Ed Arce: Okay. All right. Thanks for that. And then related to what you just said, second question is around discontinuations. You €“ as you’ve said a couple of times already, 25% to 30% is where you’re tracking now similar to your Phase 3. Question is, given €“ it seems like some mobility or at least effort to improve that over time, where do you think discontinuations could settle into further down the line as sort of a steady state? And then related to that, I’m wondering, if there’s any expectations, or if you could help us understand the potential impact of any patients that may have dropped off and that may come back later on? Is that something that you think about in factoring as well? Thanks so much.
Peter Greenleaf: Yeah. Two things here, on discontinuations, barring having any new data, at least from a company mindset, we’re carrying that number forward. And while we always hope to improve upon it with all of the things that I mentioned in terms of our tactical activity, probably the safest estimate is to look to our trials and what we’ve seen early on but know that we’ve got good effort against trying to improve upon it. At least that just gives you sort of our current view. We see improvement there, we’ll be the first to report it to you. The second part of your question was centered around — can you repeat it one more time?
Ed Arce: Yes, no problem. Patients that may drop off for whatever reason, and you see them come back. Is that a meaningful proportion given some of these things have nothing to do with the drug at all like just not picking it up and maybe they went to the doctor again and decided to really start the program?
Peter Greenleaf: What we do know from just tracking sort of the surrogate drugs that these patients have been on historical, and polling data all the way back to, say, 2017 up until today, is if you look at the actual prescription activity, patients do miss doses here or there. They do seem to cycle on and off of drug. And I think as many know, that does not align with either the ULR, ACR or CADEGO guidelines that once proteinuria is in control, these guidelines are fairly silent on length therapy. They say keep patients in control. And I think the reason for that is, what we’ve talked about earlier, that patients can miss a prescription and end up coming back on to growth, at least that’s what we’ve seen through the data. Now how to qualify that against our own data, our hope is that we’re going to see more adherence over time.
And then as I said, I think we need to see more than 3 months of therapy or 6 months of therapy before really give any steer on what we think the average adherence will look like. But I think that the net of your question is once a patient is on drug, are they forever lost to the system? At least the data would say no, that physicians seem to actively put patients back on drug if they missed picking up a prescription or have fallen out for some reason.
Ed Arce: Thanks Peter. That’s all. Appreciate it.
Operator: Thank you. Our final question this morning comes from the line of David Martin with Bloom Burton. Please proceed with your question.
David Martin: Yes. Most of my questions have been answered, but I have kind of a follow-on to the last question. So the discontinuation is 25% to 30%. You said it’s not the payers, and it sounds like most physicians are encouraging patients to stay on. But I would go back on if they’ve dropped off. But are any physicians using us kind of as an induction therapy but not a maintenance therapy?
