And I think a good example of the sort of — that sort of sweet spot is the novel anti-CTLA-4 molecule that we’ve just announced and expanded on today. It’s — appears to have a differentiated profile. We think it could have combo — potential as a monotherapy and potentially expand treatment possibilities with an IO mechanism, but also could also potentially synergize with our own pipeline down the road. So, I think that’s a good example, Phase 2 about to be Phase 3, so mid- to late-stage assets. And we’ve got a number of those still in the deal pipeline, some at more advanced stages.
Tazeen Ahmad: Is there a dollar number, Ryan, that would be an upper limit of how much BioNTech is looking to spend right now?
Ryan Richardson: So, our sweet spot, I think, as a normal course would be a sub 1 billion. And I think we certainly like the proposition of this deal, this OncoC4 deal where we paid 200 million upfront and then there are some success-based milestones and royalties, but where we share some development costs, but we take control of the asset and can really direct the development. I think that’s really what we’re looking to do. There could be some variation depending on the asset in question. But I think we really like that sort of approach. We will look at larger deals, but I think the sweet spot for us is the sort of product-centric, product-focused in-licensing and/or M&A.
Operator: We will now go to our next question. And the next question comes from the line of Daina Graybosch from SVB Securities.
Daina Graybosch: Yes. I have a couple oncology pipeline questions. First — and you just hinted at it, Ryan. Really interested in how you are planning to expand the ONC-392 development, now that you have it in your hands? And should we expect any head-to-head studies with ipi/nivo to really prove out the broader therapeutic window and potentially better efficacy? And then a second program is — second question, sorry, is now that you have a really large portfolio, really interested in the criteria you’re using for go, no go. In particular, in this presentation, you highlighted focus programs in oncology. And I wonder why these programs and what did they show to reach that focus program bar? And what does that mean for those programs that aren’t focus programs?
Ryan Richardson: Ugur, do you want to take that?
Ugur Sahin: Yes, I can take that. Hi Daina, thanks for the questions. So first of all, ONC-392, so the key differentiator that we believe is important for ONC-392 is the ability — the larger therapeutic window and the ability to induce a higher exposure and prolonged exposure to the anti-CTLA-4 mechanism, particularly by the anticipated mechanism of depletion of Tregs in the tumor micro environment. And as compared to the approved anti-CTLA-4 molecules preserving lymphatic Treg function. We are not planning to go into any head-to-head studies for — with the approved products. We are exploring, we are going to explore two types of applications. One application based on the single compound activity of ONC-392 observed, for example, in ovarian cancer, and we will also report about single compound activity in non-small cell lung cancer patients, allowing us without side-to-side control to go into indications in which ipilimumab or other anti-CTLA-4 antibodies are not authorized so far.
