice scenario, but it's also part of the truth that we are fully in the FDA's hands, and unforeseen surprises can come up. We're trying to mitigate them as much as we can. Of course, as I've said, we're trying to de-risk this as much as possible before submission. It is possible, yes. The base case assumption is probably a launch in 2027. Thank you so much. I want to follow up a little bit on Germany, if that's okay. If it is clear to you that you are taking market share in Germany with growth of sort of 5% to 6% in local currencies, if you look on 2024 and this year, I'm also asking if you could talk about the scope to further increase the market shares in Germany coming years, and what sort of brings you comfort that it is not sort of peak market shares that we are looking at in Germany? I think that would be helpful to cover in this point. Yes. We communicated these penetration levels on a yearly basis. The reason for that is that there's no perfect data that gives us exactly the size of the market that we operate in. You would need the number of patients in intensive care that are intubated and sedated. You can get things like how many patients are in the ICU, but you don't know how many of those have a tube in their throat and how many are just not receiving ventilation or are receiving non-invasive ventilation. There's no perfect data there. If we were to communicate this on a quarterly basis, there's a bit of a risk of not being precise enough. That's why we do this on a yearly basis. We are seeing progress. Last year, the penetration was 13%. What we mean by penetration is how many days of all the sedation days in Germany were our products used. That's around 13% last year. We see an increase this year. To your question, how high can this go, or have we reached a ceiling? We do also in Germany, even though it's maybe a bit more mature market than other markets, see quite substantial regional differences. Some regions are upwards of 20% penetration and even more, and some are much lower than that. You see hospitals that have 50% penetration, some have 80% penetration. There's no reason to believe that 13% should be the limit. What I usually like as a proxy is if you can reach certain penetration levels in a region. Individual hospitals are something else because you will always have outliers. If you can have penetration of, whatever, 25% in an entire sales territory in Germany, which can easily be, I don't know, EUR 2 million sales or so, that gives you an idea of what should be achievable as a national average as well by transferring best practices and making sure we have the same good execution and continuity in the sales rep position. 13% is definitely not the ceiling. I think that's a good answer. Lastly, sorry for having a lot of questions. That's fine. Around the lower costs in the quarter, if those can be extrapolated. I know you have reasonably higher costs in Q4 typically, but in general, should we expect costs to be sort of stable or slightly down, excluding the U.S. OpEx, of course? How do you see it? Yeah. No, that's fair. The one thing to think of, we have worked or continued to work on our cost structure in the first half of the year, and you see some of these efficiencies come through in Q3. What you have in Q3 is a vacation period. The activity level is typically a bit lower. There's less conferences, less travel. That shows a little bit. If you look at historical years, you will see that the cost level in Q3 is often a bit lower. It is also a function of us having continued to work on the cost structure. Thank you very much. Okay. That concludes the Q&A. Thank you very much, Johannes, Johan, and Peter, for your presentation and answers. Thank you to everyone for joining this Finwire presentation with Sedana Medical. I wish you all a great rest of the day. Thank you. Thanks a lot. Have a good weekend, and thanks.