 Yeah, so there were different CAR T presentations, but I think the most interesting one was the update of the CAR T2-1 trial, in which they showed that now with a median follow-up of more than 27 months, they still haven't achieved the median progression-free survival. So that means that patients in six-line therapy receiving this CAR T-cell product have a chance to be progression-free survival after 27 months of more than 50%. I think these are really impressive results. So at the moment, there are only two countries in Europe where CAR T-cells can be given as a commercial product to patients beyond third line of therapy, and this is clearly a problem because not all countries in Europe have access, and furthermore the amount of CAR T-cells that are available is limited. So we see now about 20 patients per year in Germany per month that can be treated all over Germany, which means that a lot of patients that are potentially qualifying will never have a chance to get the CAR T-cell product, unfortunately. I think that's what several companies are working on, and also some research groups. So one of the issues is the identiviral transduction system that is required, and there is a shortage where that's one of the reasons why not sufficient CAR T-cell products can actually be delivered to patients. So that's probably one of your next questions is our Caramba trial, so we're trying to get around the identiviral. So we do a non-viral transduction system, so not depending on identiviral production, and also to speed up the process considerably, and there are other strategies also allowing to speed up the process, because now often a patient has to wait six or eight weeks from the time of lucrophoresis until they finally get the CAR T-cell product, and that is often too long for a very aggressive multiple myeloma. So a lot of things are being done, and I'm hopefully that we are going to improve this. Development is allocars, so these are CAR T-cells taken from another person, and this could be an off-the-shelf product, so this could be also a major improvement in the availability of the CAR T-cell for our patients. So what we see now, and I'm afraid we are going to see this increasingly, is that the target on the myeloma cell that is addressed by biospecific antibodies and CAR T-cells, and that's mainly BCMA, that is going to be lost from the myeloma cell, and that's when the CAR T-cell and the biospecific targeting this antigen is no more active. So we have, we call this antigen loss, and so we need biospecific antibodies and CAR T-cells that are targeting other surface antigens, and that's what we do with the SLAMF 7 in the Caramba Trial. So a new target, a new production, so we do it much quicker than the conventional CAR T-cells that are produced at the moment, and we have a specific safe switch also included, and we are now entering the false dose level, so we haven't seen any major toxicity fortunately, and we now start seeing also efficacy. But we're still in the dose escalation phase of this trial. So we've seen several updates, and what we can see in general is that the biospecific antibodies are not as effective as CAR T-cells, so the overall response rate is about 60% with CAR T-cells, it can go up to 100%. The complete remission rate with biospecific is max 30-35%, with the CAR T-cells it can go up to 82% in the earlier trials, up to 90%. With a progression-free survival it's, we have to see, because the follow-up is not long enough, but some of the biospecifics already provide the same progression-free survival when compared to CAR T-cells. So they're very promising, and they are off the shelf products as we can start to give them directly, and the toxicity is also lower. One issue with the biospecific seems to be infectious complications, and I think we have to better manage and prophylax infections in patients receiving biospecifics. So this is the hypothesis that CAR T-cell is a one-shot treatment. This has been shown for some patients with ALL and CLL, where the CAR T-cells can persist for 10 years, and the patients are probably cured. Now in myeloma the CAR T-cells are not persisting such a long time, and therefore we don't know whether we can actually cure a patient with CAR T-cells. With a biospecific you are right, it's a continuous treatment, but again I personally believe we shouldn't give them until progression. We should stop until when they achieve the best response, and then retreat when the patient starts progressing again. So it's a must, because if you give a biospecific too long your immune cells get exhausted, and then you start to get these infectious complications that have been observed. So I think that's a very important question, and you already alluded to this, that CAR T-cells is a kind of treatment where you give it once and then everything, the myeloma, is away, and this is unfortunately probably not the case in most of the patients that we have treated now. So we need something after CAR T-cells, and melanoma, Maffototin could be a potential treatment for patients after CAR T-cell therapy, and maybe also before CAR T-cell therapy. I would presume that you would not go in with Belama, Belama, Maffototin before the patient has actually gone completely offside effects from the CAR T-cells, or I don't think there will be additional toxicity, and the toxicity of the blood rep is completely different from CAR T-cells, it's this ocular toxicity that is fortunately enough reversible. Now I think what I would like to say to the patients is that I'm very happy for us as the treating physicians, but also for the patients that we have so many new options, and a lot of these new options are so effective, and I think we now already have seen that we can control the disease much better than it maybe for five or ten years ago, and I think with all the new drugs I think we really have the option to cure patients with multiple miles.