Unidentified Analyst: Awesome. Okay. And then related to that, like law of large numbers saying, can you talk about – if you thought about any of the closest core MRD adjacencies that you know, maybe you could move into or pull forward some of the investment in those to be in the near term as part of your, like overall TAM story? Maybe not officially areas that you’re definitively going into, but maybe some areas you consider it as potential portfolio adjacencies that could be easy growth drivers as we sort of think about refreshing the long-term growth story here?
Chad Robins: Susan, do you want to take that?
Susan Bobulsky: Sure. We have looked at a number of adjacencies. I mean, first and foremost and those most obvious ones are other lymphoma malignancies in which we have not commercialized the assay. So, additional non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma indications in particular. And we do have plans in place to move forward with commercialization, including securing reimbursements from Medicare, and private cares over the next couple of years. Additionally, there are adjacencies in the myeloid malignancies and for absent other tumors. And at this time, we are exploring opportunities in the myeloid space, very early stages to understand the feasibility of particular technologies and the opportunity. And then, in the solid tumor space, we have done some review, but have no plans at this time.
Unidentified Analyst: Awesome. Thank you so much. Really appreciate you for taking the questions.
Chad Robins: Thanks Noah.
Operator: And our next question comes from the line of Tejas Savant. Tejas, please go ahead.
Unidentified Analyst: Good evening guys. This is Edmond on for Tejas. Thank you for taking my questions. I just wanted to touch upon the EMR integration with some of your pilot sites now live. I know you guys haven’t talked about volume contentions really inflecting in 2024. But what have you seen so far in terms of volume inflection at these sites?
Susan Bobulsky: Sure. Thanks for the question, Edmond. We only have one site live as of today and not quite two months of experience with that site. But what I can say is that we have seen growth in that account in that short time and at both in HTP users, as well as in volumes. And additionally, that site’s positive feedback has led them to expand the scope of the integration previously, limited to the outpatient setting now expanding to inpatient and including the potential to place standing orders which are new features they’ve added to the initial go live. We have four more sites scheduled to go live by the end of this year. So we’ll be able to start getting more robust, albeit it’s still anecdotal evidence to support understanding of how Epic may contribute to growth in 2024 and beyond.
And again, we expect to have as many as 25 sites live by the end of ‘24, at which point, I think we will be more well-positioned to comment on likely growth opportunities. But we do expect lift on Epic other companies who have implemented Epic have seen lift and we will be eager to comment further when we have a little more evidence.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. That was super helpful. And then, just wanted to clarify, I think you guys have just commented that you anticipate about $190 million in backlog, by year end for the trial side of the business. What are your expectations between on mix between pharma and smids in the backlog and between retrospective and prospective trail mix?
Susan Bobulsky: Should it between pharma – what? I am sorry. Well I can’t comment the majority of new studies that we book. When you ask about prospective and retrospective, the more agility have prospective studies and we expect that to continue to be a case.
Chad Robins: Yeah, we don’t have a mix, but I will also say, kind of the majority of our client profile is kind of large cap pharma and not smids and small cap although we certainly do have kind of a – I would say kind of call it 15% to 20% that you would kind of traditionally classify as smids. But the majority are large pharma.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. And then, with the ASH Conference just around the corner in December. Are there some key publications, presentations or data points that we should be watching out for?
Susan Bobulsky: Yes, indeed. In particular, we are excited about some data that’s going to be presented by investigators from University of Chicago on the use of our assay in blood. So in this particular study, clonoSEQ sees that early time points during first line therapy in multiple myeloma to assess response in both blood and bone marrow. And to compare that assessment to the commonly used serum biochemical markers that are part of traditional myeloma response assessment criteria. This study will show that clonoSEQ in blood is strongly prognostic of outcomes and provides greater insights than traditional blood-based markers. And the authors have suggested in the abstract, which is now available publicly that the insights that has been gained from this work could be useful in the future if validated to inform treatment intensification in MRD positive myeloma patients.
So, we expect to leverage that data to advance the adoption of our blood-based testing in myeloma by reducing it to help guide use of interim blood-based testing as a complement to marrow and by showcasing the favorable prognostic comparison when you measure early response with clonoSEQ in blood versus serum biomarkers in blood.
Unidentified Analyst: Got it. Thank you for the time today.
Chad Robins: Thanks, Edmond.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our next question comes from the line of Salveen Richter with Goldman Sachs. Salveen, please go ahead.
Unidentified Analyst : Hi, this is Lydia on for Salveen. Thanks so much for taking our question. So we just have one on the Immune Medicine business. You noted that a novel target has been identified in MS. So what are the next steps for this program? And what is the path to monetization here? And then, can you just discuss the forward growth outlook for this business more broadly? Thank you.
Chad Robins: Yeah. Sharon, I will turn it over to you to answer that.
Sharon Benzeno : Yeah, hi, thanks for the question. So yeah, we’re excited. As we mentioned, we’ve been focusing on identifying novel targets in autoimmunity and multiple sclerosis is the first lead program where we’ve identified that novel target. We’re actively confirming and continuing to validate both in in vitro and in vivo MS disease models. And ultimately building out of pre-clinical cold package to drop to the target. So that’s in MS. And now that we’ve unlocked and proven out this approach in a massive course. In parallel, our pipeline includes other autoimmune disorders. And our goal overalls is of course to eventually be able to bring therapies against these targets into the clinic either on our own or with a partner.
Unidentified Analyst : Thanks so much.
Chad Robins: Thanks, Lydia.
Operator: And our next question comes from the line of David Westenberg with Piper Sandler. David, please go ahead.
David Westenberg : Hi, thank you for taking the question. So just had a question on immune medicine business, in terms of inbound interests or conversations that you had with what could be considered strategic partners but maybe could be customers right now? Like have they desired any kind of like exclusivity on certain kinds of work you’ve done in pharma or any other kind of inbound or strategic conversations you’ve had? I know that some of that sensitive, but any kind of color there would be great.
