Brian Lian: Yes. Thanks, Yale. Well, we would hope to pursue an IND in the U.S. following completion of this study. And so we would hope to pursue that sometime by around the midyear time point and then proceed from there. And we will have more information and details around the plans for Phase II once we release the Phase I data.
Yale Jen: Okay, great. Thanks and I appreciate it.
Brian Lian: Thanks Yale.
Operator: The next question comes from Scott Henry of ROTH Capital. Please go ahead.
Scott Henry: Thank you and good afternoon. Just a couple of questions. First, spending in the quarter was a little higher than earlier in the year. How should we think about spending in 2023 relative to 2022? And perhaps the cadence throughout the year as far as the quarters?
Gregory Zante: Hey Scott, I think we did make the comment, Brian, did in the earlier comments that our R&D expenses will be pretty consistent. We expect in 2023 versus 2022 in total for the year. So I think those drive most of our spending, the R&D expenses do. So I guess we could think about our spending lining up pretty closely with our R&D expenditure. So if we are – we look at that pretty consistently, I think.
Scott Henry: Okay. And consistent through the year as well, any trends we should factor in?
Brian Lian: No, I would say pretty evenly throughout the year, just looking at the plans ahead. So yes, I would say pretty evenly.
Scott Henry: Okay. Great. That is helpful. And Brian, sort of a big-picture question. Clearly, the valuation of the company has changed over the last months. Does that impact your strategy with some of these assets going forward just in terms of development, perhaps how long you keep them and the options that are available to you?
Brian Lian: Scott, well, not really. We have always said that when we look at some of these large indications like NASH it would be preferable to have a larger party involved in Phase III and beyond. And that is still our preference. I think as the market cap changes, you might have more opportunities to do things yourselves. But that doesn’t change our preference to have a partner involved in later-stage studies.
Scott Henry: Okay. Great and final question, just with regards to 2735, obviously, obesity is a very hot indication right now in significant market. Is there anything in your safety profile or your expected safety profile that would make it better or worse than similar agents out there? I mean, diabetes is certainly a more straightforward market, but obesity. Just wondering how it compares to other similar class agents.
Brian Lian: Yes, I think on tolerability, it is a challenge to differentiate. If you modulate the GLP-1 receptor because it is hard to extricate efficacy from nausea with that mechanism and so I think the plus is that clinicians and patients both are aware of that titration seems to help, and it is generally transient. It happens early. And if you can get through the first month or two of dosing, then you are probably past most of those tolerability issues. And I think there is receptivity to – or at least acceptance of tolerability issues if you are confident that you are going to lose weight, and that is the big differentiating feature of these agents is they just induce profound weight loss. So I think it is hard to separate on tolerability when you have this mechanism, but I think it is okay given the familiarity and most patients will accept it if they know they are going to lose weight.
Scott Henry: Okay. Thank you for taking the questions.
Brian Lian: Thanks Scott.
Operator: The next question comes from Justin Zelin of BTIG. Please go ahead.
