Lori Englebert: Yes, perfect, I don’t know if I can add much more other than – it’s a bit early to talk about size and what that looks like with other lot of factors obviously come into play when you’re thinking about what that overlap looks like at the time. And that is how entrenched we are with Auvelity, what that current sales force efficiency looks like and whatnot. So, we definitely like the overlap. Obviously, it’s a very strategic thought from our standpoint in terms of how we structure the sales force. We always seek to be efficient and effective. So it will be a consideration when it comes time to fit the size of that sales force.
David Amsellem: Okay. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Your next question today is coming from Vikram Purohit from Morgan Stanley. Your line is now live.
Vikram Purohit: Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking our questions. So just two for us on Auvelity. First, could you provide some additional color on the profile of patients receiving the drug in terms of prior treatment status and prior line of therapy and how this has been evolving over the past couple of months? And then secondly, could you remind us your latest thinking on ex U.S. plans for commercialization? I believe in the past, you might have mentioned this is something you could evaluate a partnership for. So, I just wanted to see if that’s still your current thinking? And if so, how those internal discussions are going? Thanks.
Nick Pizzie: Thanks for the questions. So I’ll answer the last – the second question, and then I’ll turn it over to Lori to answer the question on the patient profile. So ex U.S. plans. So, we’ve always – we’ve always said that we would look to out-license the product ex U.S. And so that – those plans and that strategic direction has not changed, Lori?
Lori Englebert: Yes, thanks. In the very early days of launch, we were, of course, getting that later-line patient just based on — mostly due to the unmet need and new therapy coming to market, especially with a novel mechanism of action. But as subscribers have gained experience with the product and seeing early success in that patient population, they are starting to move the use up into earlier line. Right now, there is about 10% to 12% usage in first-line therapy, which is really encouraging because that typically means that physicians have seen success in patients that they feel warrants using the product profile benefits patients is always first line. But the majority that we’re seeing right now is that it’s roughly around 60% of patients that we’re getting have failed either one or two prior therapies.
As clinicians get more experience with Auvelity. And again, we are only two full quarters into launch. But as clinicians get more experience with Auvelity and our access to that [ph], we do expect it to be prescribed to people earlier in the treatment algorithm.
Vikram Purohit: Got it. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Next question today is coming from Yatin Suneja from Guggenheim Partners. Your line is now live.
Yatin Suneja: Herriot, thank you for taking my question. Just real quick ones. With regard to the narcolepsy, can you maybe just talk about hitting on the cognition endpoint there? Like what do you need to show? Is that even important, maybe the benefit of showing cataplexy in? Just trying to understand what the exact expectation would be. And then quickly, if you can just let us know what the gross to net. I missed it if you said it, what the gross to net was and maybe what the inventory is in the channel for Auvelity? Thanks.
