Considering the IMerge Phase 3 trial results, can you elaborate on how Imetelstat demonstrated efficacy in achieving red blood cell transfusion independence for at least eight weeks compared to placebo?

How does Imetelstat perform across different MDS subgroups, particularly those defined by ring sideroblast (RS) status, baseline transfusion burden, and International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk category?

The trial highlighted a sustained increase in mean hemoglobin levels in Imetelstat-treated patients. Could you discuss the clinical significance of this outcome for patients' health and quality of life?

With some patients achieving 24-week red blood cell transfusion independence, what does this suggest about the long-term durability of Imetelstat's effects?

Thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were the most common Grade 3-4 adverse events reported. How are these side effects managed in clinical practice to ensure patient safety and continuation of therapy?

How does Imetelstat compare to current standard treatments for lower-risk MDS, such as erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and other available therapies?

Given the positive feedback from the FDA's Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee, what are the next steps in Imetelstat's clinical development and potential market introduction?

How does the identification of patient subgroups that respond best to Imetelstat influence treatment strategies and the move toward more personalized medicine in MDS treatment?