Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by and welcome to the Jasper Therapeutics Update Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in listen-only mode. Later, we'll conduct a question and answer session, and instructions will follow at that time. At this time, it is now my pleasure to turn the call over to Ron Martell. Please go ahead, Mr. Martell. Mr. Martell, you may begin today's presentation. Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. We apologize for those technical difficulties, and thank you for hanging in there. I'm Ronald Martell, the CEO of Jasper Therapeutics. With an announcement of positive clinical data for barzolvolimab in stem cell transplant for sickle cell disease and acute myeloid leukemia. Our announcement of expanding the development of barzolvolimab in chronic spontaneous urticaria and closing of a public offering from leading biotech investors to allow the company to reach key data milestones. I will briefly recap the highlights, which demonstrate our significant momentum and opportunity to show as soon as possible how barzolvolimab's mechanism of action and therapeutic profile has the potential to overcome challenges encountered by other therapies in development. First, we announced positive clinical data from a phase 1/2 clinical trial of barzolvolimab as a stem cell transplant conditioning treatment in patients with sickle cell disease. The results from the first three patients showed complete takeover of their bone marrow by the donor cells as measured by myeloid chimerism, which is the main efficacy endpoint of the study. The first participant, where we had five months follow-up, we saw a significant increase in hemoglobin to normal levels. Second, we announced new positive data from a phase 1 study of barzolvolimab in combination with Flu/TBI as a conditioning agent in older adults with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes, or AML and MDS. The results showed barzolvolimab is safe and well-tolerated, and durable remissions were achieved in eight of the first 12 AML patients at one-year follow-up. Additionally, seven of the eight patients are still on study and showed no measurable residual disease as assessed by next gen sequencing, flow cytometry or cytogenetic analysis. We now have clinical validation for barzolvolimab in five indications that we have studied for transplant conditioning, adding to our confidence in its potential. Third, based on our growing body of clinical and scientific evidence that shows an attractive, acute, and chronic profile for barzolvolimab, we announced prioritization of clinical development in chronic spontaneous urticaria. Along with our ongoing development in patients with lower to intermediate risk myelodysplastic syndrome, chronic spontaneous urticaria would expand barzolvolimab's profile beyond transplant to becoming a chronic, potentially disease-modifying treatment for patients with significant mast and stem cell diseases. Finally, this week we raised over $100 million in gross proceeds in an equity offering that included participation from both current and new investors, which will allow the company to reach key data milestones in lower to intermediate risk MDS in late 2023, chronic spontaneous urticaria in mid 2024, and potentially start a BLA submission for severe combined immunodeficiency patients needing a re-transplant in the second half of 2024. In addition, our academic and institutional partners will continue to fund and run ongoing transplant studies in Fanconi anemia, sickle cell disease, chronic granulomatous disease, and GATA2 mutated MDS patients. Overall, we believe that with our strong clinical data, portfolio reprioritization, and financing, we have set a compelling path forward to a near-term clinical milestones for patients and value creation for investors. Let's move to slide four, which provides an overview of how tyrosine kinase KIT, or c-KIT, plays a central role in regulating both mast cell and stem cell survival. On the left, the graphic shows c-KIT signaling in a mast cell, which are the cells that are involved with the immune system. Mast cells drive the release of compounds that induce inflammation in a process known as degranulation. In many diseases, it is thought that unregulated mast cell activation may cause unwanted inflammation. For example, in urticaria, this manifests as hives and inflammation on the skin. Hematopoietic stem cells are pluripotent cells that drive ongoing production of red blood cells, platelets, and immune cells. Many blood disorders, cancers, and genetic diseases are caused by diseased hematopoietic stem cells. Briquelimab is an anti-c-KIT antibody designed to directly block c-KIT signaling, which we believe will deplete mast cells or stem cells that are driving disease. We have already demonstrated this in the clinic for transplant conditioning and work by Jasper and others has shown that targeting c-KIT will delete mast cells and provide therapeutic benefit. Based on this, we believe barzolvolimab's mechanism can be the basis for acute and chronic therapies in mast and stem cell diseases. I'll now turn the call over to Wendy and Jeet to highlight some of the key data and recent developments supporting the launch of our new program in urticaria. Wendy? Thanks, Ron. Good morning, everyone. Returning to slide 5, I will provide a brief overview of some of the key characteristics of barzolvolimab that we think position it for success in both mast cell and blood stem cell-related diseases. Firstly, barzolvolimab has an encouraging clinical profile. Across the 5 indications where we have demonstrated clinical validation, barzolvolimab has been used in patients ranging in age from 3 months to 79 years with a favorable safety profile. Briquelimab is a very well-behaved molecule. Importantly, we have seen no barzolvolimab-related serious adverse events in any of our studies in healthy volunteers or in transplant patients. In addition, our studies have demonstrated that it can durably deplete mast cells as a single agent, and it can also be combined with other agents to prepare patients for blood stem cell transplantation. Secondly, as shown in the graph on the slide, we have experience and data with barzolvolimab in both the intravenous and subcutaneous administration settings. IV administration has predictable properties and is ideal for our blood stem cell-focused indications. The sub-Q profile is different but also predictable and with extended PK across a wide range of doses. We believe that barzolvolimab sub-Q will be very useful in the setting of mast cell diseases. We have strong preclinical and clinical data supporting barzolvolimab's potential in mast cell diseases. This includes a range of preclinical assays, including in non-human primate models, demonstrating its high affinity for human c-KIT and its ability to deplete mast cells in a wide variety of tissues. In addition, as shown on slide 6, clinical data from a phase I study shows that barzolvolimab's inhibition of c-KIT signaling leads to depletion of both c-KIT and Tryptase positive mast cells in the skin. We believe that skin mast cells are the fundamental driver of chronic urticaria. Depletion of these mast cells will lead to disease control. Here we measured barzolvolimab's effect on skin mast cells by looking at the c-KIT and Tryptase positive mast cells. The graph on the left shows the depletion of c-KIT positive mast cells at various dose levels compared to placebo. The graph on the right shows the same for Tryptase positive mast cells. The red lines in both graphs tell an important part of the story. These represent the dose levels of barzolvolimab delivered subcutaneously that can lead to depletion of mast cells in the skin for at least four weeks. We are planning to initiate a multiple ascending dose study of barzolvolimab for chronic spontaneous urticaria, a significant disease of the skin where patients have chronic breakouts of hives. An overview of the study is outlined on slide 7. We are planning to look at patients who are not well-controlled by current therapies, and we'll look at multiple dose levels. The IND is planned for late quarter two, with a goal of initiating the study in quarter three, and we will be enrolling approximately 20 to 40 patients. The endpoints will be safety and tolerability, PK and PD, and assessments via several established urticaria and itch scores through at least 12 weeks. We expect the first data from the trial to begin to be reported out in mid 2024. I'll now pass the call to Jeet to provide some context on the landscape for chronic urticaria. Jeet? Thanks, Wendy. Good morning to all. On slide 8, we compare and contrast barzolvolimab with barzolvolimab, another c-KIT antibody that has demonstrated clinical proof of concept of c-KIT signal blockade for chronic spontaneous urticaria. We view this as a positive for barzolvolimab. I wanna highlight a couple of the key points of similarity and differences between barzolvolimab and this other antibody. First, the similarities, which give us confidence that barzolvolimab can deliver similar results. Both are humanized monoclonal antibodies targeting c-KIT. They are both N-glycosylated, which we believe is an important factor to ensure safety while targeting c-KIT. Both demonstrate on target depletion of mast cells in a similar dose-dependent manner, and they have similar and predictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Now, the differences. Briquelimab directly blocks stem cell factor from binding to c-KIT receptor, cutting the signal off from the source. Based on our current development plan, barzolvolimab also has the potential to be the first anti-KIT monoclonal antibody on the market. We have the potential to file a BLA as early as 2024 in patients with SCID or severe combined immune deficiency, which will allow us to gain formulary review and access. Lastly, barzolvolimab has been shown to target blood stem cells in the setting of transplant conditioning across multiple rare diseases, including AML, MDS, SCID, Fanconi anemia, and sickle cell disease. Turning to slide 9, chronic urticaria affects upwards of 3 million patients in the G6 nations of the United States, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, and the United Kingdom. It is traditionally split into 2 categories, spontaneous urticaria, which is the largest group of patients, and inducible urticaria. We believe both are mast cell-driven diseases where barzolvolimab can be used as therapy. Currently, the first-line therapies are antihistamines like Zyrtec and Claritin, though the disease is uncontrolled in many, as many as half of these patients. Xolair in some patients, it does not deplete mast cells, leaving many patients with uncontrolled disease. There's a significant unmet need for these patients, and it has been estimated that there are about 1 million patients across the G6 nations that are not adequately treated by current therapies. Beyond chronic spontaneous urticaria, we believe that barzolvolimab will be an attractive candidate for other mast cell-mediated and inflammatory diseases. We have provided a high-level view of some of these opportunities on slide 10. An obvious expansion target would be chronic inducible urticaria, which would be to give us the opportunity to cover all types of chronic urticaria. Beyond that, there are significant opportunities in severe asthma, prurigo nodularis, and eosinophilic esophagitis. This alone is a tremendous long-term opportunity for barzolvolimab in mast cell diseases. Remember, we are also developing barzolvolimab as a chronic therapy in lower to intermediate risk MDS patients and as a conditioning agent for blood stem cell transplant in multiple rare diseases. We have a robust development plan for barzolvolimab. Our updated strategy and financing extends our cash runway through 2024 and gets us through multiple important value-driving milestones for our programs in lower risk, lower to intermediate risk MDS, chronic spontaneous urticaria, and SCID, which are laid out on slide 11. As you see here, we plan to initiate the study in lower to intermediate risk MDS in Q1 with first data available around the end of the year. For chronic spontaneous urticaria, we plan to file an IND before the end of Q2 and initiate the study in Q3. This would give us potential to share the first data from the trial around midyear 2024. For SCID, we continue to enroll patients and work with the FDA on the BLA submission, which could start in the second half of 2024. We will continue to work with our academic and institutional partners in blood stem cell transplants for the other rare diseases, including Fanconi anemia, sickle cell disease, chronic granulomatous disease, and GATA2 mutated MDS. Not listed here is also the announcement of full data from our AML MDS study upcoming in 2 weeks at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings in Florida. With that, I'll now pass the call back to Ron. Thank you, Jeet and Wendy. In closing, we are excited by barzolvolimab's potential to become a leading antibody therapy targeting c-KIT, a target that continues to gain clinical momentum for use in mast cell diseases, stem cell diseases, and as a conditioning agent to expand the use and impact of cell and gene therapies. With that, we'll now open the call for questions. Operator? Thank you. We'll now be conducting a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question at this time, please press star one on your telephone keypad, and a confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants that are using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment please while we poll for questions. Thank you. Our first question today is coming from the line of Jay Olson with Oppenheimer. Please proceed with your questions. Oh, hey, thanks for the update and congrats on the progress. I had a couple questions. What do you expect to see from the chronic spontaneous urticaria study? Can you talk about the regulatory pathway? If the data are positive, do you plan to expand development into other inflammatory diseases? Morning, Jay. Thank you for joining us this morning. First, what do we expect to see from the chronic urticaria study? Well, clearly, we would look to see the safety of the drug, and we would anticipate based on the data we've generated to date, in the multiple clinical settings that we have, that we would continue to see a safe drug in this setting. Secondly, we would be looking for the dose to reinforce the data that we've driven from the normal healthy volunteers and reinforce the PK/PD profile. Importantly, then be able to select that dose for the next clinical trial. As was stated by Wendy, we'll be looking at the disease scores as well. All of this combined, should all of that data be positive, will inform us for the design of the next clinical trial and the potential that, if we have the data that we think we could generate, may be able to enable us to move directly to a registrational clinical trial. I think that's your second question about the regulatory pathway here. We believe that with the data we've generated to date, and again, as a reminder, the agency has already approved our ability to go into a multi-dose clinical trial in lower risk MDS. With the preclinical tox data that we have, we believe we can move directly into urticaria patients in a multiple dose setting and potentially then after this study, move directly to a registrational study based on the findings from the next study. Great. That, that's super helpful. Thank you. I had a couple follow-up questions if I may. Can you just maybe talk about the subQ formulation? Seems like it has a longer half-life. Is that gonna be important in urticaria or other chronic inflammatory diseases? Secondly, can you just talk about the toxicity that was observed with Magenta's molecule and key differences between barzolvolimab and Magenta's molecule? Yes, absolutely. First on the formulation, and then I'll hand it to Jeet for the second question. On the formulation, we are very fortunate that we have both an IV and a subQ formulation. Again, that has been studied extensively in preclinical model systems as well as in the healthy volunteer study. That will enable us to move directly to a chronic urticaria study with a subQ formulation. Jeet, would you like to talk about the half-life and what's been observed from a toxicity profile? Sure. Thanks, Ron. Yeah, thanks, Jay. The, you know, what we look at from the PK profile of barzolvolimab as a subcutaneous agent is that, you know, the Tmax is somewhat delayed, nicely around day 6 or day 7, and then a nice smooth profile out to at least 1 month of reasonable drug concentrations in the plasma for doses above 84 milligrams subQ. We really do think that it has a nice profile as a subQ for chronic diseases. The profile as an IV is of course different with a very fast Tmax. We think that the IV and the subQ formulations of the barzolvolimab are very important in the different disease settings that we're pursuing. With regards to the question on toxicity seen with the Magenta program, it's really unfortunate. Of course, you know, we all feel for the patient and the patient's families that have that had the severe reaction, but they're very different molecules. Of course, the Magenta program has first a very potent toxin attached to it, whereas briquilimab just shuts down signaling. That was the point about, you know, having an aglycosylated antibody that we think is so important here. This is a critical target, and coming at it safely is of utmost importance. Great. Thank you very much. Congrats again. Thanks for taking the questions. Thank you, Jay. Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Matt Phipps with William Blair. Please proceed with your question. Good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. I guess first, do you think that directly blocking SCF binding would lead to any differential impact on mast cells versus, you know, what's seen with Celldex molecule? Good morning, Matt. I think that question goes to the heart of the mechanism of action and why we believe in Ravulizumab. Wendy, could you address that, please? Yes. Ravulizumab, we know, binds to the pocket on c-KIT receptor that its normal signaling molecule or ligand stem cell factor binds to. Ravulizumab binds with very high affinity and avidity such that it displaces any stem cell factor. Ravulizumab is exceptionally potent in terms of blocking signaling, and it blocks signaling really, I would say, at the apex of the signaling cascade. The other antibodies that are out there targeting c-KIT, they bind to c-KIT at different locations and therefore have slightly different binding properties as well as impacts on signaling. That may influence the, not just the ability of the antibodies to bind, but also the impact on signaling inhibition. I think that that has the potential to differentiate the pharmacodynamic profile and the potency of the drugs. Thanks, Wendy. Mid next year, if these, if this phase 2 is positive, would you move right to a phase 3 or would you need to run a larger phase 2? Looking at some of the other drugs in development of chronic urticaria across all different targets, it's a pretty wide range of the size of phase III trials. Just I guess wondering what your current thoughts are. Yes. That's the question that we're discussing intensively right now with a number of key opinion leaders in the field and regulatory guidance as well. Again, if we are able to achieve what we potentially can in our first study by demonstrating the dose here, and if we can find that dose that we could, I think that's the biggest question, if we find that dose in this study and all of the data that we've generated to date demonstrate or at least indicate to the company that we think we have a dose and then that goes to the second part of this design. We know that the study will be 20 to 40-ish patients. The question is, do we do a longer follow-up on those patients at that dose to give us the confidence to move directly to a registrational trial. We'll have more guidance on that in the next couple of months here. Thanks, Ron. One last one if I can sneak it in. Any differences you guys think you've seen in, I guess, healthy volunteers or some of your transplant work in, taste loss to hair color changes versus what's been disclosed for barzolvolimab? Jeet? We actually haven't seen the hair color changes in the clinic. At this point, we have seen it at the higher doses in the chronic tox studies up at 30 mgs per kg or higher. We'll have to see on that one. In terms of the dysgeusia or the taste changes, again, we've only seen it at very high doses 280 milligrams sub-Q. We'll have to see if those are, you know, actually issues with the doses we are targeting. As Wendy said, you know, we may have differences in pharmacology here. All right. Thanks, Jeet. Our next question is from the line of Judah Frommer with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your questions. Yeah. Hi. Just to follow up on that last one, can you remind us, what you've done in terms of chronic tox work for IV versus sub-Q? When was that done, and is there still work ongoing there? Sure. we've conducted a significant amount of both preclinical and human tox work here. As a reminder, all of that has been previously submitted to the FDA. Wendy, would you like to comment on that? Sure. Thanks, Ron. We have non-human primate studies of both the intravenous and subcutaneous administration routes, up to as Jeet mentioned, very, very high in chronic weekly dosing. We also have healthy volunteer studies, a single ascending dose study in healthy volunteers in, with both an IV as well as multiple subcutaneous doses. We also have some healthy volunteer, multiple ascending dose data. That's in the chronic setting. We will be launching our lower to intermediate risk MDS study, and that is also chronic dosing. We will be launching that study in the coming months. Okay. Great. Thanks. Is the dosing similar between the low to intermediate risk MDS and the CSU study? Maybe you could just help us with mechanistically, if the dosing is similar, you know, why that mechanism makes sense for both of those indications at the same dose. Wendy, you wanna go ahead with that one? Yes. Thanks, Ron. In the lower to intermediate risk MDS, we are using the IV formulation of barzolvolimab. We think that the pharmacokinetic profile of the intravenous formulation is ideally suited to targeting the blood stem cells, and we will be evaluating doses from 0.6 milligrams per kilogram up to 1.2 milligrams per kilogram in the lower to intermediate risk setting. In the chronic urticaria setting, we think that the subcutaneous formulation is likely the most ideal for those for targeting mast cells in the skin. As we had shown in our presentation, the pharmacokinetic clearance is different between the intravenous and the subcutaneous formulations, and we can take advantage of that difference to have basically a different impact on the different cell types and a different dosing schedule. To answer your question about the dosing in the lower to intermediate risk MDS patients. We are initially studying dosing in 8-week intervals in those patients because we think it's ideally suited for the biology of that disease. In the chronic urticaria setting, we are going to initiate our studies evaluating approximately every 4-week or monthly dosing with the subcutaneous formulation. Again, because based on the pharmacokinetic data of the antibody, we think that that will have the most ideal impact pharmacodynamically on the specific disease cells that we're targeting here. Okay. That's really helpful. Lastly, maybe just, you mentioned that, you know, getting approved in SCID could kind of help with the regulatory pathway in CSU, potentially. Can you just give us a little more color on how that would work from a regulatory perspective? What can you leverage from the SCID indication for CSU potentially? Sure. First, if we are able to get the BLA filed and approved in SCID, there's the potential that that can be for a full approval. Importantly, whether it's full approval or not, it will enable us to have the facility at Lonza that's making our drug substance and drug product approved, thereby reducing the review time for barzolvolimab in chronic urticaria. As a reminder, we are well ahead on the CMC or manufacturing front as well. We are running this year what's called the PPQs or the qualification validation drug substance and drug product lots at Lonza this year. Having de-risked and potentially then approved will be a significant advantage and time saving. Great. Thanks. Congrats on the progress. Thank you, Judah. Thank you. As a reminder, you may press star one to ask a question. Our next question is from the line of Michael King with EF Hutton. Please proceed with your question. Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the question. Just wanted to follow up since we're on the topic of the SCID filing. I'm just wondering, Ron, you said it's a full approval, but does that preclude filing for fast track and breakthrough? Can you give us your thoughts on those aspects of the filing? Good morning, Michael, thanks for the question. Yes, to clarify, it potentially gives us the possibility of a full approval. We currently have Fast Track that's been granted by the agency already. That would enable us to, as you know, what's called a so-called rolling BLA. As the different modules and sections come in, we can submit those to the agency and they begin the review on that process at that time, thereby potentially accelerating the opportunity or the path to approval. We have not asked for accelerated approval at this time, we'll continue to evaluate that with the FDA. The advantage is the possibility of getting, you know, approved quicker and, and maybe on a surrogate endpoint. On the other hand, it may be more advantageous, for the molecule to have a full approval. We'll continue those conversations with the FDA around the possibility of, accelerated approval. What about breakthrough therapy designation? Would you consider that? We've also considered that. Again, we'll think about that, in the context of the overall timing here. What about pediatric voucher since this is gonna be your first filing? Is it, you know, reasonable to think about getting a PRV along with it? Yeah, that's a great question and a strategic one as well. We do believe that given that this is an ultra-orphan disease and the ongoing discussions with the FDA, that we would be eligible for a pediatric voucher, which strategically potentially has two advantages here. One is that we could monetize that if we so chose. The other is that that could help us accelerate the approval in chronic spontaneous urticaria as well. Again, if we, if we have the drug barzolvolimab already approved in SCID, reducing some of the review time for the agency, especially around CMC, and then if we were able to use that, pediatric voucher, to reduce the time down to 6 months, that could be a strategic advantage for us as well. Right. Okay. clinical question about PK/PD on the subQ versus IV. Maybe just picking up on Wendy's answer to a previous question about that. I'm just wondering if this, you know, the differentiation in PK/PD between subQ IV would necessarily preclude, you know, any use of one, you know, let's say preclude the IV use in CSU or the subQ use in AML MDS? I would assume they're not gonna have the same benefit, but I don't wanna put words in your mouth, on that front. Yeah. Wendy, you care to address that, please? Yes, no, I don't think it precludes the use of a subQ formulation in blood stem cell diseases or an IV formulation in chronic diseases such as urticaria. I think just based on the data that we have so far, that is our approach in our clinical trials initially, because we think that the profiles of the PK and the IV and the subQ formulations would be best suited for stem cell and mast cell indications respectively. Right. Okay. I know, you know, Ron, we all hate these hypothetical questions, but I guess I'll be the sucker who asks it, which is, you know, pricing differentiation. I assume the presentation of a Brick in subq is gonna be priced differently than it would be for an IV prep. Is that at least a fair way to think about it? I think that's probably a fair way to think about it, Mike. you know, when we think about these formulations and the dose and schedule, that what it does potentially do is give us the flexibility to have the possibility of two different pricings here. We'll continue to evaluate that as we generate data in both the lower risk MDS study as well as the chronic urticaria. There is that possibility. Okay. One final question, just with regard to the funnel slide that Jeet was speaking to. In terms of Xolair, do you have any information about, and I'm forgetting, I think you said on that slide, $2,000 per dose or per month? I'm just wondering, in that population, that 37,000 that you point to, is that the number that are being treated with Xolair or those are the numbers that fail? Do we know what, on average, the number of doses per year these patients are getting? Jeet? Yeah. Thanks, Mike. Those are the patients who fail. Okay. -the 37,000. Then in terms of the number of doses, it depends on the patient characteristics, but it's typically dosed monthly. They do. Some patients will get more than one dose at that time, so it's a little more complicated with their dosing regimen than I think these than what could be possible with barzolvolimab, which what we're aiming for is, you know, a single dose monthly at a minimum profile. Okay. If you wanna think about it like HAE, patients would be getting treated prophylactically, so to speak, rather than PRN? What I'd say is, you know, these patients are showing to their doctors with uncontrolled chronic spontaneous urticaria. Mm-hmm. You know, the drugs, the approach here by blocking c-KIT signaling on the mast cells leading depletion, we think will first induce a response and then maintain a response. Okay. What does that mean? You mean they would get these consistently monthly, or until. Yeah. another attack of, you know, evidence is developed? Well, we'll be dosing it in the clinical trials, continuously through, you know, some period. We do think it'll be used that way. You know, mast cells will recover. Right. Is still to understand is once they recover in this disease population, does that mean the disease comes back or not? I'm not sure, we really have the evidence to know one way or the other at this point. Right. Okay. I assume that'll be part of the exploratory aspects of some of the trials. Yeah. I mean, look, I point to Xolair too, right? What we do know with some of the other approaches in this disease that, when you do stop therapy, the disease does return. We'll have to see. Mm-hmm. If that's also true for this mechanism, but, you know, that's just what's been shown with the other mechanisms. Who's typically seeing these patients? Are they allergists? Are they pulmonologists? Are they GPs, or is it a mix of physician audience? That's gonna depend on the country, I think. In the United States, you do have these patients seen by both allergists and then particular, dermatologists that, you know, specialize in more severe, dermatological diseases. Right. Okay. All right. Thanks so much. Thank you, Mike. Thank you. At this time, we've reached the end of the question and answer session. I'll turn the call over to Mr. Martell for any closing remarks. Thank you everyone for joining our call today. Again, apologies for the technical difficulties. We really appreciate you hanging with us. If you have any additional questions or would like to arrange a meeting with the company, please reach out to Jeet or myself and we'd be happy to schedule. Thank you everyone. Have a great day. This will conclude today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.