Gregory M. Glenn
Analyst · Bill Tanner with FBR Capital
So this was a conference, a international conference focused on vaccine development of RSV only. So it was very concentrated, meaning that being said it was well attended, it was packed. The sessions were packed, there were a lot of topics addressed from pathophysiology of the virus to epidemiology. We had 3 presentation, the first was done by Dr. Gail Smith, who is our head of research. He reviewed the -- our approach to using the F protein as a vaccine, and particularly how we had displayed the SY2 [ph] or Synagis or palivizumab-like epitopes, and I think his talk was extremely well-received. We had a compelling preclinical data set, a mechanism of action, rationale for the vaccine antigen choice. I think it was extremely well-received as I said, and we followed that with a presentation on maternal immunization which I did, and then, Dr. Lou Fries provided a detailed presentation of the elderly data which we generated this year. So with respect to maternal immunization, this is a modality to address RSV in the earliest months of life, since it is such a -- there isn't really any other strategy, in fact I would say, months there's pharma companies and developers there is clearly a consensus that this is the best clinical strategy to address the very young. And then, looking at the stage of the program, we are clearly many years in advance of any other candidate vaccine. So we're again presenting our Phase II data from a large trial 320 subjects, we showed that we induced robust antibodies, functional antibodies, and had a very safe vaccine. So I think that was well accepted. And these by the way, these presentations are about to be put up on our website in the next few days. And then, finally Dr. Fries presented the data and we will reevaluate the RSV F vaccine in the elderly. And again, I think what's remarkable in all these trials is the consistency with which we are showing the new responses to the vaccine that is the anti-F, the neutralizing the antibodies and the palivizumab or the heating [ph] antibodies which we think are very important. So, I would say in general, it was extremely well-received in terms of the data and science. There were some other, I would say interesting concepts, most of them were quite early in development and we were able to, I think, stand up well with some of the scientific and developmental criticism questions that we had there. I think we'll shortly post all 3 of the presentations on the website, they have more detail than we provided at the Analyst update, so I think it will be quite interesting and worth reviewing.
William Tanner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Great, and then I guess a follow-up as it relates to the ongoing Phase II study appreciating that it's far larger and that the company is wanting to make sure that you've got the appropriate dose. Is there anything incremental coming out of the data do you think, or anything coming out of the data that would be incremental to the story just in terms of more confidence that you're on the right track, or is this just basically going to be pretty much the data similar to what has been revealed thus far?