In this case, non-dilutive capital that we can continue to put forth into the program globally is the other key part of the consideration. So, we are excited to have a number of parties that conducted diligence, a number of parties I would tell you that checked the box on some of these areas. And in the end, Kaken was really the best-in-class as it pertains to all of the areas that we’ve looked for. In terms of the overall market opportunity in Japan, I think this is an area that, in particular, Kaken is continuing to invest. I think very appropriate for them to continue to do some work here. And I think they will continue as our partner to really be able to establish how that market opportunity may present itself in Japan. Certainly, I think Lewis can speak to just the overall prevalence numbers perhaps.
And then again, I’ll come back and talk more specifically about other ex-U.S. strategies.
Lewis Stuart: Thanks, Sujal. So there are about 30,000 to 35,000 PBC patients in Japan. One of the unique things about Japan is, it’s actually designated PBC as an intractable disease. And that really creates an opportunity for much better co-pays for the patients, they have a very full throated approach at allowing patients irrespective of income to have ability to get the drug and have access to the medicine. We would anticipate somewhere between patients that would be second-line opportunity, but there just still needs to be a great deal of work done on this. And I know Kaken is going to be doing some of that work.
Sujal Shah: And then finally, Jay, I know you asked about how we think about other geographies. And it’s always been our objective to bring seladelpar to patients globally. We’re committed obviously to bring seladelpar to patients in the U.S. We continue to explore those opportunities outside the U.S. RESPONSE is a study that we believe will allow us to register both in the U.S. and in Europe. And I think I’d simply tell you today, given the balance sheet, given the resources inside the company, we’re not really in an urgency. We continue to have dialogue, but we’ll get on the other side of data, most likely and think about the right partner and the right level of economics to maximize those things really as we think about global opportunity for seladelpar with other potential partners.
Jay Olson: Okay, great. Thank you. Look forward to that.
Sujal Shah: Thank you.
Operator: And the next question comes from the line of Julian Harrison with BTIG. Please proceed with your question.
Julian Harrison: Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. And apologies, I got on a few minutes late. So, hopefully, this is not already discussed. But I’m wondering if you could comment specifically on how significant you expect pruritus to be as a motivating factor for a second-line PBC patients to possibly try other treatment options when others become available? And then PBC is clearly for now, but I’m curious if there’s anything in the primary space that been before pursuing development of seladelpar more formally in that additional indication? Thanks.
Sujal Shah: Thanks for the questions, Julian. We think pruritus is critically important. First of all, it’s a direct impact on the quality of life for patients and we’ve done a significant amount of work with patient advocacy groups spending a significant amount of time in front of patients. The literature suggests as many as 70% of patients will experience pruritus in the course of their disease and again in our clinical studies, which we think is quite reflective of potentially quite reflective of the broader population, at least 30% in our trials have had moderate to severe itch. It’s the type of itch that really never goes away even with scratching. Cholestatic itch is quite different than dermatologic itch as patients describe it affecting their ability to work, affecting their ability to be in public.
