Karsten Munk Knudsen: Yes. So as always, when forecasting, then we take into account demand in the market, competition and supply capacity. So those factors are what we weighed into guidance, both in terms of the pricing environment in the U.S. to maintain a high degree of formulary access at PBM basis. And then on the volume basis, I would say that is more a question about supply capacity since we’re not competing for share given the magnitude of the markets.
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Karsten. And over to Martin.
Martin Holst Lange: Yes. Thank you very much. So for the ESSENCE NASH study, we expect to see a readout around the turn of this year. And then progress towards regulatory filing. The FGF21 study is a Phase 2 trial actually also investigating the effect of IcoSema and NASH, and we’ll see that readout a little bit later.
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Martin. And we’re ready for the next question.
Operator: Thank you. We will now take the next question. One moment please. And the next question comes from the line of Sachin Jain from Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Sachin Jain: Thanks for taking my questions. Sachin Jain from Bank of America. Firstly, just on amycretin, back to you, Martin. The plan to progress your commentary is very vague, particularly for the oral formulation. So we’re not going to just ask you why you’re being vague at the moment and the factors that go into that decision, one would assume an oral CagriSema would be exciting, so why not commit? So just what are you waiting for? And then the second question on supply. Thanks for the color on doubling of the lower doses for Wegovy in the coming months. Should I assume there’s ability to further supply at the lower dose or is doubling the limit for full-year ’24? Thank you.
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Sachin. So, Martin, first to you, and then Karsten, you’ll take the supply question.
Martin Holst Lange: So thank you very much, Sachin. I’m not sure I’m being vague. We’re just saying that we’re not communicating Phase 1 data. I think you will hear or see or you will see us progress should the data confirm in both the subcutaneous, but also potentially the oral. The reason why we are pursuing both in Phase 1 is obviously providing optionality. We see a big demand, and we need to provide flexibility and optionality, having both an oral and a subcutaneous is providing that. When it comes to the efficacy, you’ve heard us say a number of times and we’ll stay with that. We want to see differentiated products and that goes for both the subcutaneous and the oil in the marketplace. And what we have seen so far if amycretin brings us confidence that amycretin in both oral and subcutaneous when we see the data has that potential.
Karsten Munk Knudsen: Yes. Sachin, and thank you for the Wegovy question. So to be a little bit more precisely vis-à-vis Wegovy. Then what we have done is that we have increased our supply of the start of doses by more than double. So that has taken place. And as we have also previously communicated, then we will continue to gradually expand our supply of starter doses as well as all dose strengths and we’ll gradually scale that as we’re scaling our supply capacity, so we have a sustainable supply chain in place including the necessary inventories to avoid the [indiscernible] pattern that we show on the past.
Sachin Jain: Thank you.
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Sachin, for the questions. And we’re ready for the next set of questions.
Operator: Thank you. We will now take the next question. And the next question comes from the line of Martin Parkhoi from SEB. Please go ahead.
Martin Parkhoi: Great. Thank you very much. Two questions. Firstly, on the regional development, we saw a very big imbalance this year, at least in the especially in fourth quarter between North America and International Operations. How should we see that in going into 2024? I don’t expect to get precise numbers, but just some words compared in relation to the guidance that you have. And then second question, you are doing some re-prioritization among other things removing Levemir from the U.S. market. How far can you actually go? And how cynical can you be to prioritize less on insulin, and of course, more of the production capacity on the GLP-1 franchise?
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Martin. Karsten, the first question related to the guidance on regional, and then the Lars you about the portfolio prioritizations.
Karsten Munk Knudsen: Yes. So as to the regional dynamics, I’d say these are classic dynamics when people, as yourself, have followed the company for an extended period of time, then there will be this type of seasonality. So then talking into 2024, the growth drivers remain the same, again, Rybelsus, Wegovy and Ozempic. And the real difference what you saw in 2023 is actually that on Type 1 diabetes, the growth levels were similar, just north of 50%, both in IO and North America. So the fundamental difference is the pace of Wegovy rollout. And of course, the North America are rolling ahead of IO, But it is important to note that we will be launching in additional IO markets in the volume cap rate for Wegovy into 2024, but you should expect North America still to be rolling at a higher pace than IO.
Daniel Bohsen: Thank you, Karsten. Lars, over to you.
Lars Fruergaard Jorgensen: Thank you, Martin. On portfolio prioritization, I think you should see us as being committed to people living with diabetes and in need of insulin, when we look at Levemir, specifically in the U.S. we have a situation where we have Tresiba as well. We will be launching our weekly insulin. And we also see dynamics where we have lost a contract on Levemir. So for us to stay committed to patients is also leading to us, then thinking carefully about what are the most, optimal ways of treating those patients with the emulsification products. And on GLP-1, there’s also the optimization in moving patients from daily treatment to weekly treatment where you get high efficacy and obviously an easier to produce presentation as you reduce the number of injections and presentations needed.
