Can you start with an introduction on your background in treating Bladder Cancer and your Familiarity with UGN-102?

Please tell us about the first line Standard of Care TURBT for these patients.

• What are the benefits to it being used First line?
• Why is it currently also used for recurrence? How effective is it and how well satisfied are patients with this option?
• What are some short comings of the therapy?

Could you give us a brief overview of UGN-102 and its mechanism of action, particularly how it differentiates from traditional treatments for LG-IR-NMIBC?

• What were the key findings from the ATLAS and ENVISION Phase 3 clinical trials regarding UGN-102's efficacy and safety?
  

How does UGN-102 compare with TURBT in terms of patient outcomes, side effects, and overall treatment experience?

How does UGN-102 impact the quality of life for patients compared to those undergoing TURBT, especially regarding recurrence and treatment burden?

• Both treatments involve some degree of catheter use. Can you compare and contrast the role of a catheter in each treatment?

Are there specific subgroups of patients that UGN-102 might be more appealing? 

• Females? Elderly? Other groups?

What do you see as the main barriers to the adoption of UGN-102 by healthcare providers, and how is UroGen addressing these challenges?

Based on your research and feedback, how receptive are patients and physicians to adopting UGN-102 as a treatment option?

• What % of your recurrent patients would you offer or recommend UGN-102?
• What % do you anticipate being interested in UGN-102?

On a scale of 1-10 how excited are you for UGN-102 if approved?

• What might increase this level if you are not at 

do you believe the non-allowance of intravesical chemo post TUR in the control arm of the Phase 3 ATLAS trial makes the data difficult to compare to true SoC?

why do you believe the control arm (TUR alone) in ATLAS significantly underperformed the literature/historical benchmarks for CR/DFS rates for TUR?

what do you believe are the most clinically meaningful endpoints in IR-NMIBC? The company seems to focus on 3mo CR rates and DFS but is there a risk that these endpoints do not translate to better patient outcomes?

What does your current SoC look like for IR-NMIBC and is it true that intravesical chemo post TUR is rarely used in practice despite being included in guidelines? If use truly is low, why do you think that is the case?