We can kick off our next session with AbbVie. Very excited to have the whole AbbVie management team over here with us, Rob Michael, CEO, Scott Reents, CFO, and Roopal Thakkar, CSO. Thank you all for being with us today. Great to be with you. Thank you for having us. Rob, maybe starting with you with a big picture question. Just to high level, frame for us where AbbVie sits today as we look out to the next five to 10 years. How do you expect the complexion of the company to evolve with respect to therapeutic areas- Business lines, potential new pillars of growth? I think what you're seeing is a continuation of the strategy where we've talked about a quick return to growth. We exceed our peak sales last year, just two years after the U.S. Humira LOE with, I'd say, four really strong growth drivers for the company. Immunology clearly, I mean, Skyrizi and Rinvoq, the potential that we Just time, right? We see significant runway for that. I'd say in oncology, and I'll actually have Roopal speak to some of the pipeline, because I think we should really get into the pipeline. Maybe I'll have you talk a little bit about the pipeline in oncology. Yeah, just coming out of ASCO is an exciting time. A lot of interesting development, PD-1, VEGF space, KRAS space. These are both areas that we're participating in particular combination approaches with our ADC portfolio. We saw very nice data with Temab-A, that's our c-Met targeting agent with a topo warhead stable linker. We saw new data in head and neck cancer and ovarian. Both of these areas are places we see we can start moving towards dose optimization and pivotal designs. In ovarian, we see that complementary to our FR alpha approach with ELAHERE. In head and neck, that's a unique approach that we see even in the future as a combination with PD-1 VEGF, which is the RemeGen asset that we have now, also can play in ovarian. We also showed very good data with etentamig in multiple myeloma, acknowledging that we're behind in the BCMA space. However, having a potential outpatient option with a single step-up, getting to maximal dose immediately, and having a once-a-month option right away is an exciting time. We showed very strong data there with a single dose of tocilizumab taking CRS to 0%, which is very unique in the BCMA TCE space. Coming in later with a strong profile could still allow for differentiation. We anticipate phase III data later this year. I think it's really important. The reason I want to highlight oncology is as a company, we don't get enough credit there. I look at the shape. You asked the question of the shape of the company. As I think about in 10 years' time, oncology is going to be a very important player for us. We will be leaders in immunology for a long time. We have an emerging pipeline in oncology. We're the largest player in neuroscience, really across, I'd say, three pillars today that can each contribute in excess of $5 billion peak. You think about psych, think about migraine, Parkinson's. We have a program in neurodegeneration with Alzheimer's. We have an aesthetics business that we think strategically can play an important role with the growth in obesity. We see four areas plus obesity as being the key growth drivers for the company. I wanted Roopal to talk about the pipeline in oncology because we just had ASCO. Absolutely. We're not getting enough questions on it's really important I think for investors- We have a lot of questions on ASCO, Roopal To get into it for- Don't worry. We're going to get there Oncology. We're going to get there. Rob, before we get there, you're talking about sort of oncology and other areas outside of Skyrizi and Rinvoq. Yeah The immunology concentration. Maybe that's a good segue in terms of just business development. Sure. Right? This is a question, and I'm sorry to ask you've been probably asked this multiple times in many different ways, but I'm going to do it again just to get your latest thoughts on that, on just how you're thinking about deploying capital. Yeah. Into later stage or even revenue-generating assets. It sounded like on the first quarter call, you opened the aperture a little bit on being more open to those types of deals. Update us on your. Yeah Latest thinking as it relates to the BD lever. Yeah. I would say it's less about opening the aperture. It's more about being, I think, clearer in our intentions because I would say there's probably a misconception that we were not open to, I'd say, later stage or on-market opportunities. Look, strategically for the company, we have the growth drivers we need to drive top-tier growth well into the next decade. You've seen us over the last 2+ years execute transactions expending about $8 billion in capital to really add to the pipeline for growth drivers for the company beyond Skyrizi and Rinvoq. Think next decade and beyond. That's why we've been very active with new mechanisms in immunology, TL1A, TREM1, IRAK4, and then the in vivo CAR T platform with Capstan that gives us a B-cell depletion approach that could lead to functional cures. We're thinking about the growth in immunology well beyond Skyrizi and Rinvoq. That's what really motivated the external innovation we brought in immunology. In oncology, there you've seen us with tri-specific TCEs in multiple myeloma, IGI, Simcere, also the PD-1 VEGF with RemeGen, the KRAS inhibitor with Kestrel. Those were all transactions, again, as we think about what we have in our pipeline, how do we complement that with external innovations to drive growth in oncology? In neuroscience, obviously we had the Cerevel transaction a couple of years ago, but I'm very excited about bretisilocin, the cycloplasgen from Gilgamesh, and the transformative potential it has in depression. Obviously, we're excited about emraclidine from Cerevel. We did the Aliada deal a couple of years ago to give us that brain shuttle with the next generation Aβ antibody and Alzheimer's. Obviously, the deal we did with Gubra to enter into obesity, we see that as an area of high unmet need where we saw an opportunity for differentiation. We also saw it as an opportunity within aesthetics. I also strategically think about it from a there's a cost to not participate in this space, and the cross-therapeutic benefits as we think about combinations in immunology, migraine. There's a lot of potential with these obesity assets in the therapeutic space beyond just weight loss. That's why we pursued those transactions, was to add a lot of depth to our pipeline as I think about growth in the next decade and beyond. That's not to say that if we see something that's compelling within the verticals we participate in. Think immunology, oncology, neuroscience, and aesthetics, plus really building out obesity, those are the areas that we're focused on. If there's something that's a near-term revenue driver and we think we can drive value there and it's differentiated, that's really important. It has to be differentiated in our eyes. We've seen a lot of transactions in this space. We've looked at a lot of these opportunities. We didn't see the differentiation that convinced us to pursue them. That said, if we see it, we have plenty of financial wherewithal to execute those transactions. My intent on the call was to be more clear because I felt there was this perception that we were not willing to pursue near-term revenue drivers. We are absolutely willing to do it. Yeah. You could very well see us do that. There was a reason why we transacted the way we did in the last couple of years, was to add depth to the pipeline to drive growth beyond this decade because we have, again, a very clear line of sight to top-tier growth well into the early part of the next decade. I want to just stick with obesity for a second. Sure that's been a very dynamic area. We've just come off of ADA. There's a lot going on, particularly in the 2028 timeframe with the new entrants coming, monthlies, higher efficacy agents such as retatrutide. Just maybe double-click a little bit more on the framing you just laid out on the market and where you see the white spaces or the commercial opportunities that still remain untapped, and maybe Roopal, I can bring you into that as well. Yeah. Why don't you lead it off? I can start. Much of what we've seen play out, whether it's near term now or since we did the deal for Gubra, is largely what we anticipated. Higher efficacy agents for sure, stretching out durability, duration, That's something that we think we can continue to differentiate even what we've seen today. Meaning even with high efficacy agents that you see in a clinical trial setting, despite that, when you see them on market, they tend not to last very long. We still anticipate more than 1/3 or more than 70% of patients actually falling off of therapy after a year despite higher efficacy because you still have the adverse event profiles. With some of the newer agents, now you're involving skin adverse events. That's going to continue to put pressure on adherence over long term. To realize the full benefits of weight loss, we think duration and durability are key. That's why the amylin class made a lot of sense for us. As we move this forward, we've seen a 10% delta thus far, That was in a setting that was a BMI of 29 and mostly men, not really a setting where one would see an optimization of weight loss. As we go into phase I-B and phase II, we'll see the BMIs in the 35 and up and more women engaged than we actually studied in the phase I setting. Monthly dosing coupled with a strong adverse event profile or favorable profile, we should be able to drive greater durability in the future. As Rob said, we're still interested in other external assets if we think they're going to be a good fit. What we see playing out from an access and pricing standpoint is largely what we predicted, moving into a cash pay segment, and that is, I would say, a very nice fit with our ongoing strategy and work in aesthetics where we have very deep and strong relationships with these centers that are talking to many patients on a daily basis and talking about their full aesthetics journey, which includes weight loss, which includes volume loss solutions, toxin wrinkle solutions, skin quality solutions. For us to be into that market, it's a very strong fit for us to provide that channel of offerings across the aesthetics journey, and obesity is a perfect place for us to be in, again, fully anticipating the newer entrants along with the pricing dynamics. I think in aesthetics in particular, having that additional element of portfolio. Yeah Always helps, right? I think a lot of our customers are looking for that portfolio offering, so it has a natural fit. I think Gubra, frankly, was interested in partnering with us because of the aesthetics channel. Sure. We can certainly leverage that. I see it as, again, building around the combination approach. There's multiple segments in this category. There's a lot of places you can play, also as we think about how does it play in other therapeutic areas, as I mentioned, immunology, neuroscience. As we look at this opportunity, it's more than just about weight loss. Yeah. Yeah. The compelling fit, again, with the Skyrizi, let's say in psoriasis, most of the patients are overweight and hidradenitis suppurativa The overwhelming majority of patients that are higher weight. These are the other combination approaches. Okay, I want to. We can consider. I want to get to those combos, maybe back to you, Rob. Sure. One last high-level one. Yeah. Scott, you've been waiting patiently. I do want to bring you into the conversation. Rob, for you, we're asking all of our companies this, just in terms of the external operating environment. Sure For the industry broadly. Of course. You've got the midterms coming up. You've got some regulatory uncertainty. Yeah FDA vacuum. You've got attempts to codify MFN. These deals are going to expire in a couple of years. Let's see if that happens. What are you, Rob, paying close attention to in terms of what you're watching? Yeah. Are there any banana peels out there that we should be aware of in terms of M&A or drug pricing? Yeah Skid around, that are just around the corner? Clearly 2025 was a very active year for the industry, engaging with the White House, and I think we're pleased that we were able to reach an agreement that recognized improving patient access and affordability, while also protecting the U.S. innovation ecosystem, and that was an important part of the conversation was. We have an industry now that is producing, I think, some very compelling next-generation medicines, and you don't want to disrupt that. How do you strike that balance? As an industry, I think we landed in a fairly good place. What needs to continue to happen and what we've been working with U.S. Trade on is addressing the unfair practices in Europe. The idea of most favored nations, you have to have that complement of, well, you're also addressing the unfair practices outside the U.S., and the companies by themselves cannot accomplish that. We need the administration's help, and so we've been actively communicating with U.S. Trade on ways that we can address that. I'd say that is certainly top of mind as something we're continuing to work on. Clearly, I think in terms of on the policy front, you've seen a lot of activity around 340B, and we've been very vocal about the abuse that's happening in 340B. I think the entire industry, we're all attacking it a little differently. A high level of engagement. I was encouraged that the administration recognized that the issue there was talk of having a pilot. There's obviously more to do on that front, I'd say that's another area. As it relates to codifying MFN, clearly across the industry, we all say that's bad policy. There is a level of advocacy work being done to ensure that doesn't happen again. We don't want to destroy the U.S. innovation ecosystem. I'd say those are the main things that we're focused on, with the primary one being, how do we address the unfair practices outside the U.S.? Okay, very clear. Thank you for that. Scott, let's bring you in. Talk to us about business trends, high level. We're deep into the quarter now. Any trends that stand out across the portfolio that you'd like to highlight? I think from a trend perspective, if you look at our guidance for the year, if you look at our first quarter results, very strong first quarter, double-digit growth. Skyrizi and Rinvoq, they're many years into the launch. They're still growing, and based on our guidance at 23%, both of them are. If you look at the results we had in the first quarter, we exceeded by $300 million. We raised guidance on a full-year basis, $100 to Skyrizi, $100 to Rinvoq. That continued momentum that we're seeing, neuroscience continues to grow very well also. It's growing 17% as an area as a whole, with really broad-based growth that we're seeing there. I think when you look at our top-line growth, it's actually right at 10% reported, double-digit reported growth, just over 9% operationally, we're seeing very strong momentum across the business. Certainly, there's more competition in certain areas. Certainly, immunology is an area with Skyrizi that we've seen the competition. We've modeled that competition very carefully. We feel very comfortable with our guidance that we've had. Another thing that I think we're doing well is growing earnings. We're growing earnings over 14% this year. We are being efficient with our investment, but we're also investing with an eye to the future. I mentioned earlier that we achieved a new peak sales just two years after the U.S. Humira LOE last year, but we're out here in the next year delivering double-digit top-line and bottom-line growth in the face of competition. When you think about Skyrizi and Rinvoq growing in excess of 20% in their eighth year on the market, despite the entry of more competitors, it just shows the power of that franchise. We're very pleased, but not just with the performance in immunology- We see in neuroscience, again, we'll be the leading neuroscience company this year when you look at the overall portfolio, growing high teens with tremendous growth potential there. I think we're very pleased. When I look at the business in the first quarter, every single growth area met or exceeded expectations. I think we've had very nice, broad-based, strong performance. I guess to that point, Rob, you provided some additional color on the first quarter earnings call. Yeah On how your internal forecasts, specifically for Skyrizi and Rinvoq, compare versus consensus, and that was very well-received by investors. I guess any update on potentially providing another midterm guidance in the future, and under what circumstances might that be? Yeah. We never provided midterm guidance. I'll just clarify. We provided long-term guidance ahead of the U.S. Humira LOE because if you think about the circumstances then, to give investors a picture of what the company will look like on the other side of the industry's largest LOE, it felt appropriate to give fairly granular long-term guidance. It's very unprecedented. Really, no one gives that level of detail on long-term numbers, right? We felt it was important to help investors understand what the company looks like on the other side of, again, an unprecedented loss of exclusivity event. Now, I'd say The line of sight is very clear. It's a much easier business to model as you think about no significant LOEs this decade, Vraylar coming in 2030, I'd say a clear line of sight to growth well into the next decade. Now it's really about, as we see, and I did it on the first quarter calls, we see where the Yeah Street consensus is off. That's typically what we see companies do. That seems to fit. I think that going out with very specific long-term guidance under the circumstances doesn't make a lot of sense. Yep. I will say, as we looked at the models, it was clear to us that we see Skyrizi and Rinvoq in our estimates exceeding the peak potential that's modeled by the Street. We wanted to point that out. Sure. Also, neuroscience, I've mentioned I've got three verticals that they think about them as $5 billion or plus, each one of them actually was modeled around four. Like Vraylar, we've said approaching five, the Street's at four. Migraine exceeding five, the Street's at four. Parkinson's exceeding five, the Street's at four. Each of them is off by a billion dollars. Wow. We felt the need to highlight that. I would also add, and it's why I wanted Roopal to get some- Yeah. Words in on oncology because the Street is not modeling our oncology pipeline. Yeah Appropriately. We are very excited about both, particularly Temab-A, etentamig, not to mention ABBV-969 and ABBV-706, but those two assets, etentamig and Temab-A, are multi-billion dollar peak potential assets. Yeah. Right now, sell-side has each of them around $1 billion. Yeah. There are clear upside opportunities. Expect us to talk in those terms. Sure. versus going out with a very specific long-term guidance, again, because the circumstances have changed. Yeah. Great. Thank you. All right. Let's start digging into some of the pipeline stuff, Roopal. I will come back to oncology, but we've touched on it already, but maybe just starting with immunology and IBD and some of the competitive readouts that you've had over the past few months that you alluded to with respect to Skyrizi and Rinvoq markets. You've had the J&J DUET program, that was in UC and IBD. You've had Pfizer's readouts. You have AbbVie back phase III UC maintenance data. I guess, how are you high level viewing these developments with respect to Skyrizi and Rinvoq and your overall development program? Sure. Maybe starting with IBD, then we can add TL1A into the mix that you brought in. When we step back and look at that emerging landscape, we've yet to really see differentiation from where we're at with Skyrizi and Rinvoq, and how those are positioned as Skyrizi is in the frontline in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's, and you see very strong data there and very strong share. Rinvoq, as its label has evolved starting last year, our teams are now getting into the field talking about that independently of Skyrizi, and you'll see more of that this year, where physicians now have the flexibility to use Rinvoq not necessarily always after an anti-TNF, but after a biologic if they feel it's appropriate. That is a much stronger fit with Skyrizi in the frontline and Rinvoq immediately after that for the patients that it's felt to be appropriate, and we're seeing that starting to play out. That's in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's. When I reflect on some of the assets that you talked about in TL1A, they still don't differentiate when I think about our one-two sort of punch in IBD in frontline and second line. Because of that lack of differentiation, the question is: Where can one go to break the efficacy ceiling barrier? Our strategy, starting a few years ago, was to combine with a safe asset that's highly efficacious, which is Skyrizi as an anti-IL-23, very familiar. The first foray into that combination was a unique α4β7. This is not a simple extension of half-life with an existing molecule. It is a molecule, our α4β7, named ABBV-382, has 3x-4x potency, better binding affinity than an existing α4β7 vedolizumab. We chose not to silence the Fc tail. Yep. Left it active. That's consistent with our anti-TNF that did quite well in IBD, which is Humira, which had a wild type Fc and not dissimilar to REMICADE. What we saw there in the combination was a doubling effect, not in ulcerative colitis, which is where one would think an α4β7 would shine. It's actually in Crohn's disease, where we've seen failures in Crohn's. We saw a doubling effect when you combine 382 and Skyrizi for endoscopic remission, which is the most important endpoint in predicting long-term outcomes in patients with Crohn's disease. The other unique finding there beyond the doubling, which the team is very excited about, is a lack of plateauing of effect for 382. What we will do next based on that finding is test a higher dose of 382 along in combination with Skyrizi very rapidly here, bringing in our TL1A as part of combinations, not just in Crohn's, but in ulcerative colitis. Those four sets of studies will be kicking off very soon, hopefully to enable us to move into phase III very rapidly with optimized dose to maximize efficacy. The safety profiles that we've observed have been very favorable. That's in IBD, in psoriasis, as we see emerging competition, we have the current profile of Skyrizi, which is very strong with quarterly dosing, head-to-toe efficacy, scalp, genital, palm or plantar statistical significance across the board, extremely strong data in psoriatic arthritis extending now to five years, showing limited X-ray progression, soon pediatric indications as part of that expansion. We see that already as a very strong continued competitor in the physicians and patients that already know it very well, that quarterly is already very convenient. Even with the existing Skyrizi data, if you take it every six months, you still see 60% preservation of efficacy. That being said, we do have a longer-acting agent in the IL-23 class that's entered into the clinic, which we feel can also support extended durability and potentially even higher efficacy if we test a little bit higher dose early on. As we round out immunology, we're also very enthusiastic of our B-cell depletion platform, which includes the CD19 depleting antibody drug conjugate with a glucocorticoid receptor modulator, a naked version of that antibody, and then the very exciting targeted lipid nanoparticle approach, which is from Capstan, which is an mRNA approach, which we can provide without lymphodepletion dosing that observing B-cell depletion in healthies, now pivoting that into patients in rheumatology, including rheumatoid arthritis, sclerosis, Sjögren's, lupus. We'll see some data out of that B-cell platform, hopefully later this year, earlier this year in patients, and then rapidly moving into dose optimization and phase III programs. We have a very comprehensive, I would say, replacement strategy for Rinvoq and Skyrizi many years before we would see a loss of exclusivity, especially with Rinvoq, which is out to 2037. Obviously, our attorneys and scientists have a patent estate with Skyrizi and are working to do and evaluate a similar strategy that we saw with Rinvoq. I would say it also informs how we're thinking about business development. When we look at this business like we did for Skyrizi and Rinvoq, we elevated the standard of care to replace Humira. That's what we're pursuing here, and we think combination approaches can deliver that higher efficacy to replace Skyrizi and Rinvoq, which is why we did. In the case of α4β7, we had our own, but we acquired a TL1A, we acquired a TREM1. That was really the driver of that as we thought about this combination approach. Are there mechanisms that we don't have in-house that we need to go bring in? That's why we executed those deals. I guess on the α4β7, that does seem to be an asset that's starting to get more investor mindshare. You guys talked about it with some detail on the first quarter earnings call. Roopal, you're beginning the phase II-B shortly, and you're talking about evaluating a potential accelerated phase III. Talk to us about the trial design. What can you tell us in terms of what the phase III might look like in terms of endpoints and the control arm? That's right. Well, I think one thing that's important to consider is the patient population, which is how we're thinking about it is very broad. What we saw in the early data was 80% of those patients had a failure of an advanced therapy, including 60% of them, which was on mechanism failure. We had vedolizumab failures and Skyrizi failures in the study. In fact, 20% of those failures actually had progressed on Rinvoq. You see a very broad population, and our observation that lines of therapy will continue to expand in immunology and notably in IBD, where you go from frontline, second line, third line, and beyond. We want to be able to cover all of those patients, including the treatment-naive patient population, where in IBD, one may consider using high-efficacy agents very early because you do not want ongoing damage, which would include tissue loss and then ulcerative colitis. If you don't control inflammation, sometimes immediately could result in a colectomy. That would be the patient population. Key endpoints are endoscopic in nature. Those are the core market value drivers where we've seen great success. When we talk about Rinvoq and Skyrizi in the field, that's what's most likely to resonate with prescribers is endoscopic improvement and remission. That'd be a core endpoint. Comparators from a safety standpoint, regulators may require placebos. You could see some placebo-controlled trials and likely selected head-to-heads. Although we have to be mindful of there really isn't a comparator to this combo because we've been able to treat patients that have failed virtually every other therapy. That's obviously top of mind as these go forward, and the goal for us, too, is to accelerate that combination with α4β7 moving into pivotals as quickly as possible, then looking at the TL1A in combination in Skyrizi. Again, Crohn's and ulcerative colitis both moving ahead, and we anticipate subcutaneous dosing and monthly or potentially further extensions of that. The key to this isn't necessarily convenience in IBD. It is efficacy, efficacy, and then tolerability, and then convenience because we want to preserve tissue. Okay. Well, maybe let's shift the lens back now to oncology coming off of ASCO, and we've talked about some of this already. This remains another very dynamic area, lots going on in the industry. This year's ASCO was dominated by RAS, PD-1/VEGF, ADCs. Yeah. You've got a lot of your own earlier stage assets that you've talked about. I guess first maybe just on the PD-1/VEGF, we touched on this RemeGen drug earlier, but just how has your thinking on this class changed at all, or in terms of some of the data that you saw at ASCO, the discussion from the HARMONY-06 trial. Yeah Some of the cold water that she threw. Sure. Maybe just Roopal, I'd love to hear from you on how you're thinking about putting the totality of that together. Yeah. Yeah. It has been a difficult challenge to develop in the IO space and to really firmly displace PD-1 therapies. We were very encouraged with what we saw. I know there were some discussions in subgroups and different patient populations and how that would match to Western populations, but that is something we believe is very valid at this stage to go on and continue to study. We like the RemeGen molecule very much from a preclinical standpoint, from a binding standpoint on the PD-1 side and the VEGF side, the behavior, CMC characteristics are all very strong. We have seen emerging data in non-small cell lung cancer, in non-squamous and squamous, and we will be rolling out that data currently anticipated at the World Lung meeting. I would say we are already starting to think about potentially even accelerating moving that into phase III with chemo combinations, in addition to further behind ADC combinations with Temab-A based on the profile that is starting to emerge. Again, more to come at World Lung, but we might be able to enter that much faster than we originally anticipated. So, keep an eye out for that. The combinations are very approached across some of these indications, head and neck, ovarian, CRC could be another area, as well as lung combinations in non-small cell. On small cell, departing from Temab-A and c-MET, where we have seen very strong data and movement into phase III in CRC, we are seeing extremely strong data in small cell lung cancer. What we provided at ASCO in terms of the second-line population there, 82% ORR, median OS of 14 months, largely unprecedented at this stage. Phase III now about to initiate in relapse refractory small cell lung cancer. Combinations with PD-L1 and T-cell engagers and potentially PD-1/VEGF. We have large and deep opportunities, referencing back to what Rob stated earlier, which is our core strategic focus in gaining depth, and that is in small cell lung cancer because we have our own DLL3 TCE in addition to the PD-1 VEGF. You have the KRAS in there with combinations with Temab-A and pancreatic cancer down the road, potentially lung and potentially CRC as well, currently in monotherapy today. The one I know we are running out of time that we should keep, everyone, I would say, keep a close eye on is 969. That is our PSMA STEAP1 dual targeting agent in prostate cancer with our stable linker- That's the KRAS? This is in prostate cancer. Prostate cancer. Yeah. Oh. That's the one where we showed a 67% PSA50 reduction and 45% ORR and PFS 15 months, and this is in fifth line plus. This is really even unprecedented when we even look at radioligand therapy, totally different later population. Our goal here is to rapidly move into phase III and go right directly at chemotherapy in that second and third line, which has not been done yet successfully with radioligand therapy. That can be a differentiator. We're going to start combining with androgen receptor pathway right away. That could be another very large opportunity that we haven't even really spent a lot of time talking about. That's why I'm so excited about it. I can see that. I can certainly see that. That's probably a great place to wrap up since we're a little bit over time. It sounds like, Liz, we should probably do a deep dive on the oncology side and could spend the whole hour on it. Thank you very much, Rob, Roopal, and Scott, for being with us. Very helpful updates. Really appreciate your participation of this conference. Thank you, Asad. Thank you.