 So the I-stop-MMM study, or the Iceland Screen Streets or Prevents Multiple Myeloma Study, is the first population-based screening study for monoclonal comopathy of undetermined significance, or AMGAS, which is the precursor of myeloma, and then a follow-up clinical trial, which is ongoing in Iceland. So the objective of the study is to see whether we can use screening to implement early treatment in myeloma and hopefully improve outcomes. And what are the potential benefits of that type of screening, and what are the potential harms, and then weigh them and decide whether we should screen for myeloma, essentially. So during the conduction of the trial, we have identified around 3,000, then 700 people or so with monoclonal comopathy. What we see in our findings, and the findings that I was presenting here at ASH this year, is that we are finding people with, of course, AMGAS, but also small during myeloma and wine smoldering, Alton-Stromes, which is a related disease. We are actually finding myeloma cases and, or cases of related disease earlier, about one year earlier, and we see that when people come in with myeloma to us from screening, people have sort of different disease. They have less symptomatic disease, and they also present in a non-acute manner. So myeloma patients quite often present in an acute setting where they have severe end organ disease, which is, of course, can be very hard to deal with both from the standing of the patient and also medically speaking how to apply therapies in that setting. And we see that a reduction by 75% of those types of presentations after screening. So what we're really seeing is that screening changes how multiple myeloma shows up. We diagnose it earlier, and we diagnose it at a stage where it is less severe, we can apply early treatment. And hopefully, that will need to improve outcomes, and that's what we don't know yet. I think that's an important caveat, which is that we need longer follow-up in order to know whether this early detection actually leads to meaningful benefits, or are we just giving people another year where they're on therapy, we really need to know that we're improving their long-term outcomes. And that's what we're waiting for now. It shows that screening is feasible. We did it, and it really changes how myeloma shows up clinically. And we hope that this will not need to improve outcomes, but we haven't seen that yet. We need a longer time for that. And then there's the question of whether it's worth it to do this. That's something that we haven't seen yet. And when I say worth it, I'm talking from an economical and resource utilization standpoint. We know how healthcare systems are strained as it is. So it's very important that we know that there is significant benefit, and it's worth it to do the screening. Your screening is, of course, a very big intervention in the lives of many people. And we're hoping that by doing this type of screening, similar to breast cancer screening or colorectal cancer screening, that we're really improving outcomes in myeloma. And I think our data is promising, but it's not enough. We need more follow-up, and I need to know more about how this really impacts the outcomes.