“as you know, ACS as well as the SSP programs are slated to read out in 2026, and we are on track for that.”

In context

“d Phase 2 studies that led us to pick the right doses for our Phase 3 programs in AF as well as in combination with agents in ACS as well as SSP. Secondly, our event rate is lower compared to what we had designed the study for at the current time. And that gives us the reason to increase the sample size, which you will see the numbers when we update centrals.gov. Thirdly, as we think about why the study was started, the genic study was stopped because the DMC reviewed the data and saw almost more than -- almost 3x the event rate on the investigation arm in that study. Our study is periodically reviewed by the DMC. There are no indications from the DMC that we should go any other route and they are supportive of continuing the study at this time. We truly are encouraged by all of this. And as you know, ACS as well as the SSP programs are slated to read out in 2026, and we are on track for that. Operator: Next question will come from Carter Gould with Barclays. Carter Gould: Maybe I don't mean to hammer on it again, but just wanted to follow-up on the prior question for Samit there. With the increased patient enrollment, will there be any shift in the criteria or enrichment of patients away from the -- of our proximal segments. I mean, I appreciate your commentary on what happened to your competitor but at the same conversation at ESC, there was talk about the challenges in those populations given especially what seems to be going on here at the event rate. Any color would be appreciated. Samit Hirawat: Yes. Thank you, Carter. There are no plans to change any of these criteria. We will continue to observe them and the study will continue as is, except for the change in the sample”