Unidentified Analyst: Hi, guys. Thanks for taking the question. This is [Charlie] on for Brian. Just a couple quick ones here. We were wondering if you could give us some more color on how severe symptoms are and how long RSV tends to last, more thinking about pediatric and high-risk patients relative both to each other and to low-risk adults, such as those that were enrolled in the RSVPEDs trial. And then secondly, just you spoke to antibodies and CSU. Just wondering, is this a main focus for you guys in terms of how you’re designing the specificity of your lead candidate? And do you consider that a bar for you to reach? And how else are you thinking about that? Thank you.
Scott Rottinghaus: So I’ll jump in on the RSV question. The kids that we’ve been enrolling are typical kids, often with their first episode of RSV infection. And they have symptoms typically pushing two weeks, longer than you’d expect to see in young, healthy adults given their, immune naivete. So that’s kind of the length of symptoms, 10 to 14 days. And again, severity varies in our study, the sorts of symptoms that can often get you hospitalized. So fairly severe. And with adults, again, the high-risk adults that we’re enrolling in our study, patients with COPD, CHF, again, have a more severe symptomatic profile, again, a couple of weeks in most cases. So that’s, I think, the general severity and length of that disease. If that helps.
Jay Luly: And I’m sorry, could you repeat your question on CSU?
Unidentified Analyst: Yes. And that’s very helpful. Thank you on RSV. But for CSU, we were just wondering how you’re thinking about designing the specificity and thinking about the antibody that you mentioned earlier. Is that kind of your goal in terms of the specificity of your molecules?
Tara Kieffer: Yes. So I mean, the goal of the program is to have something that’s potent to KIT. And so we’ve looked at that preclinically in both binding and cellular function assays. And we see nanomolar activity there. And then to be highly selective against KIT versus other kinases. We shared some preliminary data for that a few weeks ago. And showing good selectivity, we continue to optimize the compounds that we have and study them for susceptivity. But that is the goal, yes.
Unidentified Analyst: Thank you.
Tara Kieffer: You bet.
Operator: And thank you. [Operator Instructions] And one moment for our next question. Ed, our next question comes from Ed Arce from H.C. Wainwright. Your line is now open.
Unidentified Analyst: Hi, everyone. Thank you for taking my questions. This is Thomas, asking a couple of questions for Ed. So for the new immunology program that is to be unveiled later this year, just try to figure out, what are some expectations that you have for now, whether it be for a large disease or small disease, or something along the line of the new KIT inhibitor program in terms of large market. And then lastly, a large unmet need as well?
Tara Kieffer: Yes. So we’re primarily targeting chronic spontaneous urticaria with this molecule as a primary indication.
Jay Luly: I’m sorry. Were you talking about a future to be announced program?
Unidentified Analyst: Yes. The second immunology program that’s to be announced this year?
Jay Luly: Yes, so we – yes, I mean, we’re trying to be very thoughtful about it going after, good markets, right? Good markets in areas where we think a small molecule could make – an important impact. But beyond that, we’ll announce the program when we announce it.
Tara Kieffer: I mean, I think some of the things we think about in selecting programs. Obviously, having a good market opportunity, something that has a high unmet medical need, ideally programs where there’s a clear clinical path and biomarkers, or early signs of efficacy that we can get early on in the program and really understanding the underlying disease, cause of the disease and having confidence in the target and mechanism are some of the criteria we look at.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. Thanks. Thank you for the additional color. And the next question, one financial question, first of all, just trying to confirm last quarter for fiscal year 2024, OpEx guidance, R&D $100 million to $120 million and then, G&A $45 million to $50 million. Just trying to figure out whether that’s still on target for this fiscal year?
Paul Mellett: Yes, that is still our targeted spend at this point, yes.
Unidentified Analyst: All right. Fantastic. Thank you again for taking my questions.
Tara Kieffer: Thank you.
Operator: And thank you. And I am showing no further questions. I would now like to turn the call back over to Jennifer Viera for closing remarks.
Jennifer Viera: Thank you, everyone, for joining us today. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact us either by email or call the office. Thanks so much and have a good night.
Operator: This now concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.
