Thank you Panna. In the next five minutes or so, I will take you through some more details of LP-184 and pancreatic cancers, as well as LP-184 in glioblastomas and ATRT, and in addition, I'll introduce our newest molecule, LP-284. As you all may know, for pancreatic cancers, the current standard-of-care regimen is what is often known as FOLFIRINOX, which consists of Fluorouracil, Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin. However, less than 25% of patients with pancreatic cancer survive the first year of diagnosis and less than 8% who survived beyond five years. So, obviously, there's a great need to improve therapy. The activity of our drug, LP-184 in pancreatic cancers is therefore very encouraging, not only for this, but for additional reasons I will elaborate upon. One particularly aggressive form of pancreatic cancers, sometimes called the unstable subtype, frequently harbors mutations in DNA damage response genes. And the proportion is quite significant, over 20% of pancreatic cancers show mutations in sub genes. Among them APM is mutated in up to 5% of sporadic pancreatic cancers. Using PDX models, we validated LP-184 efficacy in pancreatic cancers, with mutations in ATM, BRCA2, and other DNA damage response genes such as [indiscernible] and ERCC. Mutated ATM is particularly interesting because, in addition, it imparts homologous recombination deficiency character, but also even when it is heterozygous, it can cause metastatic aggressive cancers to undergo what is often known as epithelial mesenchymal transition, which negatively impacts prognosis. Although such aggressiveness goes along side with enhanced deficiency of DNA repair, the vulnerability it causes can be further explored -- exploited by LP-184 because our in-silico correlations using the NCI cell [ph] minor, strongly suggest that LP-184 molecule has enhanced efficacy in those tumors that have such EMT pathways. Of course, more recently, inhibitors of PARP have shown clinical efficacy in homologous recombination defective pancreatic cancers, but it's important to note that such treatment often results in resistance to PARP within the first year of treatment. Along with the PDX models, which are deficient in homologous recombination pathways, we have also conducted original experiments that included downregulation of ERCC4, a nucleotide excision repair gene using CRISPR-based knockout strategies. The result was increased sensitivity of such tumors that are NER deficient by a factor of twofold. What this strongly supports is the notion that LP-184 is synthetically lethal in not only homologous recombination deficient, but also in nucleotide excision repair deficient tumors. We are particularly excited by this observation of synthetic lethality, as it opens the applicability of LP-184 in other NER-deficient tumors. Important example would be bladder cancers, where over 30% of tumors have mutations that disrupt NER repair. It also opens other doors, the possibilities of using LP-184 in combination with molecules that disrupt DNA damage repair. As Panna highlighted earlier, we have filed IT [ph] in areas where we have seen the potential for combination approaches with our drug candidates. So, in terms of our future directions, we are focusing on developing combination approaches with PARP inhibitors and other DNA damaged repair protein inhibitors, including those that would inhibit the ERCC proteins. This combination approach will increase the vulnerability of pancreatic cancers to LP-184 and broaden the genomic subtypes of pancreatic cancers that will respond to LP-184. But in addition, it also provides an avenue to overcome or retard resistance to existing therapy. Now, since the key enzyme that drives the sensitivity of tumors to LP-184, which is PTGR1 is regulated by stress mechanisms. We are exploring the hypothesis that other modalities of treatments such as radiation will increase PTGR1 expression, and therefore, rendered tumors following radiation to enhanced tumoricidal activity of LP-184. Such a possibility will provide another dimension to LP-184 for treatment of local lesions in combination with radiation. This is particularly of interest, since over half of solid tumors are initially treated with radiation and the localized upregulation of PTGR1 provides a vulnerability window for the tumors that will hypothetically further protect against toxicities to non-tumor cells. I'm going to now shift the themes to research studies in CNS tumors. We have convincing data for efficiency and efficacy of LP-184, in glioblastomas and another rare CNS tumor called ATRT. We have obtained this efficacy data in in-vivo models using both subcutaneous and for glioblastoma subcutaneous as well as orthotopic models. Interestingly, both these indications were initially suggested by in-silico gene correlations, using the NCSL miner and our RADR platform. Low or absent expression of smarD1, which is an obligate genomic lesion of ATRT created with a significant correlation of negative 0.4 with efficacy of LP-184. We believe based upon other published data that loss of this chromatin modifying protein imparts a DNA repair deficiency phenotype to cells and thus makes tumors such as ATRT vulnerable to LP-184. In some ways, therefore, the selectivity is similar to what we are seeing in pancreatic cancers. Similarly, in glioblastoma, our RADR data predicts specific subsets of glioblastomas such as those with active EGFR pathways to be highly sensitive to LP-184. Another very exciting observation for us from our in-silico analysis is the prediction that expression of MGMT correlates with increased cytotoxicity of LP-184. The reason this is particularly relevant is because expression of MGMT imparts resistance to the standard-of-care temozolomide. Over 50% of glioblastoma, therefore, do not respond to temozolomide. We believe therefore, LP-184 has the potential to be an alternative, both as monotherapy and in combination with temozolomide for glioblastomas, Our future preclinical collaborations with Johns Hopkins are particularly directed to provide additional evidence for such applications in glioblastoma, -- particularly in those glioblastomas that have reversed their silence of expression of MGMT. We expect to have more news of this in the coming weeks. Early preclinical screening of LP-184 in a wide variety of tumors, conclusively highlighted selectivity of 184 in solid tumors, but also lack of activity of 184 in hematological cancers. Interestingly, the positive NN tumor of this compound is what we have now built for our newest drug candidate, which is named LP-184, which appears to be quite active in several hematologic cancers. Our working hypothesis is that the molecule 284 because of its scurrility is independent of PTGR1, but dependent upon other oxidoreductases. 284, which is a new molecule for hematological cancers, like 184, severely damages tumor DNA and the damage inflict shutdown of RNA synthesis. This shutdown persists longer, particularly in blood cancers with slow DNA repair efficiency. Many hematologic cancers, including those with translocations, which are quite common in hematologic malignancies, involving [indiscernible] have evidence of low expression of DNA repair genes. The prolonged shutdown of transcription starts such tumors have short lived proteins that they are addicted to and cannot live without. We have also obtained evidence that the efficacy of LP-284 can be broadened to hematologic cancers by combination with drugs that degrade repair proteins, such as ERCC3. We are now actively engaged in developing collaborations to further our development of LP-284 in lipoid malignancies, including those with key unmet needs, such as double-hit lymphoma, and relapsed and resistant mantle cell lymphoma, as well as CML, which has shown resistance to kinase inhibitors. We expect to announce additional details on these findings and the indications later this year. With that, Panna, I turn this call back to you,