Herantis Pharma Oyj

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Herantis Pharma's webcast covering our results and key developments for the first half of 2026. Thank you for joining us today. My name is Antti Vuolanto. I'm the CEO of Herantis, joined today by CFO Tune Kuole and CMO Juha Savola. During the presentation, we will provide an update on our progress during the first half of the year, including the latest developments with HER96 and our plans going forward. We will also have a short discussion with our new chief medical officer Juha Saavola, who recently joined Herantis as we prepare for the next stage of HER96 clinical development. Following the presentation, we will have a Q&A session. You can submit questions at any time through the webcast dashboard. A recording of today's webcast will also be made available after the live broadcast. Before we get started, please take a moment to note the customary disclaimer shown on the screen. And with that, let's begin. So Herantis Pharma, we are a clinical stage public company developing disease modifying therapies for Parkinson's disease. And we are listed on the Nasdaq first North growth market here in Finland. Our lead asset HER96 is now ready to move forward to phase two efficacy trial. based on the very encouraging phase one data set. So we have evaluated ER96 in Parkinson's patients and in healthy volunteers. We have demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profile. We have demonstrated efficient brain penetration and we also have a strong biomarker data set that suggests a biological response in Parkinson's patients and the response being consistent with the proposed mechanism of action. In addition to that, we are in a very special situation as we also have earlier biological validation with the CDNF cerebral dopamine neurotrophic factor, a neurotrophic factor biology in previous clinical and translational studies. So CDNF is a naturally occurring protein that protects and restores the function of dopaminergic neurons. And now with HER96, we can bring the same activity to the brain using very convenient subcutaneous administration. So we believe that we are in a very strong position when we now go towards the phase two efficacy trials. If I shortly summarize the different aspects providing a very strong foundation for the phase two development. First of all, we have significant unmet clinical need in Parkinson's disease. Currently, the patients can have symptomatic treatment addressing motor symptoms at the early stage of the disease or right after the diagnosis. However, no disease modifying drugs affecting the disease progression exist as of today. So there is large and growing market with high unmet clinical need. I will actually discuss that a bit further details shortly. The approach that we have with HER96, the mechanism of action derived from CDNF, is very broad mechanism addressing actually the very core disease biology. And this really puts us in a very specific proposal considering the other potentially disease modifying therapies in development. I will also discuss a little bit more about the competition or the situation in the disease modifying therapy space in Parkinson's disease. As already mentioned, the phase one data and the preceding preclinical data with HERD96 is very encouraging and very strong compared to the peers, considering the data set that leads to phase two. And we do have a very strong rationale for phase two, the specific design that we have being created and are still finalizing the clinical, the biomarker, the translational evidence provides that strong rationale that we will then test in phase two to show a patient benefit, the efficacy in phase two. I already mentioned about the unmet clinical need. So the current therapies are symptomatic therapies that only treat the motor symptoms, not the disease itself. And there are very severe non-motor symptoms that cannot be treated today. Even though at the early stage of the disease, many patients can have efficient symptomatic benefit from the current treatments, there are also a number of patients who either don't get the benefit or they may have significant side effects. And what is especially important is to know that the effectiveness of the current treatments decline over time when the underlying disease progresses so all the patients who are diagnosed with the Parkinson's disease they know that there will be the day when the current treatments are not efficiently enough supporting their quality of life and it will be compromised at some point of time and we want to make a change here and this is of course associated with huge huge potential considering the market size. So currently there are 10 or maybe 12 million patients suffering from Parkinson's disease globally. It is expected to over double until the year 2050 when approximately 25 million patients might be suffering from Parkinson's disease. And today the total economic impact or burden on Parkinson's globally today exceeds 250 billion US dollars. So we are talking about huge unmet clinical need, huge market. The therapeutic market currently is approximately 6 billion or 7 billion US dollars a year with these symptomatic treatments. we estimate that, and there are many estimates that say that it will at least double when the first disease modifying treatments will enter the market. And of course our ambition is to be there. And there is very strong pharma interest in disease modifying therapies in Parkinson's disease. For example, Roche, Eli Lilly, AbbVie, MSD, all of these large players have publicly said that they are really interested in this space So the opportunity is huge. And a short update about the current situation about the disease modifying therapies, where HER96 has a very strong position as based on the very broad mechanism addressing the core biology and the potential to protect and even restore the neuronal function. So despite of the huge unmet clinical need, the huge market, the treatment pipeline remains rather limited. And most of the competing programs, they focus on relatively narrow mechanisms. including immunotherapies against alpha-synuclein protein aggregates, kinase inhibition or lysosomal or GBA pathways. And also there are cell replacement therapies. Looking at phase three, there is one compound from Roche, which is alpha-synuclein immunotherapy going into phase three. It hasn't yet started, but it will be initiated rather soon. And in phase two, actually, there have been some news during the summertime. So there have been these genetic lysosomal targets, both from Biogen Denali and then a Portuguese company called Bial, which both have reported negative outcomes in the summertime and both of these companies have announced that they will discontinue the treatment, discontinue the development. Cell therapies has been discussed also in Finland in the newspapers, and that might be a promising technology. However, there are many challenges in the practicalities related to cell therapies. Cell therapies means that you grow neurons outside of the human body, then you implant them into the anatomical place with with a rather complicated surgery and then with the hope that the new neurons can be active at the site. And there are some promising results. However, it is most likely not very suitable to treat millions of Parkinson's patients or 250,000 new diagnosed cases in the US annually. So it can be a limited niche product, but it definitely cannot saturate the market. So based on this, when Heron96 will continue to phase two development, we are in a very good and very strong position among disease modification in Parkinson's disease. So we are planning for the phase two efficacy trial in early stage Parkinson's disease patients. This phase two efficacy proof of concept study aims to show improvement in motor symptoms using continuous objective monitoring of motor symptoms with sensitive digital devices. And with that, we have partnered with INDIVI, who, for example, provided the same platform for Biogen's LUMA trial with approximately 600 participants. We also will have clinical symptom assessments as a standard practice and also different brain imaging modalities as a measure of the disease modification. and of course we will exploit the great biomarker data that we've got from phase 1b and we will have selected fluid biomarkers to complement the data packets. The phase 2 trial itself will be randomized placebo-controlled double-blinded trial with two different parts. The first part will be nine months placebo-controlled part and then the next six months will be open label. So all the participants will get HER96 treatment. Approximately 100 early stage Parkinson's disease patients, and they will get two subcutaneous 300 milligram injections per week or placebo in the first part of the trial. And the preparations for this European study are underway. we already have very much advanced discussions with a number of clinical sites across different countries, Nordics and Middle Europe and Southern Europe to have sufficient number of sites to recruit the patients within. hopefully 12 months. So we expect to submit the clinical trial application by the end of this year, have the first patient in the protocol during the first half of next year, and the interim efficacy data readout early 2029, followed shortly after by the full data set of phase two. As announced earlier in the spring, we also had a discussion with FDA about our plans and their feedback supports the planned phase two development strategy. They considered the trial design appropriate for phase two. They didn't raise any concerns about the data package that we discussed with them. So basically the feedback supports submitting an IND. So potentially we could also have regulatory approval from FDA to conduct the phase two trial. So let's go to the business highlights of the first half of 2026. In January, we reported positive biomarker data that showed a very clear biological response to her 96 treatment in people living with Parkinson's disease. And the biological response was very much aligned with the expectations with the proposed mechanism of action. So improvements in proteostasis and mitochondrial function capacity. In February, we completed a directed share issue. We raised 4.2 million euros in that transaction. Further in February, we also announced that a consortium led by Herantis was selected to receive a 8 million euro grant to support the phase two trial of HER96. and the acronym of that EU project is HERMOD. So it covers part of the planned phase two trial that we are going to initiate later. In March, our chief scientific officer, Henri Huttunen, provided or delivered an oral presentation at ADPD 2026 Congress presenting the Phase 1b data. That was also a very important scientific milestone for the company. In May, we announced a collaboration with Indivi's digital biomarker platform for the phase two trial. And there, of course, the aim is to detect early treatment related changes in the phase two trial. In May further on, we received the positive feedback from FDA that I already discussed. In May further, we announced that we appointed the clinical CRO to support our phase two preparations and eventually the conduct of the trial. And then in June, we announced the appointment of of Dr. Juha Savola as our chief medical officer and he brings more than 25 years of global experience in drug development. Let's discuss this topic later when I have a chat with Juha. But let's dive now into the financing figures. So CFO Tune, please take the lead here.

Thank you for the introduction. The cost base, as you can see, remained flat compared to the same period last year. During the first half, we have spent our resources on the following core projects. We are preparing now for the phase two clinical trial, and we are continuing development and validation of the biomarkers. In addition, as Antti mentioned, we raised funds in February. So there was cost set aside for that. And of course, we are focusing a lot on investor relation and partnering activities. So that's also part of the resource spent. Next slide. So as you have heard today, we were selected for an 8 million Horizon Europe grant. And that's really positive. That's a kind of non dilutive funding important for us. Our cash position by the end of June ended at 3.5 million. The balance sheet, as such, also consisted of long-term debt that increased compared to the same period last year due to more funding from Michael J. Fox in Parkinson's UK. As you remember, they funded the full Phase 1b trial. Equity stood at minus 0.7 by the end of June, mentioned successful fundraising. And then, of course, in addition, just to say that we need to have more capital to launch the phase two clinical trial. And we are actively exploring different options, for instance, development partnership, equity financing and also more non-dilutive funding.

Tuna. And next we will have a short discussion with Juha, our chief medical officer. So Juha brings extensive experience from the pharmaceutical industry with a strong track record in clinical drug development and special expertise in neurology. And he joins, of course, Herantis now at a very important moment as we prepare for to advance HER96 into Phase 2 development. So Juha, welcome to Herantis. It's of course great to have you with us and here. Before we actually dive into Herantis and HER96, could you briefly tell our audience about your background and maybe highlight the experience that you believe have best prepared you for the role of Chief Medical Officer at Herantis?

Sure. Thanks, Antti. And thanks, everybody. Good to be here. Exciting, exciting moment, exciting moment for Herantis and really proud to be part of the of making things moving forward. I have worked, as you said, quite many years in the field. Many of those have been responsible and leading clinical development in neurology and some other therapeutic areas, but Parkinson's disease has been the field where I have done actually most of the clinical research. I actually joined Herantis from retirement. But before stepping out from pharmaceutical drug development, I worked in my last role five years in Philadelphia, USA, in Spark Therapeutics, which is a gene therapy company, and we had developed the very first gene therapy for treatment of genetic blindness. In that role, we started a therapy for treatment of another rare disease with neurological consequences and that's Huntington's disease. We were thinking about and planning forward moving a Parkinson's disease compound So I would say that these years in business have kept me very excited about Parkinson's disease and very desperate in finding better solutions for patients. All these years have been led me to fine tune what might be most optimal way of designing a study to address that unmet need. In my roles working especially with the rare diseases I learned to appreciate the value of single subject in the study and that I think is important thinking around this. We can't recruit many patients and just believe in masses of data providing the future for the program development. We need to be smart. We need to make every patient count in the study. and that will be the best feedback we can give to the patients and scientific community. So yes, I think my background in the field of neurological disease is different modalities and really opportunity to provide something meaningful patients is making my life very exciting. Very good.

With that quite impressive background, what in HER96 and Herantis has convinced you to join? And you said that you had retired, but then you wanted to come back to operational role. So what is that compelling thing that you see in HER96? Maybe also compared to other approaches that are currently being evaluated in Parkinson's disease.

Well, there are two things, if not three even. First of all, the very concept of R96, which is attractive for me, is that it is not, as you pointed out, it's not a single mechanism of action. It is targeted mechanism of action, but it is playing across the pathology of Parkinson's disease, which is important. And I think this is important scientifically in comparison to many very focused, laser-focused biology. So that... Biological non-specificity is important for disease like Parkinson's disease therapy. What was exceptional when I listened and watched your data readout when you had your phase one data out, I was impressed that in phase one you actually had a signal that the drug is this experimental drug is actually biologically active and everything I saw at that moment and later on as I have been accessed to the books is building on that story that we didn't find any surprises there. We actually got a signal that the hypothesis built on preclinical animal studies appear to be valid for humans and that's a jump start. And that made me excited. And of course, this motivation that Herantys has is exceptional. And shortly after speaking with you and other colleagues in Herantys, I felt there's a spirit spot on in this company.

Very good. And that leads to the next item that I had in mind. So you have now spent two first months at Herantis and the team. So what has mostly impressed you about Herantis as a company or our great team, at least I would say the great team, but maybe you will.

Well, can't deny that. As I said, Herantys is showing, it's living every moment. I see it, I feel it when I am with Herantys. Seeing the people, everybody is engaged. Everybody wants to make impact on the lives of Parkinson's patients and their families. Everybody knows what we are doing and why we are doing it. And the level of engagement and commitment is very tangible. So it is, and there's a good humor in the company and it's a perfect place to work.

Well, that sounds very good, of course, in the ears of the CEO. Well, you have seen the full body of evidence that we have built now within the first two months of your engagement with Herantis. What is in a way the most encouraging, you said that the broad mechanism of action, but if you consider the data set that we have, what is like convincing you that yes, we are going into right direction, considering the long track of evidence that we have built from the CDNF preclinical to HER96 phase one data.

Well, let's go to the very basic mechanism of action. The evidence Herantys has built around CDNF first and then later on HER96 is very compelling in the field of any modalities I am aware of competing products. There is an opportunity for neurorestorative meaning This drug might make cells behave better and they might catch up and they might be finally something which is doing more than simply providing less reduction in clinical progress. And that would be fantastic for these patients. And I can see that kind of glimmer of hope coming from these cell culture studies in animal studies, So that was the first thing which was my attraction when I was going through the documentation we had, I had access to. The preclinical package has been well thought out, well planned, well executed, impressive. And then on top of that, as I mentioned, our human data is building up on that story and it makes me very hopeful that we are able to create something which is standing out in the crowd and this what we are doing really will make an impact for patients.

Right and now as we prepare for phase two what do you see as the most important elements of the study design so that we can maximize the chances of success? which is of course very critical. The phase two is the critical step towards commercialization.

It is critical step for any company. The principle is kill early. We need to have a study which is telling us if we need to stop this concept and not invest anything of that because it would be likely wasted money or we need to have evidence and signal that there is continued reason in believing in the compound. And this is the very solid stepping stone for us to move forward. and the design has to be creative the design has to be smart and smart in a way that we are able as I said use every subject in the study to build up understanding if this drug is doing what we are expecting it to do and we hope it would be doing so finding right elements for measuring the the biological therapeutic benefit is important. For that, I think your choice of building up initial efficacy demonstration on smartphone is smart, obviously, because it's so much more sensitive to detecting these subtle movement disorder symptoms, severity, it will be also more sensitive than traditional measures detecting if there's potential treatment benefit. So I believe that the compound is safe. That's based on phase one data is probably not a question anymore. And the question is now what handle we can get on efficacy. Parkinson's disease is not easy from that perspective. We are so much dependent on the Parkinson's subject behavior and what we can measure and how we can measure and quantify that disturbance. And I think that's the tricky part in early patient populations.

Yes. And a bit broader view looking ahead. So what kind of, how you would define a success for HER96 considering the Parkinson's patients and maybe also Herentis. So considering phase two and beyond, so what you could foresee here?

What I can foresee is interesting. There is a potential that we are able to demonstrate potentially therapeutic benefit in this phase two study. We do everything we can to build a protocol where we are maximizing the probability of picking up the signal of therapeutic potential. Without that, there is no path forward with this compound and it is even our call and our ethical duty to the patient community out there to be honest with the data and see if there is a reason or not to continue developing. If we are picking up the signal, this study will be a sufficient stepping, another stepping stone in developing this drug forward and should be ready for confirmatory phase three studies where we are truly demonstrating that it is benefiting the patients and their observations how the disease is impacting their daily activities can be documented and can be demonstrated and then with those data that the product can be taken to global markets. Obviously that confirmatory phase 3 program is beyond our reach. It does require a global player and so for Herontis these data are critical for licensing partner identification for the patient community, it's important additional flicker of hope that there's something will come up to benefit them. You mentioned that there are lots of activities going on in Parkinson's pipeline. That is good for patients. That is so important because there have been so many disappointing years, nothing really important has been introduced over a couple of decades in Parkinson's field. And that's sad for anybody who is living with the disease. Yes.

All right. With these words, let's continue with the Q&A session.

Yes. And we have received many questions, but there are still room for more. So what is the rationale for pursuing an FDA submission alongside the European CTA during phase two?

That's, of course, a very good question. We are planning a European study. However, having FDA's blessing, as you will, would act as an external validation for the program. Would you have any other view from the big pharma standpoint as you come from there?

for them it is important that the FDA has both in these these pharma partners who we would be approaching they need US clinical research conducted as well and for that it's a six-month prep work done already by us so that when they got our data We can have, well I'm saying we, probably we have a joint meeting with the FDA and then phase three plans can be nailed down and the program can move forward. So it's a huge shortening of the wide space in development. So it will be paid back to the licensing partner and of course market time will be much earlier. Very good.

Next, what are the key milestones investors should expect over the next 12 months?

Yeah, of course, as we already mentioned during the during the webcast, we are now preparing for the phase two. And there, of course, important milestones are submit the clinical trial application by the end of the year, start the actual clinical trial patient treatments first half of next year. And of course, before that, we need to secure the the resourcing of the phase two with, as you mentioned already, Tune, we are in discussions with Pharma related to partnering. We are in discussions with investors and also non-dilutive financing. And of course, we are very confident that the timelines that we have communicated, they will hold and we have a very good kickstart for the phase two program.

Yeah, good. In previous communication, you have referred to the upcoming Phase 2A study. And it's now being called a Phase 2. What has changed? And do you need more money for this?

Yes, this is a very good question again. It's a tiny, tiny letter, an A, but it might have a certain meaning. And of course, claiming Phase 2A or Phase 2 is not a regulatory label. It's more like the company communication label. And this is actually one thing that Juha actually brought with him, his big pharma view on how we should define items. So maybe Juha, you could provide the rationale why you believe that phase two is the right wording and what does it mean for the phase three?

Yes, to me it was clear when I saw it after seeing our phase one B data, our phase one data. providing evidence of proof of mechanism and therefore I don't need to redo that in many patients. I want to design a study and want us to do and commit to conducting a study which is ready to build up understanding whether we can or we should not continue in the confirmatory study. And with this number of patients we are considering, we should be able to support progressing into Pivotal program.

And I can also confirm that there is no extra resources, money required. So it's maybe a branding and labeling item, not as such a design item for the trial.

Can you update us on the status of all your other indications beyond Parkinson's disease? Are you doing any preclinical studies on those programs?

That's a very good question. And based, of course, on what we have disclosed earlier, we have almost fully concentrated on the Parkinson's disease and we have not divided our resources into other indications too heavily. However, I can mention that, yes, we have, for example, filed a patent application in a non-CNS indication earlier this year. We haven't disclosed what that indication is. And of course, there is no decisions to invest in that program. our ambition is currently to secure that we can continue to phase two development. And then once the resources are there, we, of course, would like to invest more on the other indications. Of course, the mechanism of action really must support going also beyond Parkinson's disease. And that's, of course, also the ambition of the company at the right point of time going forward.

referring to the phase two trial, the upcoming one. Can you define early state with some symptoms? And Finland, any cities, can Nord-Finland also be involved in clinical tests? How do we apply for the testing group?

Yes, maybe Juha, you could comment on this, how the practicality is.

Yes, thank you. It's a good question. We do use only clinical assessment to define if somebody is early with the disease progression or more advanced. That is well established in clinical research of Parkinson's disease. We are looking subjects who are not long time ago diagnosed, but we are looking for subjects who are quite recently diagnosed. That is one way of identifying right patient population and that's important so that we are not having that very diverse group of people with different stages of disease. Now what investigators what sites and like geographical access we are looking is first of all driven by identifying sites and investigators, doctors who are experts in this field of clinical research. And that is not really putting a pin on a map and say we need to do it here. We do it there if there's an expert of the sort we need. But we as a sponsor, we have many mechanisms in our repertoire, which we can use to facilitate if somebody lives in northern part of Finland and our investigator is in the southern part of Finland, then how we facilitate that back and forth movement. But it will be a logistical challenge in a country like Finland, which is is very long country. So it is going to be unfair when it comes to geography.

And maybe I'll continue a bit. So in practice, we are now planning to submit the clinical trial application. And once we get the approval, then we can activate the patient recruitment activities and her on this as a sponsor, does not recruit the patients directly. So it will be the clinical sites who will actually recruit the patients. And of course, we as a sponsor will also publish guides how to contact the investigators and how to get involved into the trial. But this will inform the patient community as soon as we have all the required information available. Very important addition. Thank you.

What is the expected cost for the phase two study and what additional financing is needed until its completion and results will be known?

Yes, as already earlier disclosed, the trial cost land somewhere around 20 million euros and the total financing need of the company is around 30 to 35 million euros, from which we have secured that 8 million EU grant, non-dilutive EU grant and a reminder that we do have a commitment from EIC fund for equity investments and based on the term sheet that we signed 2023, they can have a up to one third of equity finances if we go through that route. And of course, once we go a bit further with the resourcing of the phase two trial, we will definitely inform the market in due course about any development on that side.

Good morning. Thanks for the presentation and congratulations with the progress. Development so far this year have been encouraging. Can you share how discussions have been involved since the start of the year? Would you prefer outcome be to secure a partner before phase two starts or will you retain greater ownership through the proof of concept readout?

A very good question. And that's also, of course, the thing that the company and the board of directors are continuously assessing. What makes sense? What are the options? As we have quite openly communicated, we have had very intimate discussions with several both global and maybe more regional partners over the years. and as already mentioned we will inform the market in due course when there are any developments but of course the question is correct that we need to consider the ownership retainment and related to phase two and what actually builds the biggest value for our shareholders and that's of course something that we want to secure that that in the longer term our shareholders gets the best value which would be aligned with the value of her 96 and the value for the patient. So everything is in the same basket.

Should we expect a material step up in R&D and cash burn through the next half year and also into 227 as manufacturing regulatory and site activities accelerate?

Yes, definitely. That's a valid point. So when we approach and start the Phase 2 trial, of course, the R&D expenses will increase. But as Tuuli already mentioned during the presentation, to activate the Phase 2, we need to secure more resources for that. So just follow the news flow and that will explain what are the next steps and how we ramp up with the Phase 2 execution.

Yeah, with the discontinuation of Biogen Denali's program in early stage Parkinson's disease, from your perspective, what are the key differences between the program and HERO96? Does the program failure, if anything, reinforce your approach based on a biomarker supported mechanism and a more sensitive digital primary endpoint?

Yeah, first of all, the Biogen Denali mechanism was very, very different from what we have at Herantis. So their approach was targeting a specific kinase target, which is expressed actually in a fraction of patients, but in this trial, they wanted to treat idiopathics or all comers in a way. And they showed in the trial that on that broad patient population, it wasn't efficacious with the study setup that they built. And considering our mechanism of action, which is very broadly addressing the core biology of Parkinson's disease, it's very different. What was the second part of the question?

Does the program failure refer to that? If anything, reinforce your approach based on biomarker supported mechanism and a more sensitive digital primary endpoint.

I wouldn't say that the the failure itself had an impact on our plans. But of course, It means that there is less competition and we are stepping more visible across the different approaches for Parkinson's disease modification. Would you have any additions here?

Yes, I would like to emphasize even this laser-focused mechanism of action, what they had. and how they selected the patient population based on publicly available information. Need to remind that we have very little information of the details of the study. And interestingly Denali wants to continue in this genetically identified subpopulations. So it is telling me that there is something still which we don't understand from the data, they might. I agree with you, their outcome is not informing us on our risk profile moving forward. It is informing us that you can implement a smartphone-based data collection in a quite substantially big Phase 2 study. So at least one technical. Learning, which is supporting our decision making, is coming from that study.

And actually continuing that, those data together with published data from Roche helps us to define the statistical power behind the selected patient population and the number of patients. So it will help us in the phase two conduct and reinforce the probability of success for us.

Yes. From your comments, if all goes to plan, what is the timeline towards a phase three trial?

Yes, so basically, as I explained earlier today, we expect to have the interim efficacy readout early 29, and that, of course, would already potentially trigger discussions with regulatory authorities during 29 or early 2030, which would mean that we would, of course, want to initiate the Pivotal Phase 3 program. maybe within a year or even less time from the end of the phase two trial. And then of course, depending on the results, we need to, together with the regulatory authorities, to discuss what is the right setup for the pivotal program, the length, the number of patients, really depends on the data that we will be able to get from phase two. But now we do have the visibility already to the, to the pivotal program, at least some shape and form.

Any additions, Juha? Now coming back from Big Pharma, where timelines are not always, and this so-called white space between phase transitions is not always so critical, it is very difficult for us to control that. And they might go through their committees and spend time in planning and re-planning, So it is difficult for us to predict when the market is. But what are the timelines you just referred to? Those are achievable. They are achievable. And 2030, immediately after that, should be doable. require that a few of the stars align. There has to be compelling data coming from this study. There has to be a strong, committed partner, which is, of course, important decision making for us as well, and that they have the motivation to keep going with the pace we have started.

Yes, I think that concludes the Q&A session. It's going to be a very busy second half of this year. And I guess we are looking forward to updating the market about the progress. Do you have any closing remarks?

Yes, so thank you for spending the time. I hope that there is a big audience who were there almost the full hour, which is, I think, the record length for the first half webinars. Of course, the discussion with Juha and the many questions from the audience, relevant questions there. We were really happy to answer these questions. So I hope you all have a very nice