Mara Goldstein: Great. Thanks so much for taking the question. I just have a quick follow-up on Proleukin and I respect you are not giving guidance, but I am just curious around your expectations about working capital and how the ATM figures into that as you onboard that product? And then secondarily, can you speak to the TILVANCE trial and how we should think about the primary endpoint in terms of the Delta improvement looking for given the number of patients in the trial? And secondarily, the presence of the crossover arm just how do you account for pressure on the OS secondary endpoint there?
Fred Vogt: Yes. Maybe Jean-Marc, you want to take the first part of that and Friedrich get the second part?
Jean-Marc Bellemin: Yes, sure. Yes, I am trying to think about the best way to answer your question. So I think our goal is to integrate Proleukin the way that we will keep it as a profitable activity again, it will be separating away from lifileucel. So, we will have sale of Proleukin outside of our own usage. So currently I will say Proleukin is profitable and we wanted to do the same in the future after integration. I am not too much concerned around working capital as itself, because again, we are not talking about large amounts, we will not carry a lot of amount of inventory and everything should be pretty much managed correctly. So, no concern on that. ATM related I mean, we have commented about the activity that we have just done. And I think what’s the most important there is to keep in mind we have enough cash, including the acquisition of Proleukin into the second half of 2024.
Operator: Thank you for that. And then your last question.
Fred Vogt: Yes, sure. Thanks for the question. So, I think that was like the two-part question, one of them was about how do we think about deltas that we are trying to achieve in the context of the study design and sample size. And the second question was about the crossover, so the first question, just I mean, I am just sitting in the office here is the design of the study is a randomized, comparative study, right. So, we are not shooting for specific deltas to an existing benchmark, we are shooting for a different or a hazard ratio between the two arms. What you usually do when you design a study like that, we do look at the best available information about what you might be expecting in your control arm and then you are powering in order to be able to get the difference or the hazard ratio is a little different from how we would have done this and are doing it in our single arm design.
The information that we are pulling in for that is pretty straightforward, it’s available information on what you are seeing in a frontline population of patients treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy and the information is available in the USPI for pembro or in publication. That’s probably as much as I can say here. The confidence here comes from our knowledge of what we are currently seeing in our COM-202 Cohort 1A, where the response rate is 66.7% with our last update and that would compare to something that’s in the low 30% for pembrolizumab monotherapy. So, that gives you an idea around the ORR. The crossover, so yes, obviously, the crossovers are something that you have to keep in mind as you are thinking about an overall survival endpoint, but that is exactly the reasons why overall survival is not a primary endpoint yet.
