Thank you, Richard. Turning to slide eight, I want to highlight the unique potential of our promising late-stage pipeline led by our three ongoing Phase 3 studies. Karyopharm has the potential to establish new standards-of-care in solid and hematologic malignancies, building on our foundation in multiple myeloma, while also optimizing the patient experience by incorporating substantially lower doses of selinexor in these studies. Beginning with myelofibrosis on slide 10, selinexor is a novel inhibitor of XPO1 that prevents the new export of various proteins and messenger RNA molecules. By doing so, it promotes the nuclear localization and activation of important tumor suppressor pathways, such as TP53, while concurrently inhibiting the cytoplasmic activation of various proliferative and profibrotic pathways linked to myelofibrosis pathobiology. In addition of these multiple pathways, position selinexor’s a unique potential therapeutic option in myelofibrosis. Before highlighting our important update to the co-primary endpoint relating to total symptom score, I will recap efficacy and safety data observed from the Phase 1 trial evaluating selinexor plus ruxolitinib in JAKi inhibitor naive myelofibrosis patients as outlined on slide 11. Amongst the 14 patients, who received selinexor 60 milligrams plus ruxolitinib, all evaluable patients achieved an SVR35 at any time, and 79% of patients achieved SVR35 at week 24 in the ITT population. As you've heard from some of the leading physicians in this space on our call last week, clean volume reduction is viewed as one of the most important factors by treating physicians, given its correlation to overall survival. Having nearly 80% of patients achieve SVR35 is viewed as very positive. Durability of response is also a key efficacy measure relevant to JAK-naive patients. Our Phase 1 data demonstrates a 100% probability of continuing response for both SVR35 and TSS50 as shown on slide 12 over a median duration of follow-up of 32 weeks and 51 weeks respectively. This is particularly meaningful as it suggests that once patients experience a response, they remain in response. On our call last week, one of the KOLs indicated that this is why he believes treatment Selinexor should be added to ruxolitinib early on in the treatment journey, given the view that deep responses early on are important and can improve outcomes for patients. Turning to slide 13, we were very pleased to announce last week that absolute total symptom score will replace TSS50 as a co-primary endpoint in our SENTRY Phase 3 trial in myelofibrosis. Assessing the average improvement in symptoms over 24-weeks has gained support from the FDA, investigators, and patient advocacy groups, and is a more sensitive method to assess symptom improvement in myelofibrosis. The combination of Selinexor and ruxolitinib has demonstrated promising evidence of improvement in absolute total symptom scores in our Phase 1 trial, and we look forward to utilizing this more comprehensive assessment of symptom improvement moving forward. Building on our impressive SVR35 results from our Phase 1 trial, changing our co-primary endpoint to absolute TSS further increases our overall confidence in the SENTRY Phase 3 trials. And we look forward to potentially addressing a tremendous unmet need in myelofibrosis with this combination. On slide 14, the seep symptom improvement with 60 milligrams of selinexor plus ruxolitinib in our Phase 1 trial can be seen in comparison to historical data for ruxolitinib monotherapy. The average reduction, which signifies improvement, an absolute TSS of 18.5 points with our combination, compared favorably to the average 11 point to 14 point reduction that has been observed with ruxolitinib alone in prior Phase 3 clinical trials conducted by others. The rapid, deep, and durable findings observed with SVR35 is also observed with average TSS, as seen on slide 15. These are new data we are presenting for the first time today. Specifically, in our Phase 1 trial, selinexor plus ruxolitinib demonstrated rapid, deep, and sustained improvements in average TSS. These rapid improvements in symptoms are seen as early as week four, despite any side effects that the patients may experience from the treatment. These symptom improvements continue through week 24, demonstrating meaningful sustained symptom improvement for the entire six-month duration evaluated. For the adverse events experienced, the most common were GI side effects such as nausea, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and fatigue. And I think it is worth considering what we heard from our KOLs and GI side effects last week. These GI side effects are most common at the start of treatment, only last approximately two cycles and can be effectively managed with anti-emetics. Given this well-documented profile, we believe patients and physicians can easily be educated around this profile, enabling patients to stay on treatment long-term, which ultimately is what drives meaningful spleen reduction and symptom improvement. In summary, slide 16 highlights why the combination of selinexor and ruxolitinib has the potential to become the new standard-of-care if the combination is approved. And as we have heard at our recent call with myelofibrosis physicians, the myelofibrosis community wants to adopt combination therapies, which quickly lead to deep and durable spleen reduction symptom improvement. Selinexor’s potential in myelofibrosis is strengthened by its well-established safety profile as it has been administered to approximately 30,000 patients across multiple cancer indications. The low dose of 60 milligrams that is currently incorporated in the Phase 3 trial suggest that selinexor has the potential to be a tolerable convenient once weekly oral treatment, especially with the use of anti-emetics during the first two cycles of treatment. Turning to slide 17, we have increased confidence with the favorable changes made to the SENTRY trial. We've proactively increased the total sample size to approximately 350 patients to further increase the statistical powering. Given the strong enrollment, our expectations of top line data remain in the second-half of 2025. Furthermore, the co-primary endpoint will change from TSS50 to absolute TSS. The two co-primary endpoints, SVR35 and absolute TSS will be tested sequentially. SVR35 will be evaluated first, and if positive, the alpha will then be rolled down to absolute TSS. Just in focus to endometrial cancer on slide 19, selinexor primarily functions by blocking the export of TP53 from the nucleus to the cytoplasm. When TP53 accumulates in the nucleus, it leads to disrupted DNA repair processes, cell cycle arrest, and increased apoptosis. This mechanism is underscored by the anti-tumor effects in TP53 dependent tumors, specifically in endometrial cancer, and has the potential to be the first novel oral maintenance therapy for patients with TP53 wild type endometrial cancer. As seen on slide 20, the TP53 wild type status continues to increase in relevance throughout the treatment landscape for advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer. Recently, the FDA approved checkpoint inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy, followed by maintenance therapy with checkpoint inhibitors for advanced recurrent endometrial cancer patients, regardless of MMR status. However, the efficacy in patients with MMR proficient tumors is notably lower, compared to those with MMR deficient tumors, aligning with the mechanistic rationale for the effectiveness of checkpoint inhibitors in MMR deficient solid tumors. Notably, patients with both MMR proficient and TP53 wild-type tumors make up approximately 50% of all advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer cases. On slide 21 in the SIENDO trial, exploratory subgroup data presented at ASCO revealed that selinexor has the potential to provide promising outcomes for patients with TP53 wild-type endometrial cancer, achieving a median TSS of 28.4 months, compared to just 5.2 months for placebo, translating to a hazard ratio of 0.44. Looking more closely at the MMR proficient subgroup on slide 22, our ASCO data on SIENDO showed selinexor demonstrates an encouraging signal of long-term median PFS benefit of 39.5 months. This was substantially higher than the 4.9 months observed with placebo, corresponding to a hazard ratio of 0.36. Although we acknowledge the limitations of cross-trial comparison, it's important to note that the PFS improvement with selinexor in this subgroup exceeds the median overall survival achieved by checkpoint inhibitors in MMR proficient patients, emphasizing selinexor substantial efficacy for these individuals. The updated safety data in endometrial cancer patients from the SIENDO trial is displayed on slide 23. It's important to note that the adverse events associated with selinexor were generally manageable and well tolerated. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea were the most frequently observed adverse events regardless of grade. Grade 3 plus treatment emergent events were infrequent with neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and nausea being the most common. Notably, the prophylactic dual anti-emetics were not required during the SIENDO trial, whereas dual anti-emetics are not only required in ECO42, but all of our Phase 3 trials, including SENTRYs, which is why we anticipate the safety profile from our Phase 3 trials will be substantially improved. On slide 24, we remain on track for top line data readout for our pivotal export EC-042 Phase 3 trial in early 2026. I remain encouraged with the potential of selinexor to achieve clinically meaningful outcomes in the maintenance setting for patients with p53 wild-type endometrial cancer, especially those with MMR proficient tumors. Lastly, our Phase 3 EMN29 SPd trial is outlined on slide 26. This trial aims to address the unmet needs of patients with multiple myeloma by offering an all-oral treatment option that could also benefit those undergoing free and post T-cell engaging therapy, and built on the positive progression-free survival data previously observed with SPd 40. As we noted on our second quarter earnings call, we have worked with the sponsor of the trial, the European myeloma network to amend the statistical analysis plan. We have completed screening for the planned approximately 120 patients, who will provide an updated time line for top line data following regulatory feedback. We are very excited for what the future holds for Karyopharm, working swiftly to progress our three pivotal Phase 3 programs, fueled by increasingly compelling data selinexor could significantly benefit various patient populations facing substantial unmet needs and also enhance our currently improved indications in multiple myeloma. I will now turn the call to Sohanya, to provide updates on our commercial results from this quarter.