Tycho Peterson: But we have the same data that ias you did at that DLBCL represents about 50, 50 plus 50% to 60% of all NHL. So that is one area as we mentioned that we’re going to be aggressively focused on and the other two that we’re following with Medicare on this year are MCL and CTCL.
Sung Ji Nam: Gotcha. And then one quick one for Tycho. Sorry if I missed it, but the $14 million amortization for Genentech this year, is that should be modeled that ratably throughout the year?
Tycho Peterson: Yeah, I mean I think that’s right way to do it. I mean, it was just around multi myeloma, yeah, just kind of ratably for the year is fine.
Sung Ji Nam: Great. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Salveen Richter from Goldman Sachs. Your question, please.
Elizabeth Webster: Hey guys. Good evening. This is Elizabeth on for Salveen. Two questions from us today. So the first is on your partnership with Flatiron Health. Can you provide some color just around how that partnership is structured? And if that would include milestone payments or would it be more kind of a continuous revenue recognition for clonoSEQ? And then, second is on the Epic partnership, just curious if you’ve had any feedback from users or physicians and what you’re learning thus far in the early days about how this integration works and how it’s being used? Thank you.
Chad Robins: I’ll go with the first one Elizabeth, and then I’ll kick it over to Susan to provide more color on the Epic integration early day learnings. As far as Flatiron, what I can’t go into the specifics of the agreement, you know to be able to protect Flatiron’s position in the industry, what I can tell you is your question is, it doesn’t entail kind of milestone payments. It’s basically a setup fee and an annual fee it’s I think the most I can elaborate at this point. But Susan do you want to talk about Epic?
Susan Bobulsky : Sure. Yeah, the feedback has been very positive to-date. In fact, we’ve seen several of our early sites come back after just a short time of having experience with the integration in advance to expand the scope of the integration for example bringing on more physicians or expanding to the in-patient setting versus outpatient only. And we’ve seen increases in both the number of ordering physicians and the volumes that are flowing through in each of the accounts where we integrated to-date. I think the most, the most important improvement is simply the reduction in manpower required to enter orders and to not only enter orders, but to receive the results from orders as they now land directly into the EMR in the place where you would find other test results versus kind of having to be manually updated uploaded and searched for.
The other benefit of Epic integration is discrete data delivery, which is going to enable more streamlined real world evidence analysis, which more and more of our accounts are coming to us in expressing an interest in performing. So I think this will be a tool not only for clinical efficiency, but also for expanding research and sites around MRD.
Elizabeth Webster: Got it. That’s helpful. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. And our next question is a follow-up from the line of Rachel Vatnsdal from JPMorgan. Your question, please
Rachel Vatnsdal: Perfect. Hey, good afternoon. Thanks so much for taking the questions. I want to follow up on some of the ASP comments earlier. So you noted that you expect to lift ASP by $200 over the next two years. So, can you just talk about how should we think about the cadence of that step up over the next 24 months? Will it be linear? $any comments there would be helpful.
Tycho Peterson: Hi, Rachel. Yeah, I would at this point, model it out is linear. I think the reality is, you know ASPs based on age collections and a variety of different factors that can vary month-to-month even quarter-to-quarter, but we’re seeing kind of all the leading indicators point to kind of a linear growth to over $200 an ASP increases over the next two years.
Rachel Vatnsdal: Great. And then just as a follow-up, can you walk us through your updated- I’m thinking around the state biomarker bills. What type of impact will that really have on the business? And, then do you have any of that benefit embedded in the guide for the 2024 year, as well?
Chad Robins: It’s a great question and we don’t have that specifically baked into the guide, but we are optimistic right, which they we’re increasingly optimistic based on, the discussions and conversations that we’ve been having that the enforcement of the state biomarker kind of laws are starting to take hold. Just to give some context I said on the board of coalition for 21st century medicine and we’re working kind of hard on these initiatives. And if you look at Evamed, Aqua and all the industry associations, it’s a it’s a prominent area of focus. Obviously, you’re fighting the insurance company lobbies that are trying to not pay. But net-net I think from a national position that’s coming down on the stage, you are seeing incremental evidence of kind of positive trends and insurance companies are starting to comply with this legislation.
So, again, I don’t think it’s going to be an overnight success in obviously. We’re hoping more states and act the biomarker legislations, but you will see over time incremental and no it’s not it’s not baked into the guide.
Rachel Vatnsdal: Right. That’s it for me. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. This does conclude the question-and-answer session, as well as today’s program. Thank you. ladies and gentlemen for your participation. You may now disconnect. Good day.
