Puneet Souda : I’ll wrap my question into two questions sort of into one. Obviously, again, Congrats on the LRP increase here. Maybe, can you elaborate what is the clinical volume growth that we ought to think about in that sort of long-term guide? I mean, at one point, NeoGenomics used to grow that number at 15% growth, but I know the mix has changed today. There’s more NGS in here. So maybe could you elaborate on that? And then how should we think about the AUP and the clinical volume growth this year in 2024, the AUP has continued to ramp throughout the year for clinical in ‘23. So just wondering sort of, how should we think about that for ‘24?
Chris Smith : Maybe I’ll take a little bit of that and throw it to Jeff. But look, the way we think about our business is really a portfolio effect. And so if you think about it, we really, we have informatics, we have pharma, we have clinical, and obviously when we look at building out both this year’s guidance and outlying year’s guidance, we’ve taken into account all those factors. We have not broken down specifically the units or the AUP I will say though, on the AUP, two things significantly are driving, and Jeff will give you more, but one is our mix, right? We’re selling a lot more NGS. But the other thing is we think we have a lot of runway on revenue cycle and just the amount of — when you look at this industry as a whole, I think it’s woeful in its ability to get paid for the work that it’s doing.
And I think where our team is really becoming masterful is identifying those levers, which is probably 15 different levers within that group. But Jeff, do you have anything else more on
Jeff Sherman : I mean, we haven’t disclosed specific and we didn’t, when we gave original guidance, didn’t disclose volume or AUP. But I think, as Chris said, given our positioning on both our clinical sales force and execution as well as our anticipated additions on the ADX side, we certainly feel good that we’re going to achieve that revenue growth. I think on the revenue or per test or AUP as Chris said, there’s a few things driving that. In the quarter that NGS mix, I said this last quarter is driving over 60% of the increase in AUP. So just the NGS volume continue to accelerate is driving meaningful upside in revenue per test. And you can see that stepping up throughout the year and in 2023. And then the other factors as Chris also said, were revenue cycle specific initiatives.
The first is on just getting paid for the work. We’re doing a lot of specific initiatives to drive that. We saw good improvement in that in 2023. And then there’s also the pricing side where we’re having some success in getting price increases as well, where that hasn’t historically been a strength of ours. Again, I think the way I think about the revenue side is we have volume drivers, we have mixed drivers, we have pricing drivers, and we have RCM drivers and they’re going to hit at different intervals and different paces throughout the year. But the overall, combination of those is going to get us through our revenue growth over time.
Operator: The next question comes from Matt Sykes with Goldman Sachs.
Matt Sykes: Congrats on the quarter. Maybe just following up on Puneet’s question, but focusing on the mix side of it. Obviously, the NGS mix you guys have talked about and that’s driving a lot of that. But I’m just wondering in terms of like, as you think about the runway for mix shift, there’s clearly probably customer groups where it was easier to kind of switch them into NGS or market the NGS to them. Does mix makeshift get harder over the course of this year and into ‘25? Or do you just see a lot of runway and lack of awareness where you’re able to continue to drive that mix shift over time? And then just my second part, just quick one for Jeff, just any views on the gross margin outlook for ‘24 within that guide?
Chris Smith : Yes, thanks Matt. Look, I think when you look at this business, one of the things that we really like as we’ve got to know the business well is that we’re very under indexed both on NGS, as the total percentage of revenue for the company as well as in solid tumor. And do you think — there’s going to be some earning calls that come up in 90% of the revenues NGS, and so I think we believe very strongly in that ability, on that mix shift. I’d say the second big one is, I think you could argue this year should be better because of our increased focus going to oncology, the community oncologists versus just the hospitals and the pathologists, and expanding that sales force there and to be able to go out and spend time, and look one of our lever points is that we’re the market leader in heme and really using that to be a door opener for us for solid.
But maybe — I probably shouldn’t even have said as much as I did Warren’s here, but maybe Warren give maybe more color.
Warren Stone : I think everything that you said, I agree with a 100%. I mean, we’ve communicated that right now the ratio is roughly 25% of the business. I think, as that ratio increases, certainly it gets marginally harder, but I wouldn’t discount the fact that we have launched new products last year. It was probably mid-year by the time we were starting to see some traction take place. Looking to benefit from the annulization of those new products that were launched in last year, particularly those are the NGS related. So that’s one that certainly will provide opportunity for us. And then, as Chris said, the continued penetration into the community oncology segment, which is where we’ve invested a lot of incremental sales resources into, is another reason why we believe we can drive growth in NGS, which will support that makeshift.
