Hello all, and welcome to iRhythm Technologies Second Quarter 2024 Earnings Conference Call. My name is Lydia and I'll be your operator today. After the prepared remarks, there'll be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] I'll now hand you over to Stephanie Zhadkevich, Director of Investor Relations to begin. Please go ahead when you're ready.

Thank you all for participating in today's call. Earlier today, iRhythm released financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2024. Before we begin, I'd like to remind you that management will make statements during this call that include forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements contained in this call that are not statements of historical fact should be deemed to be forward-looking statements. These are based upon our current estimates and various assumptions and reflect management's intentions, beliefs and expectations about future events, strategies, competition, products, operating plans and performance. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to materially differ from those anticipated or implied by these forward-looking statements. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on these statements. For a list and description of the risks and uncertainties associated with our business, please refer to the Risk Factors section of our most recent annual and quarterly reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q, respectively, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Also during the call, we will discuss certain financial measures that have not been prepared in accordance with US GAAP, with respect to our non-GAAP and cash-based results, including adjusted EBITDA, adjusted operating expenses, and adjusted net loss. Unless otherwise noted, all references to financial metrics are presented on a non-GAAP basis. The presentation of this additional information should not be considered in isolation of, as a substitute for, or superior to results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Please refer to the tables in our earnings release and 10-Q for reconciliation of these measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to financial measures in this call, other than revenue, refer to non-GAAP results. This conference call contains time-sensitive information and is accurate only as of the live broadcast today, August 1, 2024. iRhythm disclaims any intention or obligation, except as required by law, to update or revise any financial projections or forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events, or otherwise. And with that, I will turn the call over to Quentin Blackford, iRhythm's President and CEO.

Thank you, Stephanie. Good afternoon and thank you all for joining us. Brice Bobzien, our Chief Financial Officer; and Dan Wilson, our EVP of Corporate Development and Investor Relations, join me on today's call. My prepared remarks today cover business updates during the second quarter of 2024, as well as our annual outlook. I'll then turn the call over to Brice to provide a detailed review of our second quarter financial results and updated 2024 guidance. Finally, Brice and Dan will both discuss the CFO transition that we announced earlier today before I close out with final remarks. Once again, we realized strong results in the second quarter from our core business as we achieved revenue of $148 million, representing 19.3% growth versus the prior year. This success was driven by another quarter of record volume demand, along with a slight improvement in average selling prices. Within our core business, our teams continued to drive growth from new accounts that were opened in the prior 12 months as well as penetration in existing accounts and we have built a very strong pipeline, thanks to the growing recognition of Zio's value proposition. The compelling CAMELOT real-world evidence data demonstrating Zio superiority both across categories and within category directly against competitors for highest diagnostic yield and lowest retest rate continues to provide traction with clinicians and health systems. Payers have also responded favorably to our health economic data in CAMELOT, enabling our market access team to drive favorable negotiations with greenfield contracts and to drive updates to several existing coverage policies for improved patient access. Our continued focus within the primary care channel has been successfully driving conversions from competitors as well as continued conversion of customers from traditional modalities, such as short-term Holter monitoring, with a steady stream of new evidence…

Thanks, Quentin. Before discussing the quarter, I wanted to briefly address my upcoming transition from the CFO role at iRhythm. I've resided in Southern California for the past 12-plus years, but I'm originally from the Midwest where much of my immediate and extended family currently resides. Like many of us, we have loved ones who are aging and have experienced health challenges. While working and residing out of the Midwest for the past couple months, I've been able to help and support my family members directly. While providing this support, it became apparent that my family needs my focused ongoing support firsthand, trying to evaluate how I could continue to support family needs while also balancing the work here at iRhythm, it was clear I needed to make a decision. With the changing landscape of my life, I've decided to step away from iRhythm to focus my attention on family. For most of my life, I've prioritized career, but priorities shift and I need to attend to personal family matters in the near to mid-term. Over the last couple of years, I have loved being a part of transforming and maturing this great company and I'm so thankful for the truly world-class team we have built. There is so much opportunity here at iRhythm and I am grateful to have been a part of it. I will be transitioning out of my role as CFO on August 31st, but will remain engaged for a period of time to ensure a seamless and effective transition. There are great days ahead here at iRhythm and I plan to have a front-row seat to see us continue to be the leader in ambulatory cardiac monitoring. Turning to the quarter, as a reminder, unless otherwise noted, the financial metrics that I discuss today will…

Thank you, Brice. I would like to start by expressing my excitement for the opportunity to step into the CFO role. I would like to thank Quentin, Brice and the rest of the iRhythm team in positioning me for success and ensuring a smooth transition. In my five years with iRhythm, I have seen a tremendous amount of growth and progress and I am more excited than ever about what's in front of us. I am honored and looking forward to contributing to our next phase of growth and transformation. As I step into the role, I am able to reflect on the engagement I have had with our investor base and covering analysts and have a good understanding of the strategic and financial expectations of iRhythm. My focus will be on supporting the company to drive continued top-line growth and doing so profitably. We have many initiatives in motion and I'm excited to continue leading and supporting those efforts as we look to scale iRhythm and serve millions more patients in the future. Thank you and I look forward to working with all of you in the new role.

Thank you, Dan. Before closing, I'd like to thank Brice for his many contributions in helping us to transform our company. While disappointed to see Brice step down, just as we're beginning to see the financial benefits of the significant transformation efforts we've embarked on over the last 30 months, I respect his decision as he deals with unfortunate personal matters at this time. Importantly, he'll be nearby as we work through this transition to Dan. Succession planning is something that we spend a good amount of time with here at iRhythm, and Dan has long been seen as a potential successor to Brice. His strong strategic financial background, in-depth knowledge of our company and industry, together with a strong relationship to our investors, will allow for a seamless transition and ensure we remain on track to delivering on the long-term financial goals that we have laid out. That path forward is as clear as ever. The strong financial performance in the second quarter and increasing our financial guidance across all metrics demonstrate the building momentum and confidence in where we are headed. I'd like to thank Brice for his many contributions to iRhythm and look forward to continuing to build upon that progress with Dan. Finally, I'd like to address recent activity around the Department of Justice's inquiry into iRhythm. As you'll recall, on April 4, 2023, we received an inquiry from the civil division of the United States Department of Justice, or DOJ, seeking information and documents regarding the company's products and services. Since the DOJ's initial inquiry, we have been extremely responsive and collaborative, and we have produced a significant amount of materials with information responsive to their subpoena. In July, the DOJ filed a petition for Order to Show Cause, an application for enforcement of administrative…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question today comes from Margaret Andrew with William Blair. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hey, good afternoon, folks. Thanks for taking the questions. And first off, Brice, very sorry to hear you're leaving and wish you and your family the very best in the meantime. So wish you well. I guess just to start on the 483s, I know quite early, but anything that you can give us around what was in the observation? Is it a few smaller observations that you feel confident to characterize, maybe minor observations, anything new or surprising? And then how quickly, I know it's early again, but how quickly do you think that you can resolve those? Thanks.

Hey, Margaret, thanks for the question. Well, look, we will respond to those observations within 15 days. So it's got our full attention at this point in time. And obviously where it goes from there, I can't speculate at this point in time, but let me try to give a little bit more clarity around it. I think it's clear that the FDA is trying to define, frankly, how to regulate this relatively new category. And I think as a market leader, discussions like this are going to be ongoing for a period of time. Keep in mind, from the warning letter in these discussions as they continue to understand this category, a whole new code has been established as a result of those discussions. At the end of the day, I think the fundamental issue sort of comes down to whether the IDTF, the CCTs, if you will, the clinical technicians, are they part of the product or are they not? And I think from the beginning of time, we view those as separate items. And I think the FDA has a bit of a different perspective right now that we're working through. But when you start to think about those two things differently, meaning ourselves versus how the FDA may be looking at it, you start to land in different places; when it comes to complaint handling or reporting or process controls and how you document those controls or how you go about your statistical techniques, I think it's important to note, like, there is no conversations in here with the FDA in the course of these inspections around the overall safety or efficacy of our product. That's not being discussed. It's not like it was in the initial warning letter where there were questions around, are you an MCT product or are you not? Or is AT a legally marketed product as a result of your letter-to-file approach or not? Those issues are behind us. That's not being discussed any further. This is really about how we go about identifying what complaints to report or not to report, how we document those things and the processes set around it. So nothing specific to safety or efficacy of the product, whatsoever. It's more about how we continue to build and make our quality systems more robust.

Okay, that's helpful. Yes, and then as we look at revenue guidance, you raised a little bit more than the beat. How should we look at that outlook for the rest of the year on a sequential basis and then maybe walk through drivers of that increase? Is it TCP, is that big contract, or something else? Thanks, guys.

Yes. Thanks, Margaret. This is Dan. I can -- I can start on that. So hopefully you heard from our prepared remarks, we feel really good about the momentum in the business, the trends we're seeing and really seeing contributions from across the board. You heard new store growth being 40%, so seeing nice balanced contribution from new store, same-store growth both monitor and AT contributing. And then certainly primary care continues to open up nicely for us. So all of that is really contemplated in guidance and see that continuing to contribute through the course of the year. You heard our remarks on Q3 being 25% of full-year revenue, which reflects normal seasonality for us.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Allen Gong with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Thanks for the question. I just want to echo my condolences for the situation with your family and I hope everything gets better. So I guess I'll kind of bundle my two questions together. The first, starting with the financials, you mentioned that there were some one-timers that really helped gross margin. You still expect to end the year at around 70%, but it also looks like SG&A improved pretty significantly. What were the drivers of that and how should we think about the sustainability there? And then just a quick follow-up on the DOJ investigation, whether or not you can kind of give us a better idea, kind of the scope of that and we've all seen the filing by now, but just kind of the scope of what the DOJ is looking into? Thank you.

Hey, Allen, thanks for the question. I appreciate the kind words. So, first question on the one-timers that we talked about with regards to gross margins, it's really a couple of different things. We've talked to the investor community about just the focus and diligence that we've placed on procurement activities and indirect procurement efficiencies that we've been drawing -- trying to drive as an organization. And the biggest thing was frankly some logistical savings that we were able to drive with regards to shipping vendors that we've been working with. We were able to get retrospective pricing dating back into Q4 of 2023 that ultimately came through in the way of a credit in the second quarter. So as you can imagine, that will sustain moving forward. But those couple quarters of incremental benefit that we gained from that negotiation won't necessarily repeat moving forward. And then the other one I think that's relevant of talking about is the fact that we do have a component of our software organization that works on optimization and, frankly, tweaks to the edges on the solutions that are used by CCTs as well as our intake solution and frankly, manufacturing for that matter Our full focus now from a software development standpoint has really been on the development of MCT and frankly getting it ready for that submission that is right around the corner. So we had very little of that work being done in Q2, so that reduced the cost profile a bit. We don't expect that to continue moving forward. We're going to continue to optimize those solutions that we have available to us. Both of those things contributed about 100 basis points of benefit in the quarter. And then I talked about the fact that we will need to continue to hire resources as we continue to scale volumes. And as we saw in Q4, you hire those resources in preparation for future volumes, and it takes a little bit of time to get them up to speed. So those are things that aren't necessarily anything to be surprised of or one-time in nature, but it's just investing ahead of the ultimate scale that you're going to get. So that's what was going on in the quarter, and we feel great about the progress that was made there. On the SG&A side, the biggest thing is, and we talked about this, we do have some higher level costs specific to Q1 with regards to company meetings and some things that hit both selling as well as SG&A, those things don't necessarily replicate and we communicated that as we think about first half being a little bit higher than that of the back half. And so you're seeing that play through in Q2 and certainly sustainable for the rest of the year, though there is some seasonality that we'll have to continue to consider as we move forward from models in '25 and beyond.

Hey, Allen, and with respect to the question on the scope of the DOJ, I don't think there's a whole lot more information, frankly, that we can provide you at this point. I think the set of questions or the documents they've requested are broad. Like we've always indicated, we haven't seen anything different over the last several months. As a matter of fact, it had gone relatively quiet for a good period of time until they made the motion to compile these documents that we spoke to and to your point, with the filings being out there, those documents are around quality system, sort of design history files of the past back in the '16, '17, '18, '19, so we feel very strongly that we need to try to protect that client privilege, not only for this case, but the precedent sets with all other cases that are out there. But we've been very cooperative with them, and we produced many, many, many, many documents, everything that they've requested, and all of them, frankly, have topical matters that are the same as what's in the reports that they've requested as well. So they have this information, but this is about protecting the attorney-client privilege that we think we're entitled to. But I can't give you anything more specific than that right now we'd be speculating, and we're not going to speculate.

Our next question comes from Marie Thibault with BTIG LLC. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks for taking the questions. Brice, thanks for all your help the last couple of years, and best wishes to you and your family. Dan, congrats on the new seat. Wanted to -- I use my one question here actually to latch onto what you talked about on the sleep space and efforts to launch into a market evaluation next year. Can you tell us a little bit more about what does that look like? Is that a reimbursable product? What parameters are being measured? And then is there spend or acquisition needed to get there into that market evaluation? Thanks for taking the questions.

Thanks, Marie. So I think we can get to the market evaluation without a lot of incremental investment or acquisition to make that happen. In the market evaluation phase, it's really about building a front-end capability that makes it entirely seamless for the physician to ultimately identify the patient, then order the product, and behind the scenes ensure the product gets to the patient. The data is received, we interpret it through an IDTF capability and provide a report back through a single digital portal to the physician. So to the physician, customer, it's incredibly seamless. To the patient, it's a much more efficient workflow. They don't have to leave the cardiology, go see a sleep specialist or somebody else. We introduce them to a virtual sleep capability or a home sleep test. Out of the gate, we will leverage a third-party sleep test while we continue to build our own capabilities to diagnose sleep disease on our own. So out of the gate, we'll leverage procuring a sleep device from a third party, make that part of the iRhythm package, and ultimately, you know, provide that to the patient, collect the data, interpret the data, and provide a report back to the physician that will be packaged up as an iRhythm solution. All of that can be reimbursed, and the reimbursable rate is somewhere between $150 to $200 for that sleep test and the service that we'll be providing back in the way of a report. And that rate sort of ranges between CMS and commercial payers. That's why there's a bit of a range between the $150 to $200. So that's for two to three days of, call it, home sleep test service and the report generation. But that's how to think about it in terms of the financial model. Over time, it's our intent to continue to develop and ultimately deliver our own home sleep test capability right off of our single platform. So that'll come further down the road and we'll step into that and really verticalize that entire offering in time. But that's not going to hold us up in the near term.

Our next question comes from David Rescott with Baird. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks for taking the questions. Brice, obviously echoing kind of the best wishes to you and your family under these circumstances. Dan, congrats on the new role. I'm looking forward to working with you even more going forward. I wanted to follow up just on the 483 comments first and curious on how these new observations impact the recently submitted 510(k), whether or not that has any impact on the total kind of resolution of the warning letter or the ability to submit for Zio MCT? And then just related to that, plus the DOJ comments, I think I heard the comments around the 8 million to 10 million of the incremental spend or the spend that's in the business today. I'm wondering if these drag on a little bit longer. If that's the case, whether or not that impacts the longer-term view around where the EBITDA margin can go longer term. Thank you.

Sure. So let me hit on the 483s and Brice or Dan, you guys could speak to longer term view around sort of the expense associated with this, but with respect to the 483s and the inspections that took place here in the back part of July, there's nothing in those discussions at all that gave us any indication or any direction to think differently around how we think about clearing the Zio AT product in those 510(k). So back to my prepared remarks, we did file the response to the catch-up 510(k) earlier this week, and frankly, the other -- response to the other 510(k) would have gone in as well, had we not been addressing the inspection. So that got delayed just a little bit, but it's nearly ready to go. So, that will get on file likely by the end of next week or shortly thereafter. And that puts us right on track for sort of that September-October timeframe in terms of the approval of Zio AT. So, nothing has changed from that perspective. And the same with Zio MCT. There's been no indication given at all that we should think differently around the Zio MCT product. Of course, we do need to see Zio AT clear or get the two clearances there, as that will be the predicate for Zio MCT. But our expectation is that we continue to get Zio MCT on file before the end of the year. One of the things that I would note, skin irritation is something that has come up. The investors have asked about it. It's something that we pay close attention to, and frankly, we even had a discussion with the FDA around it. Overall, our skin irritation rate is right around 2%, which is well below published literature of what's acceptable in wearable devices. But we have seen it step up just a little bit over the last two years. One of the things the FDA proactively asked us about is how quickly can you move from Zio XT onto Zio monitor or once Zio MCT gets approved, how quickly could you move Zio AT onto Zio MCT because we know that monitor, which will be the platform for MCT has a much lower irritation rate. So, again, that's a favorable indication of moving towards these new products. We've not been given any indication to think differently around the timeframe at this point in time. If that changes, of course, we'll have those conversations with you. But from our perspective, nothing changes there, and we stay on track.

Yes. Hey, David, question on the 8 million to 10 million. Based on everything we know now, we believe that 8 million to 10 million is the appropriate way to think about it for 2024, so effectively, no deviation. With regards to what that means moving forward, we'll certainly provide feedback. As of now, I don't see any indication that this is going to extend meaningfully longer. Now, should something creep into 2025, we'll certainly talk about that. But over time, we absolutely believe this 8 million to10 million comes out of the spend profile and becomes a meaningful contributor to adjusted EBITDA moving forward.

Our next question comes from Nathan Treybeck with Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Hi. Thanks for taking the question. Brice, it has been a pleasure working with you and Dan, congrats on the new role. I just wanted to touch on the DOJ subpoena just one more time. The wording in the recent core document that was posted seems to suggest that it might just relate to Zio AT. Is there anything in the documentation that was requested from you that would suggest inquiry extends to Zio XT as well?

Nathan, we'd be speculating at best around it. I mean, from the very beginning, this seems to have been focused around the AT or even the MCT category. Keep in mind, you know, competitors of ours who have MCT products receive the subpoena at the same time, so we don't know that for certain. But certainly so much of the documents that have been requested focus in and around that, including what you're referring to and what was produced in that filing. But at the same time, I can't tell you with certainty that that's where it's focused, right? The request has been very broad, and we've been very cooperative with them to produce everything they're asking for, so I can't speculate. That's where it seemed to be focused to begin with. But at the same time, the document request has been broad. So we can't -- I can't tell you for certainly -- for certain that that's where it's at.

Our next question comes from Joanne Wuensch with Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. This is actually Anthony on for Joanne, and I'll just echo the well wishes for you and your family, Brice; Dan, congrats on the new role. At a broker conference, I think back in June, you laid out some components in the back half of the year, driving the gross margin expansion. It was 200 bps from the CCTs coming up to speed, 100 bps from ramping up monitor and then another 100 bps from automation. Is that still how you're thinking about contribution from these components for margin in the back half of the year?

Yes, Anthony. Yes, it is. That's the way we're thinking about it. Obviously, the performance in the second quarter, that efficiency with regards to the 200 basis points from the clinical operations team actually played through much more quickly than what we anticipated. We saw some incredibly nice work by that team and focused just operations from that team in the second quarter. And we saw that play through a bit earlier than we thought. The other thing that we saw was the manufacturing efficiency component and not so much pure automation, but the efficiencies component playthrough as well in the quarter. I alluded to the fact that there were a couple of things that contributed to the benefit in the second quarter. However, that doesn't take away that 400 basis points that we laid out and where we expect to be as we exit 2024 and frankly, as we move into 2025.

Our next question comes from Mike Polark with Wolfe Research. Your line is open.

Hi, good afternoon. If I could sneak into, I'd appreciate it. The easy one is R and D. It looked to be, in dollar terms, just a little lumpy than -- a little higher than it has been. What is -- is there something new in there? Is that 20 million a quarter the good run rate or do you expect to step back down in 2H? And then the second question is, my ears perked up around major policy shift from a large national payer. I heard a couple of things in there. Step through for ILRs and removing step therapy. I guess it sounds different, new, you're calling it out. Can you maybe spoon-feed us what's going on there and what's changing? Thank you so much.

Hey, Mike, thanks for the questions. On the R&D side, really no major deviation from trend moving forward. I will say the expenses were higher in the quarter, most notably for as we get the product ready, that being Zio MCT ready for a regulatory submission, working through human factors testing, finalization of some work on the software solution side, and basically just getting in a position to ultimately file that regulatory submission. The cost was a little bit higher in the second quarter. That's not something we anticipate moving forward. We would expect to see that start to trend down in Q3 and then even further in Q4 as we get beyond that submission.

Hey, Mike, it's Dan. I'll take the second question. So I'm glad you captured the nice wins the team drove there on the payer side and market access side. I think it highlights the clinical and economic evidence we continue to generate, and that getting recognition from the payers. There was a few different wins lumped in there, right, some new coverage, and we sized that up to be 2.9 million new covered lives, and then some coverage policy decisions that essentially make it easier for patients to get onto Zio. So some really nice wins there. Those -- The impact of that doesn't necessarily show up immediately, but we will see that start to show up in results and really benefit both volumes and ASPs through time. But ultimately, those coverage policy wins absolutely make it easier for patients to get access to Zio, and that will have a long-term benefit.

Hey, Mike, one thing that I'll add to it, because I just think it's encouraging to see the impact that CAMELOT continues to have in this space. So many policies in time have required up to 30 days of monitoring before you can get onto an ILR. They are proactively moving that down to 14 days directly in line with the Zio monitors' wear period. And that comes back to the data that's being presented in these CAMELOT studies. So, again, I think it's resonating. It's leading to incremental access, it's leading to reduced hurdles to get onto the product, and it's opening up new channels, but CAMELOT has been a wonderful thing for us.

Our next question comes from Ravi Misra with Truist. Please go ahead.

Hi, this is Ravi from Truist. Thanks for taking the questions. So just two questions on our end. First, just Quentin, it sounds like the 483 observations are more kind of around workflow issues and things like that. I was hoping you could maybe talk about what you envision around risk in terms of the discussions don't go the way you think they will. They seem pretty benign so far, at least the way you've described [Technical Difficulty] patients into the channel right now. And what are you doing to kind of [Technical Difficulty]

[Technical Difficulty] with M steps and CAMELOT really, sounds like driving the plans, the policy changes. And you talked about the ASPs. How should we think about that from a future perspective? Is this a directional change because of this data, you're able to negotiate higher ASPs with the plans, and is that something you expect to go in the future? Thanks.

Yeah, not so much, Bill. So many of these plans establish a rate for a particular category code, and a lot of times the broader industry is billing against that code. So take CMS, for example, we're all getting reimbursed the same level there. But encouragingly, you saw in the proposed rule, long-term cardiac monitoring, frankly, was the only one that had the cost element increase meaningfully in this proposed rule. Now, some of the position fee adjustments and other adjusting factors bring that down a bit, but net-net pricing remains stable. I do think in time, where the opportunity presents itself is in these larger at-risk proactive monitoring programs. We have a bit of an ability to negotiate price differently because in those situations, you may be selling directly into the payer plan at whatever price you negotiate with them. And obviously, the more we can demonstrate the value that we're bringing to them, the more they're going to be willing to pay for this product as well. So, we're in the process of collecting all of this data. Again, the yield rates have been incredible, far surpassing what folks initially set out sort of targeting. And that's why you see these pilots begin to expand more broadly. But I do think in time we start to gain a bit of pricing power in some of these sort of programs that historically we've just been billing against codes where the model starts to evolve a bit and probably opens up some flexibility for us.

Our next question comes from David Saxon with Needham & Company. Please go ahead.

Great. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. I wanted to ask on MCT, and so this is probably for Brice, but maybe for Dan. So it sounds like that can still launch in 2025, and maybe that can help you take share in the MCT market. But my understanding is MCT as a product category, it's lower margin but higher dollars. So when that product does launch and ramps, how should we think about the impact to margins and to dollar profitability? Will it be meaningfully different than what you're seeing with AT? Thanks so much.

Yeah, it's a good question. I appreciate that. And you're absolutely right. From a revenue perspective, it is a higher dollar-reimbursed product as it stands now, however, it's more, I would say, costly to service that product. However, that was fully contemplated in the LRP as we designed it. And frankly, we have efficiencies that we're working on from a gross margin perspective, that's meant to not only offset any ASP pressures that we would have over time, but also that shift into the MCT category. So we talked about that low 70s gross margin over time being where we believe we're able to go. Obviously, that requires us to drive incremental efficiencies in and above that, as we absorb some of these things that ultimately cause a little bit of pressure there. However, we feel very good about the LRP that we put out in front of the investor community, and we're still running to that level.

And our next question comes from Suraj Kalia with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. Brice, it's been a pleasure working with you. Hope all is well on the family front. And, Dan, congrats on the new seat. I echo this sentiment. So, gentlemen, a lot of questions have been asked. Quentin, I'll just throw a couple quickly your way. This policy change of Zio being a precursor to ILR, I'm curious, is that a trend towards a little more, I don't know if coordination is the right word, but the larger players with ILRs, how should we think about the relationship in the field? That is one question. And in terms of asymptomatic, the policy changes, you're working with some of the IDNs and whatnot, should we think about in the future a differential pricing system for asymptomatic versus symptomatic? Thank you for taking my questions.

Yes, great question, Suraj. With respect to the coordination in the field around ILR and maybe longer duration monitoring being a step through into it, it'll be interesting to see how that plays out with respect to relationships in the field. We don't offer an ILR. So, for us, we have one value proposition to physicians, which is our Zio product, and it doesn't compete against an ILR procedure. But what's interesting is ILRs are quite expensive procedures for payers, so they're inclined to look for a cheaper alternative, right? And I think that's where they get interesting in really looking at the data to see how beneficial are these other therapies versus going straight to an ILR if I don't have to, because they're quite expensive sorts of products, if you will, or procedures that they're reimbursing for. So I actually think the payers are going to continue to be interested in this space. And ultimately, how the competitors or other players who have ILRs respond to it, we will see. I think what we're finding is requiring an MCT sort of product to be a step-through therapy to an ILR is frankly not necessary. The data is showing us that 14 days of monitoring can get you what you need. So we'll see how that plays out. On the asymptomatic versus symptomatic and pricing discussions, I think it's too early to tell. We're still working diligently to try to influence USPSTF to proactively recommend proactive monitoring, if you will, of asymptomatic. That's still a big hurdle out there to get the full market to really turn. But I do think continuing to work with commercial payers is going to influence the overall market and get it to move well ahead of USPSTF even needing to make a recommendation. So we'll see where pricing models go into the future from that. I think a lot of it comes back to your diagnostic yield. You have to be very effective at being able to identify the right patient population and ultimately result in a good yield out of targeting that to make these things worthwhile for the payers. So there's a lot that comes into play there as we learn more in this space and come back to pricing, but we'll have to see how it plays out. We couldn't be more encouraged. The fact is, two years ago, we were talking about the opportunity for proactive monitoring. Hadn't seen a lot of it taking place yet. Now, we're starting to see it take place and we're seeing players reach out proactively to inquire about it, ask about it and begin working on programs that they can put into their own network. So we'll see where it goes, but we're excited with it.

Thank you. We have no further questions in the queue, so I'd like to turn the call back to management for any closing comments.

Well, thank you for joining us today. We couldn't be more pleased with the start of 2024, and we couldn't be more excited about the growing momentum in our business as we begin to explore opening new adjacencies like sleep or like a continued expansion into the primary care channel. The back half of the year is set up to demonstrate some significant financial leverage as we continue to progress in our efforts to become more operationally excellent as we grow. And in addition to that, we have multiple growth levers that remain in front of us which are yet to contribute to our success, including a new innovative Zio MCT solution, further entry into the international markets, including the second largest ACM market in the world being Japan, and further expansion into that primary care opportunity. So our future has never been brighter. We couldn't be more excited and we look forward to talking to you again in the near future. With that, take care. Thank you.

This concludes today's call. Thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your line.