Scott Koenig: So, as you know, irrespective of what the product is, any CD3-based bispecific molecule when interacting with the regulatory agencies. There is a lot of prudence in terms of the dose escalation speeds in which these things can be conducted despite the fact that we had very significant data showing dramatic reductions in cytokine production in primate model systems and anticipate that we could move this faster. But having said that, we are following what was discussed with the FDA. We are right in the middle of dose escalation. The study is going well, and that’s all I can say at this point. My sense is that once the dose has been picked from that dose escalation and we go into a more Phase 2 like study, there may be greater opportunities to accelerate development. But again, that will be with either with Gilead, if they opt into the program after the Phase 1 or during Phase 1 or by ourselves if it warrants it. So, it’s still too early to tell.
Kaveri Pohlman: Makes sense. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Yigal Nochomovitz with Citigroup. Your line is open.
Yigal Nochomovitz: Hi Scott. Thanks for taking the questions. On the TAMARACK study in metastatic CRPC and then the Phase 1/2 dose escalation with the combo, and I think you mentioned CRPC there as well and you want to do an expansion. Can you just comment — are those patients — those prostate patients are relatively similar in their degree of pretreatment? You mentioned advanced solid tumors for CRPC. So, it wasn’t clear if it was similar or if the ones in the Phase 1/2 were more significantly pretreated versus TAMARACK? Thanks.
Scott Koenig: So, there are some slight differences in eligibility, we have a little bit wider in TAMARACK, but the majority of the patients will be quite similar. So, we obviously wanted to compare apples-to-apples with the modification of those. We obviously wanted to get this enrolled quickly. So, there was some minor changes, but I would say they will be very easily comparable to the previous data. And then the same story with the combo for whatever prostate patients come in very late-stage patients as well, typically have advanced on engine receptor targeting agents on a taxane and often experimental agents as well. So, we think the data set will be — we will be able to compare each one.
Yigal Nochomovitz: The reason I ask is because, I mean, if you do the prostate expansion in the Phase 1/2 with the vobra and lorigerlimab, and that looks really good. I’m just curious how you’re thinking about pivotal study and how you would register the product because whether you’d want to register with the monotherapy with vobra duo or if the lorigerlimab, vobra duo looks really good in prostate, if that would be the way to go forward to take the drug to the combo to market, that’s more of a strategic question, but just curious how you’re thinking about that?
Scott Koenig: Yes. So, obviously, we — this is a constant discussion. Obviously, we with the data on a lorigerlimab mono story being so encouraging, we decided to move a little bit up line with now going into chemo-naive patients but with androgen reset their experienced patients. So, that right now, there is no other checkpoint that is vying for that population. So, this is a great opportunity when we can demonstrate in that line of therapy success. With regard to the vobra story, either as monotherapy or potentially combination with Lori, that’s a nice problem to have. It both look very successful, both the results from TAMARACK and then the combo. So, we’ll address that as the data comes out next year.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Stephen Willey with Stifel. Your line is open.
