Steve Kelsey: Well, there’s clearly going to be additional follow-up on all these patients. I mean you’ll get more information on whether or not €“ well, firstly, there’s a bunch of patients that have been enrolled that haven’t yet been evaluated for efficacy. So we’ll have that. There will be more durability data, hopefully, to the patients that are currently on study. As Mark said, the investigators are beginning to lean into the selection of patients for this study, and it’s heavily biased towards non-small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer. And the epidemiology of that means that around half of them are going to have a G12D mutation, and probably a third of them are going to have a G12B mutation, and the rest will be a scattering of other things. So I would expect there to be a substantially larger database predominantly focused on pancreatic cancer and lung cancer with G12D and G12B being the major mutational forms that we report on.
Mark Goldsmith: Yes. I would just say, Eric, we have a discussion about when we do this midyear update. Midyear isn’t the date or a time. It’s just kind of the time of year. It’s a season. And so obviously, we’re giving you some information now which wasn’t necessarily contemplated previously. So we’re going to cut some more information. We’re going to try to make the next update a meaningful update incremental to this, but there’s no sort of prescribed formula, which is why asking us more about what we’ll have. We’ll have more patients and we’ll have more follow-up. That’s for sure. So…
Eric Joseph: Mark, with that comment, I take it that you’re not necessarily targeting presentation at one of the other major scientific meeting? Perhaps there’s some expectation that you guys will present at ASCO?
Mark Goldsmith: Well, as I pointed out previously, we could not link it specifically to a scientific meeting or not. We’ve left that unspoken. If we do a scientific meeting, we may still have a corporate session. And if we don’t do a scientific meeting, we’ll probably have the corporate session and then do a scientific meeting after that. So sort of all of the above are in play here.
Eric Joseph: Okay, great. Understood. Thanks for taking the questions, guys. Congratulations.
Operator: Our next question comes from Chris Shibutani with Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open.
Unidentified Analyst: Hi, everyone. This is Charlie on for Chris. Thank you so much for taking our questions, and congratulations on the data thus far. Just real quick from us. Regarding the 120 mg dose cohort, just wondering if you can give us a sense of how long these patients have been at this dose level and being dosed at this level? I understand that it’s probably at a lower €“ on the lower end of the range of duration of therapy that you guys gave us some color on there. But just trying to get a sense of how long they’ve been on drug. And also if you could give us a sense of the kinetics with the appearance of adverse events such as rash. Like how long does it typically take for the rash to show up? And is there the potential for the severity of rash to increase over time in subsequent cycles? Thank you very much.
Steve Kelsey: Let me address the second question first because it’s a more concrete question for which we actually have data. The duration €“ the time to onset of rash is between one week and two weeks into dosing, depending on the dose being used. So the higher doses, it tends to start sooner but not usually before one week of dosing has been completed. The severity does not increase over time. In fact, if anything, either stays the same or improves. We have had reports of patients whose rash has got better with just persistent dosing. And we have reports of patients whose rash remains unchanged and is easily manageable with cream, just like putting up with local treatment. These rashes are very much like EGFR associates rashes in that they don’t €“ they occur in different parts of the body in different people.
