Thank you. The next question is from the line of Dylan van Haaften from NIBC. Please go ahead.
Dylan van Haaften
Hey, good afternoon, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Just one for now. Just on the SAG meeting. I was just wondering if there’s anything you could tell us around the line of questioning and concerns raised during the SAG? Thank you.
Yes, we decided to not to give any specific feedback on the SAG meeting. And the reason for that is very simple. We, of course, will communicate on our regulatory process when there is a precise and specific and definite information to share. And as you know, SAG in Europe is an advisory meeting on specific questions and not necessarily predictive of CAT and CHMP final conclusions. So we consider they would not be appropriate to specifically provide any color.
In addition, as you may know, most companies actually do not disclose SAG meetings in general. In 2018, there were roughly 30 of those meetings on roughly 80 approval procedures. So they’re very common, very customary and most companies don’t disclose them. And the reason we did mention that this SAG meeting was going to take place was – because it triggered a delay in our process and pushed the approval from 2019 to 2020.
The one thing I can say, though, is that the meeting went very well. The team did an excellent job of preparing, as they’ve done all along the regulatory process. And I’m pleased with everything that the company is doing on the regulatory front.
Dylan van Haaften
Excellent. Thank you.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Philippa Gardner from Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Oh, thank you. Just on the SAG meeting. I mean, I guess, given the time of the meeting, is there any reason why the outcome of this is not being discussed at the ongoing CAT meeting, which is happening this week? And then related to that, do you think that once it’s been discussed at the CAT that the CHMP will then look at this site and the CAT outcomes at the subsequent CHMP meeting, or do you think it will be a latest CHMP meeting? Thank you.
Yes. Thank you, Philippa, for the question. The SAG meeting was September 3. And in parallel to the SAG meeting, the CAT meeting had specific questions to us, which are – were not exactly the same as the questions to the SAG. The – so by definition, this – the CAT meeting, discussing the results from the SAG could not take place already in September. And the reason is, is in a way very mundane.
The SAG meeting took place on September 3, then the [indiscernible] prepare and draft meeting minutes from the SAG meeting, it has to be circulated to the SAG members and they need to give their commentary on that. And that, again, very mundane and that process is not yet final. There are no final meeting minutes even from the SAG meeting, because these are very busy clinicians from all over the place. They still need to give a full final commentary.
In addition, the responses that we submitted to CAT for the CAT questions, of course, need to incorporate your initial view on the SAG feedback. So, again, by definition, it wouldn’t have been possible to have a SAG on September 3, followed by CAT also in September.
So, CAT is in October, would not have been possible to do that faster. And, of course, what is a bit frustrating, but just unavoidable is the fact that we had the summer come in between, otherwise things could have moved a bit faster.
With CAT in October, there is a chance that CHMP would still also be in October. But typically with a conditional approval, there’s a period of at least a month, where the company and EMA discuss the specific conditions and finalize the exact wording of those conditions. And that typically is not possible in that one week interval between CAT and CHMP. So typically, there’s at least a month between a CAT and the CHMP in a conditional approval setting.