Thank you, Mark. Turning to Slide 21. Given the investor interest in these topics, we thought we would quickly visit some of how we view the surrogate marker of SVNA titers that describes the possible clinical performance of our molecules and then provide an update with a view on next steps. First, recall that a key consideration in the FDA's thinking on COVID antibodies has been the concept of immunobridging, which is a form of bioequivalence analysis. These analytics use point estimates from antibody neutralization potency assays that have marked intrinsic variability, including several fold differences with pseudovirus assays and up to tenfold differences with authentic virus assays. This variability, while not contemplated directly in an immunobridging analysis in the form of a range is addressed directly by the FDA on the PEMGARDA fact sheet, where you can see the wide range of potential bridging values between PEMGARDA and adintrevimab depending on assay from 0.82 to 0.35. Turning to Slide 22. Single SVNA titer point estimates can, of course, become obsoleted quickly by virus evolution and associated evolution in estimated EC50 values from these assays. Even more complex before Omicron, there was a great propensity for single sweeping viral lineages as opposed to the rapidly shifting variant soup, we have seen since the Omicron saltation event. We, therefore, became interested in moving from a conception of antibody potency that indexes to one virus to a conception that reflects an ongoing weighted average EC50 calculation. This type of analysis might yield a more complete and useful portrait of overall activity, although, of course, these analytics are limited by the disparity in underlying assay systems that intrudes into all analyses of this sort. Turning to Slide 23. In furtherance of our serial monoclonal antibody approach to COVID-19, we have analyzed public pseudoviral data to evaluate weighted average EC50s and reflected that analysis against observed regulatory actions of authorization and relocation of authorization. In this example, you can see Evusheld depicted in its weighted average potency over time and associated de-authorization. Turning to Slide 24. To provide further insight to past regulatory actions of authorization and revocation of authorization, we extended this analysis across historic antibodies authorized for both treatment and prevention. Turning to Slide 25. When we extend the analysis to pemivibart and VYD2311, a compelling portrait emergence. Over the time since the selection of VYD222, dozens of virus lineages have emerged, becoming clinically meaningful and then have been outcompeted. This evolution continues to this day. Pemivibart weighted average values fluctuate without substantial appreciable change. This lack of meaningful change could be predicted by the structural biology of a conserved epitope, but challenged by the inherent variability of the assay systems that define these data. Turning our attention to our pipeline, although it is difficult to see on this chart due to its significant potency improvement and lack of meaningful change, VYD2311 has demonstrated early signs of potential improved potency with improved and stable IC50 values. Invivyd has built its platform to keep up with the inevitability of virus evolution. However, there are general principles around the conservation of epitopes we aim to take advantage of in order to increase the resistance of our antibodies to the effects of virus evolution. We will never be perfect. And by design, we hope to innovate at an attractive speed. The data such as these that accompany our structural biological insights and the power of our discovery platform will aid in this endeavor. Turning to Slide 26. Another challenge in applied virology with rapidly evolving viruses relates to the ability to secure reliable, high-quality academic or commercial partners that can handle authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus in an appropriate BSL-3 laboratory setting and perform timely and accurate neutralization analyses for us. Recently, one of our partners, a commercial provider of such services discovered a potential contamination event in their virus stocks, which in turn has rendered the JN.1 authentic virus value, it has generated a questionable reliability. Reassuringly, this authentic virus asset potency value against JN.1 is very similar to the independently generated pseudovirus potency value estimated for pemivibart viral against JN.1. The FDA and Invivyd have been in dialogue on this matter for about several weeks. And among other next steps, Invivyd will reassess pemivibart activity versus authentic JN.1 virus in a series of labs to determine a reliable number. Potentially also informative on the matter of JN.1 and the clinical meaning of SVNA titers generally is our preliminary analysis of the second half of the CANOPY study, which happened to occur during a time of JN.1 dominance in the United States in the winter of 2024. The FDA is also in receipt of these preliminary exploratory data. As Mark noted, we look forward to sharing these data soon when finalized and prepared for presentation. Overall, our goal as a company is to improve the usefulness, accuracy and informativeness of virology data to all key stakeholders. While these cellular bioassays are of clear interest and importance, they also have clear limitations that must be acknowledged by those of us in the business of making medicines to protect the vulnerable and treat diseases. We are and for now years have been in constant dialogue with the FDA and see many opportunities to improve our collective acumen on this topic, especially when we can all see contemporary clinical data from, for example, CANOPY and Supernova. I'd like to turn the call over to our CFO, Bill Duke, for final remarks prior to Q&A.