Kabir Nath: So all I would say, that is, obviously, we don’t have any specific insights into either of those, either the regulatory process or what they’re doing for launch prep. But yes, we will clearly be watching that. We will be watching the process of application, assuming it’s successful, assuming that there’s an outcome and so on and indeed, how they prepare to launch. And obviously, we do talk to many of the same sites and many of the same physicians.
Operator: Our next question comes from Sumant Kulkarni with Canaccord Genuity.
Sumant Kulkarni: It’s been some time since the Phase IIb trial has ended, but are you still following some patients that were enrolled in that? Do you have any additional anecdotes on how patients might be doing now? And are there any more data we could expect on that?
Kabir Nath: Well, we have got, of course, the follow-up data that we’re in the process of writing up in full. So that’s not — people are still following, but it’s data that we haven’t fully digested. We will be showing that, I suspect, in 2024. There are individual PIs who have a lot of interest in their patients, as you might imagine, and we know that they are conducting quite long-term follow-ups in the Netherlands, for example. These are not studies that we are sponsoring. So they’re not ones we have a great deal of detail about, but we know that they’re going on. And we’ll be obviously very interested in what those conclusions look like from those studies.
Sumant Kulkarni: And then a follow-up on your Phase III 005 program or even 006, how closely will you be monitoring blinded data, if at all?
Kabir Nath: We don’t monitor blinded data. The data is, by definition, doesn’t come to us. It comes to a third party.
Operator: Our next question comes from Gavin Clark-Gartner with Evercore ISI.
Gavin Clark-Gartner: I’m just wondering what Greenfield rate you’re seeing thus far and how this compares to your assumptions, when you design the trial?
Kabir Nath: We’re not really giving out that kind of data, I’m afraid.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Thomas Shrader with BTIG.
Thomas Shrader: We’re all asking kind of similar questions. But I’m curious if in the site recruitment process, you’re getting a sense of the final commercial footprint. Are you having your pick of sites, which is to say, many places want to get involved and then you decide? Or is it kind of the expected power sites. And I’m really wondering if you’re getting a sense of whether this will look a little bit like the CAR T world, where everybody sees this, they’re excited about it, but the actual physical footprint is much smaller.
Kabir Nath: Yes. I mean let me start on that and see a guide on it. I think 2 things to say. One, we are being very careful about site selection. I mean, I think everyone knows that large trials in psychiatry are complicated, and there are plenty of anecdotes about where core site selection has contributed to poor results. And we are very much in control of that process. We’re careful. Obviously, we have the nucleus of sites that were successful in Phase IIb for the core of the Phase III program. But then going beyond that, it’s picking that right next of academic sites, one that can scale to commercial and so on. So I think the second thing I would say clearly, though, is from a patient demand, as Guy said, there is very significant patient demand and interest in that.
So obviously, not every psychiatrist in a single practice will be in a position to offer COM60 therapy. But I think as our trials evolve with others do and so on as Spravato continues to scale, you’re seeing an ever-increasing number of potential sites that could deliver this commercially.
