Yes, both – one of the abstracts is demonstrating top line data, particularly the secondary – primary, but also the secondary endpoints. The study showed, I can give you a general overview. I won't get into the specifics of take away anything from the abstract. But generally, as was mentioned earlier, we met our primary endpoint. It favored the somatrogon over genotropin. This was true not only at 12 months but also at six months. We also looked at other secondary endpoints such as IGF1. We also looked at height SDS. And again, it showed a consistent data favoring the somatrogon treatment. Something that I think the data will show. And when you do see it if you later when it's presented is that there's a consistency finding the data favored somatrogon, both in terms of age, when you separate the patients as per age, or gender or also at the baseline, the severity of growth hormone deficiency. So that, I think, consistently really demonstrates well for the program or the product. Also, the safety was, again, comparable to genotropin. And we'll have more details on that. We will also have an analysis, which I think has become important as the IGF-1. On IGG-1. There will be an oral presentation on that were one of our presenters, the person who actually did a lot of statistics on it to demonstrate what are the changes in IGF-1 throughout the treatment, throughout the year. And as you know, it's used as a way to monitor treatment with growth hormone to ensure that we're dosing properly throughout the year. And all I can say is, I think, with the abstract will show is that when you take the IGF-1, the estimated mean IGF-1 for those patients throughout the 12 months, that we have a very low percentage of patients that have higher and in two, which is the what's required is below and IGF-1 SDS below two. So I think we're in very good shape from that aspect. But again, it's going to be presented at the meeting in more detail.