Sure. I mean one thing I just want to make it clear. Obviously, we're going to start off with a very strong foundation where this disease is being treated by multidisciplinary centers and where our organization is there. But when it comes to positioning, I want to make it very clear that we are strictly promoting our polyneuropathy indication, and we will adhere to that until, obviously, we received the label expansion. So I just want to make that clear. Now again, I think, as you highlighted, one of our great advantages is we have deep equities with TTR centers. We've been able to expand our polyneuropathy prescriber base by 50%. We have a well-integrated customer team. Now we highlight the fact that the prevalence of this disease, obviously tenfold. Having said that, the number of prescribers is not tenfold. It's a lesser magnitude of prescriber base. Therefore, we believe we can actually scale this up in the appropriate way. And then when it comes to in rare diseases, having an integrated customer-facing team where you have good coverage of reimbursement support, you have good coverage of medical and field organization support is going to be key. We have that. And the last piece, I think, of the puzzle is a very good, strong established patient support services, where we are actually quite pleased with the time to treatment from patient start forms into patients getting reimbursed and starting on therapy. Now those are obviously some of the capabilities where we're keeping an eye on, and we're going to scale that out. Now when it comes to your second part of your question, in terms of labeling, how we're going to be positioning the product, obviously, that's going to be depending on the FDA and where we don't comment given the label discussions that we have. I think what you will see at ESC is going to give you further color about the robustness of this data and how we can actually be able to communicate effectively both primary composite and secondary end points as well as the oral cost mortality. We believe there's going to be a clear differentiation for our products. And last but not least is the product profile itself. I mean the -- given that this is a swiftly progressing reversible disease to be able to demonstrate a rapid knockdown that really knocks on the disease closing pathogen as quickly as possible is going to be important. Given the convenience of quarterly dosing is going to be important, given that how patients actually quickly get on access to this treatment is going to be very critical. So combining all this with the data that we have with HELIOS-B and the product profile, we really do strongly believe physicians will choose AMVUTTRA, if approved as a first-line product given where the disease is, given what the product is and given where we have the data.