But I think when we do a more fulsome update, it will be easier to be able to begin to draw parallels across what we’re doing and what some of the other folks are doing. But I do think that to the extent you’re thinking about gene therapy needing to repair genetic defects and models having to have a specific defect so that gene therapy companies can show that they can fix that DNA and then have a clinical outcome from that. Our approach would be that we do not need to have such difficulty that we can use what I would characterize as cruder forms of deafness because we aren’t trapped by or forced into the narrow segment of a single gene being responsible for the absence of effective hearing.
Joe Pantginis: That makes great sense. I appreciate that. And I’m just going to just focus on one of your D words, and that’s the delivery. Obviously, you need the experiments to look at durability. So AAV is much smaller than cells and you’re dealing with a very limited volume environment, are you looking at what’s essentially been relatively standardized surgical techniques. Now I know this is pretty forward-looking, or is there something more unique to cells that we’d have to consider, or is it too early to really even go down that tally?
Brian Culley: You’re asking an excellent question because, of course, cells are much larger than viral vectors. And one place where we think that, that’s extremely interesting is in the setting of the eye. We know that viral vectors can travel across the optic chiasm and appear on the other contralateral untreated eye. So that makes control arms in that space a bit challenging. With respect to delivery to the ear, it is extraordinary to learn what is capable with tiny -tiny needles and a steady hand. So we do have some challenges in the deliver, as we do have challenges with the delivery to the spinal cord or to the eye or to everywhere because as you correctly note, if the stuff doesn’t get where it needs to be, it’s not going to work.
So I think what we will do is, we’ll share some of our findings and some of our methods in particular, at that update later this year. But I think that generally speaking, we have not — I can say that we have not needed to invent anything new in order to perform these preclinical studies. If that answer is at least helpful in the interim.
Joe Pantginis: No, it certainly does, Brian. Thanks a lot. I can’t wait to hear about it.
Brian Culley: Thank you, Joe.
Operator: That concludes today’s analyst call. I would now like to turn the call over to Brian Culley, for closing remarks.
Brian Culley: I would just like to say thank you, everyone. It’s exciting to have such great interest in all the things that we’re doing. And we will continue to work hard to make this company interesting and exciting and successful. Thank you. And have a great afternoon.
Operator: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.
