 This is the first in-class GPRC5D targeting bispecific antibody. So that study showed that the response rate was over 70%. There were a couple of different doses studied, but for the most of this presentation, we'll focus on the 0.8 milligram per kilogram every two weeks. So every two week, subcutaneous drug. And that drug in a patient population that was heavily treated, five to six different chemotherapy regimens, including prior T cell redirection, showed a very impressive response rate of over 70%. And in that 0.8 every two week dosing, the progression cruise arrival was 14 months, which is really impressive for an off the shelf. And I think people may not have heard about, but at the Greece meeting at IMS, we showed that the PFS for high risk and standard disc were identical, which is rare to see in myeloma. We also have not seen a lot of infectious deaths, like even though this drug was accrued, the study was done during COVID. Unlike some of the other products, we didn't see a lot of infectious complications. We know that people can mount an antibody response to the COVID vaccines. So those are all of the plus points, but I think there's some unique side effects that we saw. These are what I would describe as untarget off tumor. And what that means is GPRC5D, yes it's expressed on myeloma, but there are other tissues that also express GPRC5D. So when you give a drug that's basically trafficking the T cells to anything that's expressing this target, the T cells are gonna kill that. And yes, that'll give you myeloma control, but it can give you lots of taste, peeling of the hands and feet, rashes, and then nail changes. And those have to do with what we think that where the GPRC is expressed. And so basically what the purpose of this study was, if that's the background, we know that TalcrataMAP median time to response is actually one month and median time to best response is three months. So as we really try to figure out these unique side effects, which you don't usually see with other myeloma drugs, what do we do? And the question was, well if the drug is so active and it works so quickly, can we back off on the drug in terms of dose and schedule in the patients who've had a response? And that's really the premise of this study at ASH. The infection rates with this drug are quite low compared to the other drugs in this space. So for example, BCMA bispecifix with the most follow have a grade three, four, which means serious infections of about 55%. Here we're seeing it about 20, 25%. Also, we're not seeing deaths from COVID as much. We only had two deaths out of almost 300, whereas the BCMA bispecifix have a lot more of those. So I think it's a generally favorable infection profile, also less neutropenia with lowering of white counts. So because we saw that the drug was highly active and worked quickly, we started with looking back at patients who had been treated already and looked at about 50 patients who had had a reduction in the dose intensity. They came from any of the three cohorts, either the weekly, every two-week, or either of those doses, but in a cohort of patients who had prior T-cell redirection therapies like CART-T and bispecific. And what we found in those 50 patients is there didn't seem to be any compromise of efficacy. The responses and progression physorobyl seemed to be very encouraging. The problem with that data is that it's not the right way to do the analysis because when you reduce a dose, it's usually people who are doing well, right? And so doctors and patients may not be as excited to reduce a dose in somebody who's not doing well, so can't really tease that apart. So then the second part of the study was actually to do it intentionally in what we call a prospective fashion. So take patients who are responding, what we call partial response or better, which means a 50% reduction that are more or higher, and then reduce it from there. And so that study showed that there was no apparent compromise again in efficacy and safety-wise. We saw that there was a hint of improvement in oral toxicities, skin toxicities, and also nail. We didn't see as much difference in weight. One other interesting finding that I think people may be intrigued to hear about is that as we were looking at this information, we realized that when you look at the first three months, patients who have these taste losses and peeling of the hands and feet, there's actually a 20% higher likelihood that they're gonna respond. So it's unique because in our solid tumor colleagues, they have drugs where if somebody has a rash, it actually means the drug is working. And we don't really have that in myeloma, right? And so here, this is unique because I wanna be, might make sure that people understand that the drug works in many patients and the side effects are very common, but should you have the side effect, it tends to mean that you have a better chance of responding, right? So it's not that if you don't have a side effect, you're not gonna respond, but I think that's an interesting finding and it's a different way of looking at the side effect rather than like, okay, this is, yes, we wanna minimize this, but it's actually a sign that maybe the drugs work for you. I think we'll have to study each drug by itself because each drug's dosing, schedule, route of administration is all different and the target, of course, is different because this is the only BGPRC-ID. But what I can tell you, which pertains a little bit to this is we wanted to look at also the immune fitness and what we found was that when patients had this planned dose reduction, the T cells became less exhausted. So what does that mean? I describe, you know, like, if you keep giving a bispecific repeatedly on schedule, it's like teenagers who party too hard and they get exhausted, right? And so what it turns out is if you take a break, those T cells don't get as beaten up and that made both well, both for not only the benefit of efficacy of the current treatment, but many of you even down the road for your next treatment. So I think that finding suggests that this may be something that could be studied in other drugs, but I want to be careful and not say that we should be doing this without proper study, but what other bispecifics targeting other targets are also similarly realizing that we're being in backing off seems to be beneficial. But again, I think it's important that people don't hear this information and say, well, why not start lower? Because if you are a heavily treated patient with myeloma, you need these initial starting doses, right? Because you know what's worse than side effects is having uncontrolled myeloma. So first we need to control the myeloma and then when we have that, we have the some breathing room to maybe adjust the dose. The one final thing I would add is that in a hundred or so patients, I've treated with Toccautamabally, one person has come off for side effects and not for disease progression. And it's not that I've had a magic sauce, I work with the patient and I'm like, listen, the drug's working for you. We're gonna, if you're having these side effects, we're gonna find the right dose and schedule. And I think the other thing I would want patients to know is that if and when somebody comes off the drug, these side effects are reversible. So it's not that this is, okay, whatever you have, this is the rest of your life. So yeah, I think that's, hopefully it'll give patients hope that this drug really is a lot of potential for them.