Andrew Baum: Thank you. A question on US commercial access for GLP-1 agonist. First, could you share with us how you’re thinking about modeling the impact of the IRA in terms of GLP-1 uptake increasing as a result of the co-pay cap? And additionally benefiting from the reduction in free drug program. How significant is it given the patients still got to find $2,000 per annum? And then second, in relation to the oral DPP-4 market which is still a very, very substantial $14 billion market. You have a category of drugs extensively which may offer considerable advantages in efficacy for glycemia and white. But I’m reminded of the stickiness of the in the prior period. To what extent do you think managed market is going to preclude your ability to penetrate that segment with oral GLP-1s just on the basis of generic DPP-4s? thank you.
Joe Fletcher: Thanks, Andrew for the wide-ranging question on diabetes. I’ll hand over to Mike first to talk about your question regarding potential impact of the IRA on access for GLP-1. And then the second question around how oral GLP might fit in given the stickiness of some of the older diabetes medications. Mike?
Mike Mason: Yes. Good questions. On the IRA side of it, it will benefit patients who live with diabetes who use GLPs and are Medicare Part D the outpace cost will go down. We have I would say a small or moderate impact on GLP sales or just probably lower rates of abandonment than what we’d see at higher out-of-pocket costs. As it comes to the oral DPP4 the perceptions of oral DPP-4 have really declined over the last five years and really being replaced by ST2s and GLP lose. So I don’t see much of an impact of DPP-4s going off path in the US or other markets.
Joe Fletcher: Thanks, Mike. And Lois, I think we have one final question in the queue. So let’s go to the last question.
Operator: Thank you. And that’s from Robyn Karnauskas from Truist Securities. Please go ahead.
Robyn Karnauskas: Great. Thanks for taking my question. I was just thinking more about some of the launches that are coming up but I know the maybe a little bit out. But for Mirikizumab and I always get this wrong, sorry. But for UC, can you just talk a little bit about given how much promotion there’s been for as you move into also Crohn’s with data reading out soon. Like how do you see like competing in that market? Can you start launching? Do you have to be DTC heavy because it seems like they’re very prominent. Like what about the launch dynamics. And then second for lebrikizumab the same question here. Atopic dermatitis is getting pretty crowded. What kind of pushes and pulls might you need to use to get quicker uptake in atopic derm? Thanks.
Joe Fletcher: Thanks, Robyn for the questions. I will go to Patrick Johnson for both of these first on mirikizumab and competition in the UC market and then on lebrikizumab. Patrick?
Patrik Jonsson: Thank you very much. Well, overall we feel very good with the data we have seen on mirikizumab. If we look at the 52 weeks, we have more than 50% clinical remission and we see statistical and clinically meaningful improvements across both clinical, symptomatic, endoscopic and histologic endpoints. What I think is important that if you look at the patient populations with ulcerative colitis, we saw the same results across the bionaive and the bio failure patients. So I think we’re extremely well positioned for the launch here. We also demonstrated on a factor but it’s extremely important for patients or agency. More than 40% of patients were either completely or almost our urgency at week 52. So therefore, we believe we have a first-in-class asset here that probably initially will be used mainly second line for those that haven’t responded appropriately to TNFs and similar.
