Good afternoon and welcome to the NeoGenomics Third Quarter 2026 Financial Results Conference Call. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I will now turn the call over to Andrew Brackman, Vice President of Investor Relations.

Thank you, Sylvie, and good afternoon, everyone. Representing NeoGenomics here today are Tony Zook, Chief Executive Officer, Warren Stone, President and Chief Operating Officer, and Abhishek Jain, Chief Financial Officer. This call is being simultaneously webcast and a recording will be available following the conclusion at ir.neogenomics.com. During this call, we will make forward-looking statements regarding our future financial and business performance, our planned leadership transition, planned future operations and related expectations with respect to timing and performance, future financial position, future revenues, growth potential and expected growth drivers, projected costs and capital expenditures, prospects and plans, estimates of market size and position, the implementation of our new revenue cycle management platform and its anticipated benefits and effects on the timing of our collections, objectives of management, and financial guidance. We caution you that the actual events or results could differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements made during the call speak only as of the original date of this call, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements. Please refer to the information disclosed on the Safe Harbor Statement slide in the deck posted on our website, as well as the information under the heading Risk Factors in our annual report on Form 10-K and our subsequent quarterly results on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K filed with the SEC to identify important risks and other factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the four that were stated. These documents can be found in the Investors section of our website or on the SEC's website. During this call, we will also refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures that involve adjustments to our GAAP results. The non-GAAP financial measures presented should not be considered an alternative to the financial measures required by GAAP, should not be considered measures of liquidity, and are unlikely to be comparable to the non-GAAP financial measures provided by other companies. Any non-GAAP financial measure referenced on this call are recognized as the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures in a table available in the press release we issued earlier today and in the slide deck available and the investor section of Olipsi. I will now turn the call over to Tony.

Thank you, Andrew, and good afternoon, everyone. We're excited to report another strong quarter, which shows we have the right strategy in place, the right team to execute it, and we're delivering consistent results because of this. Our business is continuing to gain momentum, and our third quarter results show it. Clinical revenue grew 13% year over year. NGS revenue grew a strong 29%. and our adjusted gross margins expanded by over 300 basis points, all of which allow for us to increase both total revenue and adjusted EBITDA guidance for the year. We made a lot of progress on key initiatives this quarter and are well positioned to deliver a strong finish to 2026 and a continuation of these trends into 2027. Before I walk through the quarter highlights in more detail, I want to acknowledge that this will be my last earnings call as CEO of Neogenomics. As we announced earlier this month, effective January 4th, 2027, Warren Stone, our current president and chief operating officer, will become chief executive officer of Neogenomics and join our board. Our support has transitioned and remain actively involved as our new executive chair. We shared three messages at the time of transition announcement that I want to reinforce. First, these roles cement our leadership team well into the future. Abhishek and the broader leadership team in place have helped drive our recent progress and will continue to do so. Second, this change comes from a position of strength. Succession is best done when the business is performing at or above expectations, which is exactly where we are. Warren has earned this promotion and I'm confident that he's the best person to lead neogenomics well into the future. Finally, with our strategy firmly in place and not changing, Now is the time to accelerate execution and advancement of that strategy. Warren will remain focused on the same value drivers that our team has been fixated on, and he'll speak to that in a moment. As I step into the role of executive chair, I see great opportunity for Neogenomics over the coming years as our business shifts to higher value, advanced testing modalities. Today, NGS represents about a third of our clinical revenue and only 10% of our clinical volumes. Over time, we expect NGS and MRD together to ultimately approach two-thirds of our revenue. With that inversion, we see the potential for durable and accelerating revenue growth, which will also drive discipline margin expansion, just as we saw in the third quarter. We'll continue to seek ways to remove operational complexity, upgrade our infrastructure, and invest where we see the highest ROI, namely in our clinical business across the NGS and MRD franchises. Now let's get into the third quarter highlights. Total revenue grew to $209 million, up 11% year over year and ahead of our expectations of approximately 10% growth. Our entire clinical business, which makes up roughly 93% of our revenue, is gaining momentum and exceeded our expectations. This is driven in large part by strength in NGS, with this higher margin revenue growing 29% as strong trends across both heme and solid tumor continue. On the much smaller non-clinical side, quarterly results met our expectations, though still represented a modest headwind to total revenue growth, declining approximately 10% or $1.5 million year-over-year. As a reminder, our non-clinical business is made up of two parts. One, our high-margin oncology data solutions business, or ODS, which is an emerging opportunity for us, selling proprietary, real-world evidence to pharma customers, and two, are a pharma service business which supports customers through drug development and clinical trials and historically has been comprised of legacy lower value tests. Looking ahead, as we have done in all parts of our business, we continue to evaluate the low margin commoditized contracts in our legacy pharma testing which are not strategic to our business. However, we remain committed to more high value services which move us up the pharma value chain. On the margin front this quarter, we again saw significant improvement. Adjusted gross margins expanded by over 300 basis points, driven by mixed shifts, strong AUP growth of 11%, and lab of the future initiatives. Together with operating expense discipline, this drove adjusted EBITDA to $19 million, well above our expectations. Beyond our financial results, we achieved several important business milestones in the third quarter. In August, RadarST received MoldDx coverage for immunotherapy treatment response monitoring, Our third Medicare covered indication and a cornerstone of our MRD launch. We continue to expect two additional indications to be granted reimbursement by Mold DX, one potentially by year end and the other by mid-2027. Warren will discuss recent customer feedback and other payer successes shortly. Separately, we continue to advance Lab of the Future initiatives and investments in digital transformation, including upgrades to sequencers in our revenue cycle management system. Lastly, our pipeline continues to advance, and we expect several tests and upgrades to move closer to clinical availability in the coming quarters and years. In the third quarter, we upgraded our flagship NGS test, our neocomprehensive heme panel, to include UVA1 and to detect variants at allele fractions as low as 3%. These additions, along with turnaround times as fast as eight days, further differentiate the test. Our next generation whole gene assay remains on track with data generation expected next year and a potential clinical launch in 2029. In sum, this was another strong quarter for NeoGenomics with our team of over 2,400 individuals delivering the consistency that investors expect. And as Warren takes over as CEO in January, I expect that he and the team will continue to execute on the objectives in front of them. With that, let me turn it over to Warren.

Thank you, Tony, and good afternoon, everybody. I want to begin by thanking Tony, our board, employees, and the shareholders for their confidence in me as I take over the CRO role early next year. I'm excited and grateful for the opportunity to lead Neogenomics, something I've prepared for during my time with the company. Let me start by sharing a bit about what inspires me about the opportunity ahead. At Neogenomics, we're a pure-play precision oncology company focused on the community, where approximately 80% of patients seek treatment Today, we estimate roughly 60% of patients are still not receiving advanced comprehensive genomic profiling, which could lead to improved treatment decisions and outcomes. We have the opportunity to be the company that bring these tests to more patients. Through our leadership in hematology, our trusted physician and community providers, a broad test menu that spans diagnosis to recurrence monitoring, and our growing oncology field force. is about leveraging our strength and momentum to advance the execution of our strategy and accelerate value creation. Our focus areas remain consistent, delivering durable NGS growth, driving MRD uptake with RadarST, and investing in our business while driving profitability through operational excellence. I'll briefly touch on each of these today. First, let me begin with NGS, which we view as our key value driver. In the quarter, NGS grew 29% and volumes grew 17% with large panel volumes growth above 25%. We view these trends as durable based on new product launches, mix shifts for higher value tests, and our integrated portfolio offerings. In hematology, new therapies are driving demand for our tests, and we have upgraded our flagship neurocomprehensive heme panel as we continue to deliver industry-competitive turnaround times. In solid tumor, Pantracer family, inclusive of probe, tissue, and LBX are seeing strong uptake while driving halo effects across the entire portfolio. LBX in particular is seeing increasing utilization and managed care reimbursement tailwinds following the Moldex reimbursement decision earlier this year. In total, we estimate large panel therapy selection penetration in the community setting to be around 35% to 40% leaving substantial room for our business to grow. As we drive more wins with commercial payers and deliver more integrated testing solutions across the entire testing journey, our momentum should grow. As we view it, our NGS therapy selection and expanding portfolio provides us a unique opportunity to differentiate ourselves. This becomes even more true now that we're promoting RadarST for immunotherapy or IO monitoring. A recent customer experience highlights the power of our comprehensive offering. The community oncologist in Texas, frustrated by ordering from multiple vendors for a single patient, worked with our team to standardize testing on Neogenomics, given our breadth of primary diagnosis through surveillance. Now, new patients at this practice start with Pantracer Pro and Pantracer Liquid for therapy selection, followed by RadarST for MRD. The single vendor also allows for faster turnaround time and better tissue preservation. It's a strong example of how an integrated menu sets us apart in the community oncology channel and drives multi-product adoption. Next, in MRD, we are confident in the opportunity and the foundation that we are setting. Early launch indications are encouraging. Over 30% of radar ST orders are accompanied by other gene and neogenomics tests. Approximately two-thirds are an indication and about 20% are in indication orders for patients on Medicare. Clinical RadarST volumes continue to improve on a month-over-month basis following the August decision by Moldex to reimburse RadarST for IO monitoring in late-stage cancer patients. IO monitoring is a critical piece of our foundation for a successful RadarST launch, with what we estimate to be a U.S. market opportunity of just under $4 billion, including several hundred thousand stage 4 patients. of which approximately 40% are on Medicare. Looking ahead, we expect further progress on the reimbursements with two additional indications for Radar SD currently under review by Molex. If approved, these additional indications would expand our access to over 40% of the total addressable market for tumor-informed MRD testing. Moreover, a leading regional commercial plan is informed us that effective December 15, It will cover radar ST for all MALDEX reimbursed indications. While clinical revenue will take time to ramp as we further unlock commercial opportunities over time, we are encouraged by the recent volume trends and oncologist receptivity to the test and expect growing momentum in 2027 to support more meaningful revenue contributions in 2028 and beyond. Finally, we're instilling operational excellence initiatives across our enterprise that will free up dollars for growth investments. These efforts will help fill investments into high ROI areas like commercial, lab of the future initiatives, and product pipelines. In commercial, we ended the quarter at over 160 sales resources consistent with prior commitments. Given the strength of our NGS business and recent reimbursement wins for RadarST, we plan to further expand our sales force in a disciplined manner in the fourth quarter and into 2027. In addition, We're investing in our vision of delivering a differentiated customer experience. This quarter, we released a real-time order status tracker which provides improved visibility to expect the completion timing of test results to support downstream workflows and patient scheduling. We also continue to improve EMR connectivity through Epic Aura integrations and the near-future integrations with FlatIon. Progress on our Lab of the Future initiatives also continued this quarter. We remain on track to transition our Heem NGS portfolio, the largest revenue component of our NGS business, to the Novaseq X platform in the first half of 2027. Separately, we recently expanded our digital pathology partnership with Indica Labs to prepare for AI's growing role in cancer diagnosis and therapy selection. In closing, I'm excited about the future. We have a tremendous opportunity ahead to deepen the penetration of precision oncology in the community while delivering consistent, durable, profitable revenue growth. And with that, I'll hand the call over to Abhishek.

Thank you, Warren, and good afternoon, everyone. In my remarks today, I will discuss our third quarter financial reserves and our updated 2026 guidance. We reported total revenue of $209 million, up 11% year-over-year. Clinical revenue grew 13%, $295 million, NGS revenue grew a strong 29% year-over-year, driven by 17% volume growth and above 25% volume growth for large-panel NGS tests. As Warren noted, we are pleased with the consistent, durable growth in our NGS portfolio and are excited about the opportunities ahead given by product upgrades across both heme and solid tumor as well as growing adoption of our large panel test. This mixed shift towards high value testing is also the primary driver of the increase in AUP with a balance coming from our CME initiative, including managed care pricing gains with payers. Turning to our non-clinical business, we reported revenue of 15 million in line with our expectations representing a decline of approximately 10% year-over-year. We continue to see compelling opportunities across our high-margin ODS business, though legacy pharma remains a headwind for us as we evaluate low-margin commoditized contracts while staying committed to offering high-value pharma services. Adjusted gross margin for the third quarter was 49%, an expansion of over 300 basis points versus the prior year period. Our adjusted growth profit increased by $16 million or 19% to $102 million. This was driven by AUP growth, a high mix of NGS revenue, and continued lab efficiencies driven by our Lab of the Future initiative. We continue to invest in the areas that will help us drive the growth margin expansion. We bought new sequencers and data servers for over $5 million in capital expenditures as part of NovoCX transition in this quarter. Also, we upgraded our revenue cycle management platform to Zyfin, as Tony noted. Zyfin is one of the leading RCM platforms for its ability to streamline and automate workflows, improve collection rates, and reduce bad debt. With a platform transition of this size, we saw a temporary impact on our receivables that we expect to normalize throughout the fourth quarter and into early 2027. Over time, we believe Zyfin will help us continue to drive AUP improvement and Greater Efficiencies. Moving down to P&M, total operating expenses in the quarter were 105 million. Sales and marketing expenses grew 27% year-over-year as we continue to invest in our sales team to help accelerate growth. And R&D increased 13% year-over-year as our team works to upgrade our on-market tests and advance next-generation products. These increases were funded in part by decreases in G&A expense, which declined by 4% year-over-year. This decline reflects our commitment to reduce G&A expenses as a percent of revenue and an intentional shift in capital allocation within operating expense lines. Our adjusted EBITDA was $18.7 million for the quarter, up 53% year-over-year, reflecting strong operating performance and disciplined investment. Turning to balance sheet, we ended the quarter with $139 million in cash and cash equivalents down $6 million as compared to the last quarter. Cash flow in this quarter reflects three discrete items, the payment of roughly $10 million for the DOJ settlement that we reserved for and discussed last quarter, transient effects from the Zyton implementation, and our continued investment in modernizing and scaling our infrastructure. Now turning to our 2026 guidance. Given our strong third quarter, we are raising our full-year 26 revenue guidance to a range of $807 to $809 million, up from $802 to $806 million discussed previously, and representing full-year revenue growth of approximately 11% at the midpoint. The key assumptions underlying the midpoint of our revised revenue guidance are as follows. First, our clinical business to grow in the low teens for the full year reflecting strong Q3 performance. Second, we expect NGS revenue to grow more than 25% for the full year, approaching approximately $250 million in 2026. Third, no change to our Pancras liquid or radar estate revenue assumptions. Finally, we now expect our nonclinical business to be down low double digits year over year. For the fourth quarter, this implies revenue growth of approximately 11%, slightly ahead of our prior farm entry. Turning to gross margin, We now anticipate well over 150 basis points of adjusted gross margin improvement for the full year, implying fourth quarter gross margin of approximately 48%. Finally, we are raising our full year 26 adjusted EBITDA guidance to approximately 60 million versus 56 to 58 million discussed previously, representing year-over-year growth of approximately 40%. With that, let me turn the call back over to Tony.

Thanks, Abhishek. We're making great progress in 2026 and expect a strong finish to the year. Four of the five growth catalysts we outlined for 2026 are now behind us, and the fifth, Expanded Radar ST Reimbursement, is well underway, with I.O. monitoring secured and two additional submissions pending. Our priorities from here are clear. Deliver a strong fourth quarter, drive durable NGS growth, uptake in MRD, and discipline margin expansion through operational excellence. We're looking forward to exiting 2026 with momentum, and we're excited about 2027. Thank you for your continued interest in neogenomics. And with that, operator, this concludes our prepared remarks, so you can please open up the line for questions.

Thank you. The floor is now open for questions. If you wish to join the queue to ask a question at this time, please press star 1. And if listening on speakerphone, Please pick up your handset while asking your question to provide optimal sound quality. We also ask that out of consideration to other callers on the line today and time allotted to please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. Thank you. Once again, please press star 1 on your phone at this time to join the queue to ask a question. And your first question will be from Dave Westenberg at Piper Sandler. Please go ahead.

All right. Thank you for taking the question. And congrats on Warren on taking over and congrats on Tony on being the new board member. So, well, you voted, sorry, chairman of the board. You know, I think I just kind of want to ask, you know, broadly, we're about the management transition here. You know, I think all of us that follow NEO very well think that Warren is the obvious, obvious successor. And, you know, clearly this is a, you know, 100% who we would all want to be CEO. Now saying that, I think Neo's transition and leadership haven't always been seamless. The business doesn't appear to be broken, so can you just talk about some of the timing on this, why we made this decision now, and then just some of the questions directly for Warren Can you talk about some of the things that you've been involved with in terms of the management decision over the last couple of years? And as you step into the role, how you're going to kind of communicate the long-term ambition versus keeping things in check? I know during the transition from Chris to Tony, there's a little bit of maybe not the best communication of the long-term ambition of the company. And then last, was there any lessons from that transition from Chris to Tony? I know there's a lot, but I think a lot of us want to know about this Tony to Warren transition.

Sure. Sure, Dave. I'll kick it off and then Warren turn it over to you. I would say there were a lot of lessons learned, Dave, and I think that's benefited us as we've done this transition. I would say first and foremost, relative to the timing of the transition, This was the result of what I thought was actually really good succession planning. There were no guarantees given to anybody. And if you recall, when I came on board, the first thing I did was appoint Warren to do his current role, where he would move from leading just the commercial organization to also include lab operations and demonstrate enterprise leadership across multiple functions, and as well representing almost 75% of our employee population. And I will tell you, Dave, that Warren did a marvelous job there. The degree of innovation and change within the labs today is literally amazing. And we continue to gain momentum in what we're doing across the commercial front. So I would say, without any hesitation, through my eyes, as well as the board, Warren earned the opportunity. And so once we knew that we had the right person for the future, then it became a question of what's the right time? And we just believe that we're doing this from a position of strength. By making the transition now, we get continuity for me going back to the board as executive chair. So there's not going to be with Lynn stepping out and not seeking reelection. There won't be a new chairperson coming in to my challenge strategy. So it just seemed a perfect opportune time for us to do it. Second, by doing it when we did it earlier in the month, it gave us the opportunity to get in front of all of our leaders because we already had a senior leadership team scheduled. And there we were able to guarantee that there would be no disruption from the change and everybody is fully aligned internally around what we're doing. And so I would say the key lessons learned as well is that Warren and I have been working closely together over the last few years and we continue to do so. You know, we're joined at the hip relative to the strategy. will be very, very much aligned as we go through the budget process in the final order. And I think those were the big lessons learned. I was basically handed a budget that I didn't have the same insights that I would have liked to have had. Warren would be able to own this budget himself due to the timing. So that's kind of the macro-wise, and then Warren, you can give your own perspectives.

Yeah, thank you. First, thank you for the kind words. Appreciate that. I think to your question sort of how involved am I being, I think that's a critical question that and I've just come up on sort of four years in near genomics and I'd say my first two years I was very involved in most things and over the last two years since Tony transitioned into CO, I'd say I was acutely involved in practically all decisions, certainly those that related to people and strategy. So I really consider myself as sort of one of the architects of the strategy and I say that because it's important. I think we have momentum in the business right now, and I hope the results that we've just reported here in the third quarter actually demonstrate that. And what we want to do is not only maintain that momentum, but obviously accelerate that momentum. So continuity in the strategy is critically important, and maintaining continuity within the leadership is important as well. So the fact that I've been heavily involved in that process, I feel very confident we're able to achieve that. To that point, I think in terms of what is changing, I think maybe the ambition in terms of the value that we can deliver from the strategy as we transition into this next chapter. And I think lastly, your point is how are we going to keep the community informed around our ambitions and the future. I think what we certainly are planning on doing outside of investor comps like JPMorgan is to have an investor day in the first half of 2027. A lot of exciting things to share from a portfolio perspective, from a commercial expansion point of view, operational excellence, and we feel it's been four years since the last opportunity. It's time for us to do the same again.

Got it. Thank you very much. And since that was a long answer, I'll keep it kind of short. Abhishek, I just wanted to know about what MRD and liquid contribution would be in Q4. If you have any, just given the fact that you gave it on the year, there's technically only one quarter in the year. Honestly, we're just trying to get kind of a run rate for 27. I know you're not going to give 27 guidance, so I'm going to try my best with kind of looking at that. Thank you.

We would expect nothing less from you, Dave. Yeah, no, again, I think we're not breaking it down with the quarter level for now, Dave. Sorry to disappoint you on that one. We'll provide more color in our Q4 call for that one. But overall, for both liquid and the MRD, our guidance that we gave in the beginning of the year, we are tracking well to those numbers.

Operator, let's go to the next question. Next question will be from Pumitsuda at Learink. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. Thanks for the questions. And Warren, congrats. Well deserved and excited to have you on the spot. And Tony, really solid job as you came into the seat and executed. First one, you know, First one from my side is really, again, AUP growth is a very important part of the story. Came in, again, slightly even ahead of the pre-announcements as we looked at it. Maybe could you elaborate, you know, just how should we think about that? and the sustainability of that into 2027. I know you're not giving 27, but just to, you know, the volume growth, 17% NGS, really great, 25% large on the panels, on the larger panels as well, but just wanted to get a sense of the AUP growth sustainability of that.

Sure, Kunit, I can take that question. AUP growth came in at 11% for the current quarter as we reported in our numbers this quarter. And we had guided in the beginning of the year that overall AUP growth is going to be in the high single digits and the volume growth is going to be in the low single digits. The reason for the AUP growth to be higher and volume growth to be lower was primarily because of this exit of the high volume, low value test. One particular customer that basically kind of had a run of pretty high volumes in 2025. So what we are basically suggesting that once we kind of stabilize out of this particular dynamic of exiting this high-volume, low-value contract, what we have guided that the volume and the AUP should track back to the mid-single digit, which we have been in the past. So that's the first piece of the question that AUP growth should, in the normal environment, be around mid-single digits. Now, on the 11% AUP growth and from the durability perspective, I would say that we feel that there's a lot of room for us to continue to deliver on the AUP numbers. The reason, number one, is the mix. The two-thirds of the AUP growth is coming from us driving the high-margin, high-value NGS product. And given the fact that our larger panels are even growing strongly within the NGS family, that is actually helping us drive the AUP growth. Now, the second piece of the AUP is the RCM initiative. Now, RCM initiative, as we kind of called out in our prepared remarks, we are actually encouraged by seeing some of the recent wins in the commercial pairs. And that is basically helping us drive the RCM, the real AUP benefits that we are seeing now. So those two pieces kind of actually help us continue to drive the AUP growth.

Got it, super. And then just briefly on the NGS volume growth itself, I'm wondering if you could qualify that, you know, how much of that is sort of new store sales or same store sales? Essentially, I'm trying to get to is, you know, are you taking share or how much of this is just market growth versus taking share? Again, competition in this space is, as you know well, is there, but you have a very strong position in the community setting, so I just wanted to get a sense of how you're winning there.

Yeah, Puneet, and again, firstly, thanks for coming on the front. I would say I don't have the data specifically broken out. I can tell you that this is not just with regards to growth of existing customers. We're certainly seeing robust new customer acquisition, which is supporting this growth, as well as incremental volumes that are coming in from existing customers, enabled by our bidirectional interfaces that we've put in place to support a simpler workflow and better customer experience.

Thank you, Puneet.

Next question will be from Bill Bonello at Craig Hallam. Please go ahead, Bill.

Hey, guys. Thanks a lot. I want to come at the growth, maybe, hopefully I'm not asking the exact same question that everybody else has been asking, but Obviously, the NGS growth was especially strong this quarter. When I think about it, there's a lot of drivers, including the expanded sales force. She implemented the specialized oncology sales team, and then obviously the new products. I'm just wondering if you can give us some sense of the relative importance of those factors. What I'm really trying to get at is is, you know, to what extent the new products are already truly, you know, kicking in and adding growth or, you know, is most of the growth still coming from those other factors and the growth from the new products is largely in front of us? I just, that 25% number you gave, it actually sounded a little bit low to me and, you know, I don't have a base to put it on, so... Anyway, I think you get the gist of what I'm asking and then hopefully a follow-up.

Yeah, Bill, I'll kick it off and then Warren, please drill down a little bit more. I think you were right in your initial talking about, you know, the Salesforce expansion and product introductions, all these things contribute. I think, you know, when you look across the spectrum, I think actually, you know, some of the product upgrades and new therapies certainly were additive to the overall growth rate. What is also nice is that we're seeing its broad base. It's across heme as well as solid tumor. Heme being a larger portion of the business, it's still showing very good robust growth. Solid tumor is beginning to kick in. It's on a smaller number, but that does help fuel growth trajectory as well. You mentioned the mixed shift to the larger panels, and 25% volume growth is really, really strong, especially when you consider the mixed shift. and then, of course, there is what you mentioned before, the Salesforce expansion. But any other color, Warren?

Yeah, I think, again, I'd say, well, there's no one single factor. If we go back to the five products that we launched in 2023, you know, that's contributing about 25% of our revenue today and the actual growth of those five products was north of that, well, north of that 25%. They were a large panel that we introduced in 2023. Well, north of that 25%. 25% that we articulated. So there's definitely still a lot of opportunity in the products. And then secondly, yes, certainly field force expansion is something that we continue to see as a really attractive investment. We're getting good returns there that's substantiating the growth. And that's why my prepared marks indicated that we're going to make further investments into the commercial organizations for NGS and MRD that's coming as well. And then, you know, just our work around customer experience. I will maybe just call that out both in terms of just taking friction out and our bidirectional interfaces. That channel continues to work very effectively for us, so that's helping accelerate the growth. The only comment that I will make is the upgraded panel that Tony spoke about, our HEEM panel, that happened very late in the quarter and probably has very little to do with the results that we've actually articulated.

Bill, I guess maybe just a capstone on this, I guess, you know, as an organization, you can do anything you want you just can't do everything you want and you know this organization is focused relentlessly on driving our key growth drivers which NGS is is the biggest short-term driver that we have and so it is an organizational focus point for all of us and maybe the final thing is and Warren's made this apparent in previous conversations moving from a product mindset to a portfolio mindset we look for connectivity across the portfolio and that is certainly having an effect that

Thank you. That's really helpful. And just as the quick follow-up, and I know that the focus is on NGS growth, but we have had a little bit of a drag from discontinuing the low-margin customer, the high-volume, low-margin customer. Can you just remind us when we should start to see that annualized, and maybe what a normalized growth rate for the non-NGS portion of the business is on a volume standpoint?

No, absolutely, Bill. And what we have generally called out this high-value, low-value customer T in Q3 of 45. So we basically had the toughest compare with one in this particular quarter. And then this will start to taper off in the Q4, which I would say that it will basically start to kind of get muted as we go in Q1 and Q2 of next year. But the whole idea here is that if we were to ship out basically this particular quarter and a little bit of the path line, the non-oncology testing that we exhibited. When I drew my math, the volumes are growing in the mid-single digits, very similar to how we have seen in the past. So my sense is that you will start to see the volume to uptake. For example, the Q4 volume growth is anticipated to be about 3%. So we were at, say, zero in Q2. We came at about like 2% this fall, then we are going to be growing at 3%. So you will start to see that the volume will start to normalize in the back half of 2020 sets.

Thanks. That's super helpful. Thank you very much. Thanks, Bill.

Next question comes from Mark Massaro at BTIG. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thank you for taking the questions. And Tony and Warren, congrats on your new roles. In some of our recent doc call diligence, we found that there were clinicians ordering Radar ST and indications that you don't have reimbursement yet. Can you maybe talk about the strategy there? I recognize the volumes are probably small here, but maybe just remind us. I believe Radar is a pan-cancer test, so I'm just curious if you can speak to whether or not some of the indications that they're ordering in, in your view, are close to reimbursement, or is this perhaps part of a strategy to increase interest in the platform pan-cancer ahead of the reimbursement?

Yeah. Well, thank you, and thank you for your kind words as well. I think a couple of points I'd like to highlight there. First and foremost, we are actively promoting Radar SD for in-indication volumes at this particular point, But, you know, I.O. actually covers a lot of different indications where it's relevant. So it actually has allowed us to proactively broaden our message in the market. Not that we're taking all comments, so to speak, but we can take many more indications than we could before. And that's really helped to drive adoption. We've seen a meaningful uptake there as well. Now, then I think your other point is that we are taking Thank you very much.

Yeah, and Mark, again, this was a conscious effort on our part. When we initially had the good opportunity to reenter the market, you know, we basically had head and neck and a subset of breast. And so the reality is, while we were excited, it's still onesies and twosies with an individual doctor. They're not going to start to embed you in workflows and broader use until you have a more expansive indication base. And that's why I.O. was so important to us, because for the first time, As Warren said, with the other two indications that we anticipate, all of a sudden you're now talking more than 40% of the TAM, and we no longer have to settle for the onesies and twosies that can go after workflow. And so that's why it's such an essential element to secure those as we then head into 2027 from a position of strength.

Yeah, Mark. Okay. Just one other thing I had mentioned here is just the halo effect that we're seeing, right? One of the things that Warren said in his remarks was, We're seeing about a 30% attach rate from orders with Radar. I think that's sort of what we're seeing across the portfolio, right? It's less about the single product, single indication in these early days, but more about the broad portfolio effect that we're seeing here with Radar as an interest market.

I think maybe I'll build on that. The greater majority of that attachment is actually NGS as well. So there's a halo effect you're starting to see come through very clearly.

Okay, perfect. And then my follow-up, in your press release, you indicated that you expanded agreements with multiple commercial payers in some of your new techs. Are any of these with large national health plans? And can you speak to any progress either with Pantracer Liquid or with RadarST?

Yeah, I can basically say, Mark, that we are not providing that level of detail. There have been a handful of wins in the last one quarter, and I would say the majority of the wins that we are seeing, they are coming in the pancreas, the liquid, and the N4 radar. But yeah, we are not providing more details other than that, but we are very interested to see these wins with many of these pairs. Thanks, Mark. Great. Thanks, guys.

Thank you.

Next question comes from Matt Leroux at William Blair. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good afternoon. You called out improving month-over-month radar volumes following the Moldex decision. Just curious what you're seeing from physicians, you know, that gives you confidence this is, you know, a sign of real early adoption, perhaps, versus initial trialing, and would be curious Andrew and Warren's comments around Attach, just where you're finding the most Attach and kind of workflow synergy. And Warren, you briefly addressed it in your response there, but would love to hear a bit more.

Yeah, so maybe I think what gives us confidence is I think one of the things that we track is not only new physician adoption, i.e. how many new physicians are coming on board, how many people are coming back multiple times and We were in the past sort of looked at somebody who reorders a test five or six times to create a bit of a stickiness. We saw this when we were trying to drive adoption for NGS solid tumor previously, driving a similar sort of metric here on RAID RST. And we're seeing more and more physicians, particularly now in IO setting, that are actually seem to be sending to us on a regular occurrence. So consider that as sort of sticky and adopted versus trialing would be In terms of the attach rate, I was actually doing some due diligence on this before the call, and there isn't a particular trend that's linked to a certain indication, whether it's a specialist or a generous oncologist. It's pretty broad-based, where a single oncologist may have an attachment for one patient but not for the next two. So they seem to be using it very selectively at this stage, but it's equating out to about 30%, which has remained consistent. from when we reported it after the first quarter of launch at the end of the second quarter. We were at about 30%. We're still there, and volumes increased meaningfully.

Matt, I think you were asking also something there on workflow integration, too, across our portfolio. Warren, it might be interesting to talk sort of about the diagnosis through remarkets, right?

Yeah, I think, great call. So I think... One of the biggest values that we bring, particularly in a community setting, is that we have this sort of workflow that starts with the primary diagnosis, where we actually get to see the patient or the patient sample first, because they need the primary diagnosis. That kicks off all of the downstream work, so we get that first, and more and more of the work that we're doing, particularly with Pantracer Pro, is trying to actually drive an automatic ordering of downstream workflow requirements. This is a lot of our philosophy is sort of trying to leverage the fact that we get to see the patient first from the primary diagnosis and how can we then attach that downstream testing from that initial testing that we do.

Yeah, that's really helpful and not to distract from the main stage here, but just on the non-clinical side. It sounds like you're thinking about approaching that differently and there might be some decisions made about areas that are worth pursuing versus those that are not. Just curious, do you think that's a business that remains attractive for you long term and that you can be well positioned to grow in at some point, perhaps, again, after you've gone through some portfolio rationalization?

I think it's a great question. I would tell you that, again, you know, Thank you for joining us.

MRD, and old genome, that's attractive.

I just don't believe, just like we looked at with our clinical business, we want to continue to pursue the kind of commodity-based bespoke solutions that really aren't going to be supportive of long-term growth and margins. And so I think we just need to refocus our energies there, but longer term, it's still an area that we want to be supportive and grow through the value chain on pharma, especially, you know, the higher tech part.

Okay, I appreciate it. Thank you.

Next question comes from Mason Carrico at Stevens. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the questions here. I guess the first one, how are you thinking about the potential impact of the preliminary 2027 rates on the clinical business? Have you guys sized up the headwinds? Do you still think you could grow ASPs in the mid-single digits next year if those were finalized?

Yeah, I'll keep that one off and Abhishek, certainly you can dive in if you'd like. I think relative to Pamela, when we looked at, you know, the preliminary rates that came across, you know, for us, our NEO exposure, it's relatively low. It's low to mid-single digit millions, you know, because we enjoy a book of our business that's, you know, more client built. So we have not quite the same exposure that some other companies would have. So knowing that it's You know, in that mid-single-digit million, we're confident we continue to show growth in AUP and other areas of the ESPs over time. The area that we'll obviously have to sharpen, you know, our pencils on is that while it's only mid-single-digit millions and we can absorb a lot of that, it does drop down to EBITDA, you know, and through gross margins. So, you know, we'll have to get creative in our expense base and making sure that we're making the right investments, but it is not a big headwind for us as we envision it today.

I think you've covered it all, Tony. I think I'll only add to that one, Mason, that at the end of the day, if our AUP growth is mid-single digit, this basically represents a very small portion of that, right? So overall, it will not be meaningful from the AUP growth perspective. It's just that the overall number for the adjusted EBITDA will have to basically kind of make up for this number that you would have basically seen as a higher either basically a flow through. We are just a little bit out. We have to basically say, okay, do we need to make some conscious choices on our investments?

Got it. Okay, that makes sense. And maybe for Warren, first, congrats on the new role. I think it was maybe you who touched on this at a past conference or earnings call, but you've talked about a halo effect from Pantracer liquid on Pantracer tissue. I was wondering if you could be able to Quantify that to some degree, I guess. Are you seeing faster tissue order growth in accounts that have adopted Pantracer liquid versus those that have not yet?

I don't have the answer to that question off the top of my head.

I'd have to look at that. I can take it sideways because I was looking at some data yesterday. So, what we are seeing that, okay, now, based on the pancreas of pro, now you can actually reflect to a liquid test automatically, right? So, what we are clearly seeing that our pancreas of pro orders are going through the roof. And that basically gives us the optionality, basically, that basically gives us the optionality that if you're not able to perform the tissue, then we are able to reflect on the liquid. So, that's the good part. and maybe I'll say not go into the room, but go back to our guidance on the liquid. So basically we are doing as we have expected on the liquid side of the job.

I mean, basically, and this is what happens when finance talks about the growth rate in the NGS through the roof. I wouldn't like to quantify it through the roof. It's doing very well, though. We actually see, it's more the, we see more the other way around. We seem to start from tissues. and when tissue, we don't have enough tissue or tissue fails, we get to reflux the liquid. Yes, we have isolated situations where we have customers that are just using us for liquid and not actually using us for solid yet. And we actually obviously work to try and drive adoption of tissue in that particular case. But we do see this as a growth opportunity in terms of the portfolio. When a physician's ordering one and not the other, we obviously actively promote against the other test as well. but Pantracer Pro is our key vehicle here and it gives them optionality as to where they start.

Got it. Thank you, guys. Thank you.

Next question comes from Taco Peterson at Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks. I want to probe a little bit on gross margins. I understand you're obviously taking it up here above 150 basis for the year. I mean, you've had really two strong back-to-back quarters here. Can you maybe just talk on where you see a ceiling for margins as a lab of the future, efficiency scale, anything you can quantify on what X is going to do on margins. And then in prior quarters, I think you talked about clinical AUP growth was aided by MCO pricing gains. So is any of the portion of the margin expansion you're seeing now tied to structural payer contract improvements that won't repeat next year?

Yeah, on the adjusted gross margin again cycle, we are seeing a solid growth there, 300 basis point increase year-over-year. We finished the quarter net adjusted with a margin of 49%. And what we are seeing is the benefit of the A and B growth, which is primarily driven by the strong uptake in our AGS revenue, which is a high margin business. So that's the first one. and of course the second piece stays the RCN where the benefit will be a direct pull through to the adjusted gross profit dollars. And the third piece is the lab of the future as you called out. I would say that most of the lab of the future benefits are driven by the sourcing and the efficiencies within the lab. We have not yet started to see the impact of the NovaSeq X transition because we just moved What is the liquid? The liquid portfolio has moved to the Novosig X, but that's a relatively small revenue in the overall scheme of things. But we are excited about the transition of the heme portfolio that we are anticipating will take the first half of the next year. So we should start to see the impact of the Novosig X transition in the second half of 2027. And as we roll out the remaining portfolio of the Novosig X in the second half of 2027, early 2028, I would say 28 would become the year when we start to see a more benefit of the transition to the normal index.

Anything that I would say is although I would consider ourselves in the fairly early innings in terms of lab in the future initiatives, et cetera, probably any three or something. And we have a great outlook in terms of how gross margins can expand. In the short term, the one offset really is just we are running a lot of MRD where Thank you very much.

and the channel.

The high volume, low value business that we were exiting was actually not a product that we were exiting, it was one customer that we secured about a year ago, maybe 15, 18 months ago. We decided to no longer do that business with that customer because it wasn't profitable. Those tests are still readily available in our portfolio and the community channel are actively using them. So this was a one-customer scenario, not an overall product discontinuation.

Okay. And then lastly, just on pharma, you had the question earlier on longer-term strategic value of that business. In the near term, has that segment bottomed? And I guess just touch on the corrective actions you're taking that could allow it to return to growth next year.

Yeah. I would say, Tygo, our view relative to 27 hasn't really fundamentally changed. We still see that we want to prioritize the key growth drivers that I've mentioned before, the NGS, MRD, and whole genome. We don't just want to pursue new kind of low value bespoke solutions within that segment. But I would say in general, we still see the potential for return to growth to be slightly positive in 27. We still see our growth coming from the ODS segment. That's showing really good quality revenue. I would say, you know, the legacy pharma would be, you know, low single-digit kind of decline, but net-net, it would be, you know, slightly up. Tyco, again, I would probably just say in general, it's not material, really, that the 27 guide, because, you know, to be up, you know, positive growth, we're talking a difference of one or two millions. If you miss the number, it's by one or two million. It's probably not going to be material to how we view the business in 2027. and the real opportunity for the pharma piece is how we can help drive our revenues in 28 and beyond as we bring out things like next-gen MRD and whole genome and things like that.

Okay, thank you.

Next question comes from Dan Brennan at TD Cowan. Please go ahead.

Great. Thank you. Thanks for the questions. Hey, Tony, congrats. And obviously, Warren, congrats. Maybe just one on just starting MRD, what, mid-single-digit revenue guide was for this year, right? So any color what it was actually in the quarter? And just thinking through with IO being such a larger market than the first two that you have, as Tony alluded to, I would think juggling from $5 million is not a big Herculean task in 27. Any way to think about How much that IO opportunity can mean in 27?

Yeah, we'll definitely go with the 27 in 27, Dan. You know my view on that, right? We've got to keep both our feet in this quarter, and we still have a quarter to deliver. Relative to the mid-single-digit millions we've posted for radar and LDX, I would tell you that, in totality, we're pretty much in line with those expectations, to be maybe even slightly positive. On radar, very specifically, That was broken. If you remember, there were two parts of that. It was clinical as well as pharma. I would say on the clinical side, Dan, we like what we're seeing relative to the volumes. Those plans seem to be moving in the direction that we anticipated relative to that key assumption. Now the key is just pulling it through, right? You know, continuing to beat down the commercial side and securing additional indications would also go a long way. So pretty much in line there. The pharma adjustment that we said loads double digits, that did include a little bit of what was in there for radar, and that was more of contract timing. So I would again say on the clinical side, it's pretty much right where we thought we would be. Pharma maybe just a hair behind, and that's more on the timing. But in totality between radar as well as LBX, we're on, if not slightly ahead, of that mid-single-digit million number. Okay?

Great. Thanks, Tony. Obviously, NGS, you know, very clearly ringing through is the future growth, future margins. You mentioned the penetration opportunity in CGP, but, you know, when you talk to all the large clay labs, I mean, they're obviously going after this market extremely hard, and the community is important. So, any – can you just give some color about – I know there was a question from Puneet earlier about trying to disaggregate maybe same-store sales growth versus new clients, but – There's a way to discuss kind of how often you run into large clear labs, like what's the overlap of your customers versus theirs, and have you guys discussed any kind of win rates versus them, and if you have, how have those been trending, steady, up, down, anything of that nature? Thank you.

Again, it's a complicated analysis. I mean, we obviously see most of the large clear labs in most of our customers. It's seldom that we don't. At the end of the day, it's very regionalized in terms of who we bump into. A lot of our business is certainly take away from a number of those players based on our portfolio opportunity from diagnosis and therapy selection, not MRD. Those discounts, the fact that we have to put in the door all the time from the heave side of things, that creates a unique position for us. So we always have that seat at the table and that's a leverage point for us. They're typically sending high volumes to us. We have couriers arriving every single day to collect samples and It's just our workflow simplification is really a key driver for us. So that's why we're winning. That's why we differentiate exactly what the win rate is. I don't have, relative to different competition, I don't have that data.

Great. Thank you.

Thanks, Jim. Next question will be from Subbu Nabi at Guggenheim. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thank you for taking my questions. I have a slightly different question on NGS. What share of NGS volume is now comprehensive panels versus targeted, and where do you expect that mix to settle? How much AUP runway is left from the mix shift alone?

Are you talking from a volume perspective or revenue perspective?

Let's start with volume.

Yeah, so we're quickly approaching sort of a 50-50 mark now between large and targeted panels from a volume perspective. Slightly higher volumes on the large panel on the heat side and slightly smaller, lower volumes on the large panel on the solar tumor side is sort of how the mix is actually breaking out. But the growth rate in terms of large panel, as we indicated, north of 25%, We quickly see the shift taking place, and that's part of what's helping from a mix shift perspective in supporting higher AUPs.

So there should be much more AUP runway left even next year as the mix shift continues, right?

Yes. Yes.

Perfect. And then on pricing, how many of the 300 contracts that you have renegotiated since 2Q, how much of that uplift is still ahead of you in 2027?

I'm not sure. Which 300 contracts are you referring to, Siva?

that you guys spoke about renegotiating since 2Q, you know, that you were revisiting all the accounts and that's how you found out this high volume, low contract customer that you exited. Or do I have that right? Do I have that right?

Actually, maybe so. We do not recall the 300 contracts comment.

Okay. Okay. No worries. You noted a 30% attachment rate of RadarST to other neo-tests. What's the internal goal for attachment and how do you plan to get there? That will be it. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. I think we did set ourselves a goal and we're actually in the midpoint of our goal at this particular point from an attachment rate perspective. So we're actually seeing quite an encouraging uplift. As you said, at 30%, we're in the midrange of the goal. However, we have identified a few other opportunities whereby we feel, over time, we can increase the attach rate further. But not necessarily MRD attached to NGS. It's also the other way around. You're now doing the NGS. You may have a TNB high outcome. Logically, you're a candidate for radar ST with IO. And how can we actually attach from radar from NGS to Radar. So we're thinking of attachments from both ways. The 30% that we called out is just Radar to other testing where we feel we can also drive it in the other direction, if that makes sense.

Definitely. Thank you so much. And congratulations again, Warren.

Thank you, Sue. Thanks, Sue.

Next question comes from Lou Lee at Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Great, thank you for squeezing me in. So I will kick the question short. I guess I think you mentioned you're going to increase the MRD investment, including the Salesforce. I'm wondering, can you give a little bit more color in terms of the size of the investment and then maybe specific areas that you're going to invest? And then just another quick one, in terms of oncology data that you see as emerging, I wonder, like, you do have a large data for a while. So I guess, like, what kind of strategy that you're planning to kind of monetize that asset? Thank you.

Yeah, maybe just on the first one, and then Warren, you can take the second. Relative to the investment areas for us now and moving into the future, you know, we'll get more specific and give you some metrics for 27 in 27. But the areas that we would continue to invest would certainly be on the Salesforce side. We're still a little under indexed, and there's more opportunity for us there. So Warren and his team, Kristi, they've nicely ramped up the selling resources available to us today, but there's probably more opportunity there. We're not talking doubling or anything of that nature, so it would be a really disciplined expansion on the Salesforce side that we'd be happy to share when we get into the February session. Likewise, we'll continue to invest in the R&D. of our house because any indication growth that we can get for our portfolio serves us not just in revenue growth but also bad debt because we can start to collect some money back on these things. So expect R&D to go from what was in that 4% to 5% range. We're talking now 7%-ish, so a step up. It won't be crazy. We'll also continue to invest in lab of the future initiatives where we see that we can be really good with our investments and drive margins. So those will be the areas that we'll continue But I would tell you there will be some offsets as well. We're going to continue to get smart in G&A. We want to continue to drive that down. We have a number of efficiency goals across the organization as well, so it won't be all additive because we still want to have a disciplined approach to evidence. So that's kind of a high level of where we're going. Warren, on the second part?

Yeah, I think on the data side of things, you're absolutely right. We've been generating data from the testing that we've been doing for many years. Up until recently and probably the 2023 timeframe, most of our data was image data. It wasn't genomics data. So maybe in terms of what pharma is looking for today, and the less valuable, the image data than it is genomics data. So since 2003, we started to develop quite a robust database and we expect that database to grow significantly as we launch the WGS portfolios in 2028 and beyond. So this is an attractive business for us. It's growing in the double digits and it's very, very high margin business. So we're going to continue to invest in there and actually The raw material, so to speak, is going to continue to grow at a compounded rate based on INGS growth rate.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dave. Next question will be from Mike Madsen at Needham. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. I really appreciate you getting us on. This is actually Joseph on for Mike. I'll just keep it to one, just given that it's late in the call. Maybe just on the Indica Labs partnership, was wondering if you could give some more color on the breadth of what's being collaborated there. Is this something that maybe we should expect development of an AI pathology tool specifically in clinical diagnostics, or is this likely to stay in kind of the research side of it for the time being?

So we've had a partnership with Indica Labs for a number of years. We've actually started this back in 2016 and it's the reason why we have so many images that we actually sell on the ODS side of things right now because they were digitized all the way back to 2016. So we've expanded that. We like Indica Labs because it's an open system, different to other providers. and ultimately we see two primary areas where we're going to get a lot of efficiency. The one is operation efficiency and it's all AI driven at the end of the day where we can use AI interpretation of digital images. So that's going to be a big area of focus for us. It's one of the Lab of the Future initiatives that's going to help and it's particularly going to create capacity on the doctor's side of things where they do the sign outs. and then absolutely these are going to be AI algorithms which will ultimately be tested to support diagnosis and therapy selection decisions. So we see it both commercially and operationally creating value for us.

Okay, very helpful. Congrats on the strong quarter, you guys. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

This time we have no other questions. I would like to turn the call over to Tony Zook.

I'd like to thank everybody for joining us on the call, and I want to personally thank my NeoGenomics teammates for their unwavering commitment to our mission. It's been a privilege to lead this company, and I lead this role with great confidence in Warren, our leadership team, and our strategy. We'll look forward to updating you on our fourth quarter results in the 2027 outlook in February with Warren leading the call. Thank you again, and have a great day, everybody.

Thank you. This does conclude today's conference call. You may now disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you again for your participation.