Phillip Koo:

There were questions about biopsies, so we're sticking to biopsies, and… They were saying, alright, if you have… something that really looks suspicious on a PSMA PET and an MRI, why do you even need tissue? Why do you need to undergo, you know, a 12-core biopsy?

Zachary Klaassen:

Yeah, it's a great question, one we get asked quite commonly. I think the short answer is, as good as MRI is, and as good as PSMA PET is, it's not perfect. And so, we know that looking at cells under the microscope, at least in 2026, is still the definitive way to diagnose prostate cancer.

And it also gives us an opportunity to see whether it's low-grade, intermediate risk, high-grade, that sort of thing as well, which we still can't do on an MRI or a PSMA PET. Now, may we get to that point? We might, and I think with continued, you know, other agents coming into the market, they may be good enough that we don't need it.

But it does help… the biopsy gives us a lot of information. I think, like I mentioned, it's putting it into the context of… you could have a really hot PSMA spot, but it's only Gleason 6 prostate cancer versus what you may think is Gleason 9. So, we have to risk stratify. We know the side effects of treatment are certainly real.

We don't want to put somebody through something if they don't need it. You know, active surveillance versus a radical prostatectomy, big difference in side effects. And so, at least at this point in time, we can avoid the biopsy, but we're trying to select patients better for who needs to undergo a biopsy.