 I'm happy to be here to share our experience from Cambodia. So first, let's start with an overview of the disease and the treatment. So hepatitis C can be acute, but not most of patients become chronic. And then the chronic infection lasts a lifetime, at least a serious labor problem including cirrhosis or labor cancer. And there are six genotypes. In Cambodia, we mainly have genotype 6 and genotype 1. And then there is the revolutionary treatment options in recent layers coming out. It's direct acting antivirus. The cure rate can be as high as 95%. So in Cambodia, we use a softened dye combination. It's pan genotyping, it's efficacious, it's safe, and the patient needs to receive a treatment for three or six months and to reach the 95% of cure rate. However, DAAs in resource constraint countries, the experience is limited and a significant proportion of patients lack of access to treatment. So with this background, MSF launched the hepatitis C clinic in Pre-Cosmic Hospital in Phnom Penh in September 2016. Very quickly, the clinic was overwhelmed by patient load and was unable to face this situation because of the space constraints. And what was even worse was the waiting time to get a result. It took one week for serology test result, two months of rare load, and three months for genotype. So it was decided to put a quota on new patients and to prioritize to treat F3 to F4 patients. But still, waiting lists continue growing. And we quickly, the waiting list increased to over 3,500 patients. And we finally had to stop to screen new patients until we finished the backlog until July. So you can see from this graph, at the beginning we had a, okay, we had 50 visits per day and they quickly grow to more than 200 visits per day and with only four doctors. Okay, let's see what was our model at the beginning. This was based on the easel guideline in 2016. You can see the visits, including the labs, counseling, consultations, and it allowed us to provide some services for the cirrhosis complications management. So from screening to cure, patients need to make 16 visits. And a turnaround time between the first visit and treatment initiation was about three months. So keep in mind, we have 3,500 patients waiting for the treatment, and at least this continued growing. So we had to figure out a better way to serve our patients, faster but without jeopardizing the quality of care. So first question, can we simplify the test algorithm? Can we stop genotyping? So we have the majority of the patients with genotype one and genotype six. Genotype one was a very well studied about the efficacy of soft-dac combination, but we knew a little about genotype six. So we demonstrated the effectiveness of a soft-dac on genotype six. And from then on, we decided we can safely stop genotyping. Genotyping was taken three months to obtain and the cost 70 US dollar. And then furthermore, we did the operational research on gene expert virulote on genotype six. So we were able to switch from central testing to gene expert virulote point of care. So instead of waiting for one to two weeks for the result, the patient can get the result in one day and we save 80 dollar. And we also switched from ELISA to SD-BioLin on capillary blood. It's even making the screening faster and easier. So by all that, the diagnosis of virumic patients can be obtained in one day instead of three months and the cost of the screening decreased from 170 US dollar to less than 20 US dollar. And also adapt our criteria for endoscopy and ultrasound to simplify the algorithm even more. And then finally, we decided to keep Fibroscan because we find that Fibroscan result is strongly correlated with failure and the complicated cases. Also Fibroscan is fairly easy to perform and it's much easier to use to define Fibroscan stage than using lab tests. So Fibroscan state. And then we did more changes in patient management with separate screening from treatment activity to have a better, to have a more efficient patient flow. And we did task shifting from doctor to nurse or pharmacist and we removed less clinical, meaningful visits. So now we finally reach our current simplified model. If you don't remember how many visits our patients need to do, on the top was the full model and to compare with the full model, the bottom is the current simplified model. So first visit, second visit, third, fifth, and sixth, and that's it. So we, with a total of six visits, including one medical consultation. And so we reduced the visits from 16 to six and the doctor visits now is only one with a simplified model. The patients only need to see the doctor at the initiation. So we reduced the turnaround time between the first visit and the treatment initiation become less than one week and it can be even within a couple of days. What about an impact on treatment as we made such big change? So we can see the treatment initiation per month. We increase from 150 maximal with four doctors to not over 400 patients with the three doctors. And you can see there's like low bars because at that point, we had a near stock rupture. So we had to limit the number of initiation. And then the median days between screening and initiation reduced from more than three months to nowadays less than one week. And the impact on patient safety and outcome. Serious adverse event occurrence is very low. And when the adverse event occur, the majority are due to cirrhosis complications. And minor side effects are rare, it facilitates good adherence. And sustained a very response at 12 weeks after treatment to finish was 69%. I consider we have more than 80% of patients with advanced five versus. So after hearing our experience, actually on the way of simplification, we are trying to balance the two questions. Expanding treatment to all or managed cirrhosis, treat the cirrhotic. What would you choose when you see these two options? So what if I say by manage the cirrhosis and treat the cirrhotic, your team need to do 5,000 ultrasounds and 2,500 endoscopies next year. And as a consequence, your team capacity to treat patients decrease from 25,000 to 5,000. But in the same time, you are able to diagnose 300 cancer patients and perform 1,250 ligatures, which might be life saving. Also by doing that, you actually manage to reduce the number of, reduce the number of F4 patients that you're treating from 7,500 to 5,000. And by doing that, you also managed, you didn't manage to increase the life year you saved, you actually reduce the life a year saved by a third. So at this point, what would you choose? Okay, so from our experience, we had some lesson learned. First, simplification is essential in delivering hepatitis C treatment for the patients in resource limited contacts. And care quality can be maintained through simplification. And the benefit gained from simplification and scale up treatment all the way the potential benefit of cirrhosis management model. Thanks for the team. Thanks, everybody.