Susan Galbraith: Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the questions. So the Dato-DXd, again, as I said, I think the data in the second line show the potential for improving on the current standard of care. But of course, you’re going to get in the second line responses in a subset of the total patient population. It’s really the durability of those responses that drives the confidence in that efficacy component. The first-line trial isn’t just about data. It’s about combinations of data DXD with the immunotherapy agents. And again, we have seen is something where you’re seeing enhanced response rates beyond what you would just look at from what you would expect from the individual components. So I think that’s really what gives us confidence about the first line and I don’t think it’s a straightforward extrapolation from the data that you’ve just seen in TL 01.
It’s taken into account the other data that we’ve got across the portfolio. The floor 2, the confidence for that is based on the — again, we’ve got a Phase II data set that’s already been published, the Opel data set which showed really high response rate of around 90% and a high durable progression-free survival which if recapitulated in the floor to would represent a significant improvement over the standard of care and something that’s in line with what the much smaller data set that we’ve seen from the an avant combination has seen. So, I think that’s what gives us confidence. Yes, it does come at a tolerability profile but there are some patients who are symptomatic in first line because of their disease that might want a higher response rate and the opportunity to have that longer time off therapy.
And again, the chemotherapy is only given for a fixed duration in the floor. So I still think that it represents a reasonably convenient overall regimen for patients in that setting.
Pascal Soriot: Thank you, Susan. Christopher Uhde at SEB. Chris, go ahead.
Christopher Uhde: One is just a follow-up on bushel which is — can you tell us what proportion of it roughly has actually made it from shelves into arms I’m thinking about this stat article mid last year but tracking sales for this one doesn’t work like other drugs. Then — so yes, if there are any ways that you can use to — that you could share with us, that would be great to hear. And then the second question, so Calquence going forward. I noted your remark about durability. But Obviously, the competition is sort of now better positioned than Calquence. So strategically, obviously, Calquence is supposed to be a backbone of, I think, a budding hematology franchise built on combos. So how do these recent competitive advances affect that strategy and your outlook for Calquence going forward.
Pascal Soriot: Thanks, Christopher. So maybe Iskra you can cover the second one. The second one is for you, Deb. It’s a provocative question. We don’t agree with the fact that competition is stronger but I’m sure you can elaborate on this. Over to you, Iskra.
Iskra Reic: Let’s start with a simple one. Thanks for the question. And when we look overall, I mean there are such huge differences across geography that is really difficult to give you 1 number. But it’s also true that if you look at the countries where Ivus was available earlier basically from December 2021, you will see the numbers that go up to 80% or 90% of the delivered doses that are utilized in the hospitals and obviously in the arms of the patients. There is also a note to mention that in some geographies, like, for example, Japan, where a few months ago, we actually got the approval, obviously, those numbers will be very, very low. All in all, I think what is really important is that as this is a new market and there is a huge need to increase education and awareness around the need and the availability of those options within the hospitals.
