Welcome to the Lucid Diagnostics Business Update and Fourth Quarter 2022 Financial Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants will be in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Michael Parks, Vice President, Investor Relations. Mr. Parks, you may begin, sir.

Thank you, Paul. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for participating in today’s fourth quarter 2022 business update call. The press release announcing our business update for the company and financial results for the year ended December 31, 2022, is available on the Lucid website. Please take a moment to read the disclaimer about forward-looking statements in the press release. The business update, press release and this conference call, both include forward-looking statements and these forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from statements made. Factors that could cause actual results to differ are described in the disclaimer and in our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. For a list and description of these and other important risks and uncertainties that may affect future operations, see Part I Item 1A entitled Risk Factors in Lucid’s most recent annual report on Form Q-10 filed with the SEC and subsequent updates filed in the quarterly report on Form Q -- 10-Q and any subsequent Form 8-K fillings. Except as required by law, Lucid disclaims any intentions or obligations to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect changes in expectations or in events, conditions or circumstances on which the expectations may be based or that may affect the likelihood that actual results will differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. I would like now to turn the call over to Dr. Lishan Aklog, Chairman and CEO of Lucid Diagnostics. Dr. Aklog?

Thank you, Mike, and thank you everybody for joining us this morning. I look forward to giving you a positive update on our activities for the past quarter and recent weeks. As those of you who’ve been with us for a while have noticed, we’ve changed the timing to hopefully better serve our shareholders to have our quarterly calls in the morning part of the open in our press releases in the evening prior. So I’ll start with some recent highlights before doing a bit of background and then diving further into details. We’re really excited about the steady significant strides we’ve made over the past quarter. As you’ll see, the EsoGuard test volume growth has remained strong and we’ve seen some nice acceleration particularly in this quarter and a rapidly increasing satellite Lucid Test Center activity that is now driving nearly one-third of our testing volumes. We’re very excited to report that we’ve secured in-network EsoGuard contract with the largest secondary PPO, MultiPlan, and this provides access to EsoGuard to approximately 60 million consumers of that participated in the networks. Our commercial payer engagement and claims history is accelerating. In-network EsoGuard contracts are now averaging over $2,000 per test and all of the PPO contracts we’ve secured are priced at or above the Medicare rate. I’ll dive into this a little bit further later, but we’ve launched a really important initiative for us. We’re calling it our Direct Contracting Strategic Initiative and the goal here is to engage directly with large ASO or Administrative Services Only self-insured employers, unions and other such entities. As we reported in the press release, we had a successful launch of our high-volume CheckYourFoodTube events and we have a robust near-term pipeline of additional events coming up in the next month or two. Our…

Thanks, Lishan, and good morning, everyone. So if you go to the next slide. So the Board has authorized a $20 million preferred offering at an $11 million secured convertible debt. We completed the initial closing of the preferred in the amount of $14 million and have until the end of May to complete the remaining $6 million. The financing was priced in accordance with NASDAQ at the market closing bid price rules. The accredited investors were led by a family office familiar to our IR firm and some long-term high net worth shareholders for participants in total, but share a long-term vision for the company. After exploring a variety of alternatives, this preferred structure created a mutual win for the company and the investors by matching an attractive dividend with a strong incentive to hold the stock for more than two years. Additionally, yesterday, we entered into a securities purchase agreement to issue $11 million in convertible debt securities with an accredited investor that has provided the same type of structures for PAVmed over the years and currently holds PAVmed’s existing debt with similar terms. We expect to close the funding in the coming days. The note interest is only for six months and has a $5 voluntary conversion price and a 7.9% interest rate. Amortization does not begin until a six-month anniversary, which we can then pay in cash or in stock. Both structures keep stock out of the market for long periods of time, likely two years in the case of the preferred, which allows the company to complete its work on clinical utility studies and improving reimbursement. Our runway is substantially elongated through deepen 2024. On a pro forma basis, when combined with our cash at the beginning of the year, results in pro forma cash…

[Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Kyle Mikson from Canaccord Genuity. Your line is open.

Kyle, good.

Good morning, Kyle.

Just one moment. Seem to be having a little technical difficulty here. All right. Mr. Mikson, your line is open

Hey, guys. Can you hear me now?

Yeah. We can.

All right. Perfect.

Yeah.

Interesting. Yeah. So congrats on the results. Thanks for the questions. On the effect of ASP here was $95, it seems like have the denial rate for reimbursement seems like still pretty high. Cash collection is pretty low. It’s not like super surprising I guess. But just the ASP dynamics, you’re talking about out-of-network $1,400 payment and then commercial payers, $2,000, PPOs at the Medicare rate, which is like almost $2,000 as well. So would you mind just walking through why the revenue per test is so low and when that inflection point occurs and what kind of like catalyzes that?

I’ll let Dennis dive into that deeper, but maybe just provide a high level. This is a bit of a moving target, right? Because the average life cycle of -- the cycle for payment can run up to 90 days. There’s claims adjudication out and so forth. So what we’re seeing in any particular quarter in revenue is really a snapshot of what was going on with submissions a while back. But I’ll let Dennis a little bit further in detail.

Correct. So, as Lishan indicated, the submitted claims do take some time to process and beginning in the fourth quarter, those amounts start to trickle in. There was more than 200 insurers that were billed claims leading up to the fourth quarter and into the early part of the first quarter. In the first quarter, we are starting to collect at an accelerated pace. It’s still early in the game and claims are being adjudicated both from a denial and appeal, as well as asking for additional information. That will -- that steam will pick up as the year unfolds. The fourth quarter is not indicative of what the first quarter results are so far and we expect that the coming quarters that reimbursement will improve MultiPlan certainly helps with that endeavor, as well as we are getting paid from some of the larger players, United, particularly, and we’re getting paid out-of-network rates. That backlog should continue to pick up and so that, ultimately, we’re hoping that in time, when we get to full reimbursement, there will be a match in terms of when the claims are submitted and the cash is collected. But for now, there is a large gap between those timeframes.

If I could just add a couple of things, just to, again, emphasize the sort of the phase shift here. We started submitting claims in the end of August. So basically mid-to-late third quarter. So the fourth quarter results, if you kind of take that typical 90-day cycle and those cycles are longer for new tests. One of those tests are more established, they tend to -- the turnaround time take longer. So the fourth quarter numbers really reflect a small portion of the claims that were submitted in the -- in only half of the third quarter. The other point I would make is, again, these are early numbers. We don’t have good denominator on this. But we don’t have -- the number of -- you sort of mentioned the denial rate, there really isn’t a denial rate yet, because the number of claims that have gone through the full adjudication process that have been divided is very low right now. So most of the claims are -- have either been paid or more likely the vast majority of them are still working their way through the process.

Okay. That was really helpful guys and it sounds promising, too. Maybe just sticking on a similar kind of subject, really good to see the kind of projection for the first quarter, test performed here, like 1,500. Looks like -- I believe that 36% growth sequentially, so that’s awesome. Any reason why that type of sequential growth can continue going forward to potentially accelerate from there? And is there anything about maybe seasonality or other dynamics that could maybe inflate that 1Q number? I mean it sounds very reasonable, but just trying to think about how that progresses throughout 2023.

Yeah. No. I think if you look at that slide, there’s a bit of seasonality you saw in the fourth quarter, and that’s common, as you know, Kyle, from other companies. We also in the fourth quarter had to work through some compliance structure, establishing some compliance structure in a couple of our larger states as it relates to how to do the satellite Lucid Test Centers. So there’s some pent-up demand in both Florida and California there that we’re addressing. But if you kind of look at the overall trend in the line, is that 36%, something like that quarter-on-quarter, about 200% or so compounded growth rate, I think, is sustainable for some period of time, and obviously, the goal is to continue to grow that. I think, you know as we’ve said in the past, we’re not on full throttle, right? We’ve decided to plateau our sales team and that sales expense that did a show. We expect that to be flat for this year. And we think our current team can continue to drive test volume growth as we start getting more predictable payment and improve on our contracting, and we think these initiatives, such as the high-volume testing events, as well as Direct Contracting with ASO type entities, we’ll be -- we’ll play an important role in that growth over time.

Okay. All right. That was great. And similarly, just thinking about test order per ordering position, I guess, and I know your test center strategy is not on hold, but you’re just sort of investing in your current number, I guess, of the centers. And the MultiPlan you got some providers there as well and so some visions will get on board and I suppose to start ordering one more. So I mean that denominator number is sort of is still pretty healthy. I’m just wondering if test per doc is increasing. How that’s progressed through the -- like since the launch in 2021? Is there a plateauing, like just any kind of trends? Yeah.

Yeah. I mean what we’re focused on. I don’t have a sort of a single number to give you to capture that. What we’re focusing on, we have a good number of providers. We have, as you mentioned, threat geographically now and the fact that we can do satellite Lucid Test Centers have given us, again, we’re not -- just to be clear, we’re not putting the physical locations. They still more remain an important anchor and are key in areas where we -- as sort of the headquarters for our clinical team, our nurse practitioner team, but the fact that they can branch out both within their local geography and literally got on a plane to go to San Antonio and do 400 test in the week. All of that is enhancing our geographic reach and the number of providers. But we have a very focused effort right now by our sales team to focus on stickier business. On having accounts continue to order on a clip, the reps are now increasingly incentivized along that -- along those lines and it is working. So we have figured out ways. The issue with the repeat ordering and stickier business is not about sort of loss of interest. It’s more -- it’s just more a matter of potential. And I think I’ve mentioned this before, but I’ll reiterate it, one of the things that we really like about the satellite model is by having a day where the Lucid nurse practitioner is going to come to the practice on a particular day does bring the whole issue of esophageal precancer testing front and center and as they know that the fees is going to be there next week or in a couple of weeks, it’s much more front and center than previously, where we had to just have multiple contact points by our reps to keep it front and center. So, yeah, I don’t have hard data on you on that, but the trends are actually -- are good. We are getting stickier business, but we’re also -- we’re doing both. We’re trying to get breadth and depth at the same time, while keeping kind of a mid-throttle approach until we get more predictable reimbursement.

Okay. Just one last one before I hop off. So I guess on FDA, obviously, there’s a lot of back and forth, but it does seem like FDA is going to push towards regulating ODTs like in the near future, I guess. And I know you delayed the BE1, BE2 trials. But what would happen to your ability to offer EsoGuard in the event that the FDA starts to kind of crack down on tests in the next one year or two years or 24 months. What’s the plan B here?

Yeah. We’re monitoring the valid act, as well as the FDA’s recent declaration around rule making in this area carefully. We don’t have any concerns in the near-term. These are all long-term. That’s certainly not one-year or two-year events. There are grandfathering clauses. We have confidence with regard to where our risk, where we will win wider in our risk assessment that we think will have the appropriate data to be able to continue uninterrupted. And so we’re monitoring closely. We’ve established long-term strategies to mitigate that. On our -- on the clinical utility side, we will start getting clinical utility data. I should mention that there are other sources of clinical utility data from the BETRNet study, the NCI-sponsored studies that were anchored by the BETRNet consortium that’s centered around Case Western Reserve. Those studies are collecting data. They’re starting to get critical masses of data with good results and we should start except -- starting to see those come online in meetings and in peer review publications well before we have our BE2 data out. So we’re monitoring that, but we don’t have any concerns in the near with that.

Perfect. That’s great, Lishan. Thanks guys for the question. Appreciate it.

Thanks. Thanks a lot, Kyle.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Ross Osborn of Cantor Fitzgerald. Your line is open.

Good morning, Ross.

Hi, Ross.

Hi. Good morning, everyone. So, generally, a couple of calls, I may have missed this, but where did you end the year in terms of sales reps and what are the hiring plans for 2023?

So we had 40, which is what we had said we would target in our strategic update call in January that reflects some layoffs and some backfilling, but we have -- where we settled in a 40 sales personnel, as well as the clinical support team, the nurse practitioners and clinical specialists. We’ve added a couple of that to make sure we have sufficient coverage there. And the plan right now is to maintain that flat through the year and to allow this team to continue to drive the type of test growth volume that I just talked about with Kyle. Certainly, there will be opportunities to dial that up if the reimbursement side accelerates more quickly than we’re prepared to keep that flat or down.

Okay. Great. And then I realize the focus is now on satellite testing at least for the near-term, but could you discuss your geographic presence relative to your original stage geographic rollout? And then as a follow-up, what can you do to accelerate satellite testing activity?

Yeah. I just want to kind of maybe restate just to make sure there’s no misunderstanding here that there isn’t -- we’re not shifting or we’re not pausing the physical test center model, it still remains our anchor. That’s where our nurse practitioners are physically based, but they have the opportunity to move and do tests in a broader geographic area. The -- there is really good sales coverage right now and our sales team coverage is broader than the 11 states and the 13 test centers that with physical locations that we currently have. And so there are opportunities, for example, in Georgia, and other states where we don’t have physical test centers where there is increasing activity that we could support using nurse practitioners using the satellite test center model. So we’re not -- certainly, we’re not -- with 40 reps, we’re not covering the entire -- every single state or every single metropolitan area, but the geographic coverage is broader and it certainly covers the major states, particularly, California, Texas and Florida, Ohio, those are big location -- remain big location for us.

Okay. Great. Thanks for taking our questions.

Okay. Thanks, Ross.

And our next question comes from Mike Matson of Needham & Co. Your line is open.

Good morning, Mike.

Hi, Mike.

Yeah. Good morning. Just a question on -- so the CYFT event, you said you did like 391 tests there. Is that included in the test number and do you expect to get paid for those tests?

That’s an interesting question. So, yes, they are included in those numbers and there -- we are -- these are commercial patients that have commercial insurance and so they’re not applying a research project or anything like that. So we do to them in the commercial numbers. We don’t know yet. It’s an interesting dynamic, because generally, for example, typically with a firefighter group, the Firefighter Union is often an ASM, so they have their own decision-making opportunities. So you might expect that our ability to engage with them directly. That’s why I was saying that the CYFT events are tightly linked to our Direct Contracting Initiative, right, because we’re dealing with typically organizing these on the logistical side, dealing with the firefighter team and the unions in particular. And so as we’re expanding what’s a quite robust pipeline, we’re being much more proactive at the beginning about understanding the payer structure within each of these and working closely with the self-insured entity, typically, to set these things up. So we don’t know yet, but there’s certainly some hope and some promise that the prospects of the payment rates, the percentage of claims that get paid as a result of these tests could be higher. That’s our hope, obviously. And so it’s an attractive aspect of this business because it’s a large, high volume event. It’s a good chunk of testing. We can handle that chunk of testing and it’s with a single entity that. And our engagements with these entities with the firefighters in particular have been extraordinarily positive. They understand the need. They’re very focused on protecting their members and it’s a very different dynamic than a typical -- than engaged with a typical health plan. So we’re quite optimistic. I’m glad you brought that up, but we obviously have to demonstrate that.

Okay. Understand. And then I think Dennis said the cash that you used about $30 million of cash in 2022, is that right? And then with the announcement earlier this year of the cost reductions, I think, you said, you’d reduce your cash burn by about 25%. So that seem -- would seem to sort of imply like a low $20 million number for 2023. Is that reasonable?

Yeah. The burn rate for the first half is going to be in the $7 million, $7.5 million range. And then should gradually decrease as operating expenses continue to remain flat and the collections, we are estimating will start to improve at a significantly higher rate that will bring the burn down for the second half of the year at a larger number.

Sorry, the 7% to 7.5%, is that -- that’s a quarterly number…

That’s the first half.

That’s quarterly -- that entire...

Quarterly number. Yeah.

Quarterly number. Okay.

Yeah.

All right. Got it. And then, yeah, so with MultiPlan, the covered lives there. How do those, I guess, the geographic concentration of that sort of match up to your sales force and test center locations?

There they have MultiPlan with national.

Okay.

They are in every corner of the country. So we -- our market access team does have a robust process, whereby they look at where payers are and how that aligns with our team. So that’s a process that we utilize. And some of the other contracts that we’ve had, those are regional and that has -- that’s much more actionable that MultiPlan is really a national plan. They have their primary PPO network, a complementary PPO network. So there’s lots of opportunities to engage all across the country.

Okay. Got it. And then, finally, I apologize if you’ve mentioned this earlier and I missed it, but MolDX, I mean, you discussed the clinical utility efforts, but when do you think you could make -- take another shot at getting MolDX coverage?

Oh! Just to be clear. No. There’s no other shot. The shot is already out there. We’re just waiting. Yeah. So there’s nothing more for us to do. We went through the process last year where upon publication of the draft LCD, we participated both with MolDX, as well as with Noridian, that covers our laboratory through the open meeting process, as well as the common period. Once that’s submitted, there’s nothing for us to do. It’s just a waiting game. So it’s on their desk. They’re looking at it and they’ll go back to it at their time. If you recall, it took quite a while from the ingrain submission to even get the draft LCD published. So we make no particular predictions about when that will happen. But you did -- you made a good point in that linking at the clinical utility. The -- our ability to respond to an updated LCD and seek -- remember these are foundational LCDs, they’re general LCDs for the category of testing to translate a foundational LCD into a specific LCD 4. Lucid for EsoGuard will require submission of clinical utility data. So until we have the fishing clinical utility data, which is to respond to the LCD, which we won’t have until midyear. The timing of the LCD right now is not actually hurting us, because we won’t be in a position to do the technical submission to convert it to a test LCD until midyear. But we’re waiting. But the good news is and the reason we’re focused on the commercial side is that, the demographics of the patients being ordered for testing remain -- to remain strongly tilted towards commercial payers with 10%, 12% of the patients being Medicare. So we’ll just continue to wait on the Medicare side, while we’re pushing really hard full steam ahead on the commercial side.

Okay. Got it. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks, Mike.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Mark Massaro from BTIG. Your line is open.

Hi, Mark.

Hey, guys. Thank you for taking my question. So, yeah, you guys were very clear about what you need to do to show clinical utility. The positives just need to get a confirmatory endoscopy and the negatives just need to not get one based on the clinician suggestion. So can you give me a sense and maybe confirm that, Lishan, that you plan to submit the clinical utility, was that midyear 2023? And then can you give us a sense for the numbers, I mean, are we looking at like 100 patients, a couple of hundred patients?

Yeah. I’m going to go back to the previous slide. I hope it was going to show. Yeah. So let’s do -- let’s kind of do a deeper dive into this. So just use the model. Oh, hold on a second, Mark, there is technical glitch here. I want to push in the audience. Hopefully, you can see the numbers there. So one quick minor correction to your summary, which is otherwise excellent, what clinical utility mean? It doesn’t even mean that they have to actually get the endoscopy. People fall through, they fail to show up and so forth, loss of falls and things like that. We just have to document that that what the physician did, that the physician ordered the endoscopy or they did not order an endoscopy. And even in negative, there are going to be times where in our endoscopy order for other reasons, right? But as long as endoscopy was not ordered for screening of -- for esophageal precancer then that shows -- that demonstrates clinical utility. The numbers I show here are really intended to give you a picture of sort of a number of ways we’re approaching this. I mean this is an all-out effort, multipronged five different areas that we’re focused on there. I like to be more, because each new CheckYourFoodTube event will be another batch of clinical utility data. The main -- the ones that are the strongest are the two Lucid registry and CLUE study. Those are the truly prospective studies, which will garner us the most attention from the payers. But all of them are important and all of them will be useful. The -- so those are our estimates and our targets for midyear and we will be submitting data as they come in. We don’t have to wait for some specific number. While once we have a critical number of patients involved in each of these, we’ll be able to submit interim data for peer review. And so by -- it’s a little bit hard to know until we have a little bit better trajectory on the projections here, but certainly by midyear, I would expect that we would have some of the, particularly, the retrospective and the CYFT data submitted and -- for peer review and published. The other one may be a little bit more time. But right now with online journals, turnaround time for peer review is not kind of big issue. So these are just ballpark numbers, ballpark targets, where we look to end up and hopefully that makes sense.

Yeah. So, yeah, so MolDX is likely looking for approximately 200 individuals in a prospective observational study?

I think that’s about right. We have right now targeted 400 patients in the true prospective studies that concluded in the listed registry. We certainly will be able to combine those. But you’re right, because if you think about it, our positivity rate is about 7% to 10% and that’s where you need the numbers, right? So if you have 400 patients, let’s say, at a 10% positivity rate, that means there will be 40 patients who are positive and you could show that those 40 patients did not get referred for -- that they did get referred for endoscopy. And then the -- obviously, the other 160 patients, that’s pretty large number to demonstrate that negatives or not, sorry, not 160, 360 patients that show that the negatives are not getting referred for positive.

All right. Perfect. Yeah. Thanks for clarifying that the physician just needs to order it rather than the patient needs to complete the procedure.

Yeah.

Cool. All right. So my next question, the San Antonio Fire Department is really, really interesting, because that’s about one-fourth of your volumes in Q1 based on my math. And I think you noted in the press release that firefighters have a higher risk for GERD and esophageal cancer. So and I think you indicated that your near-term pipeline for future events is robust. I would love to hear just a little bit more about maybe what some of the other high risk groups are, what your funnel looks like and how many of these do you think you might be able to pull off in 2023.

Great. So the pipeline is robust. We have -- obviously, you’re going to focus on your successes first. So the initial focus has been on other fire departments. And as you mentioned, the key lynch men there is that is the published well-established data of a 65% increase risk of esophageal cancer in firefighters based presumably on environmental exposure. So there are a lot of firefighters who have fire departments. We’re picking up the phone and calling a lot of them, and we expect to start seeing more on those sites. But then as I mentioned, Mark, this sort of folds into kind of the broader -- there are certainly other higher risk groups. You can think of other unions, truck drivers, other placement and other public service groups. But this is -- this starts to kind of fold in or meld into the overall approach to direct contracting, right, to engage with entities that are very -- one of the things we learned from engaging with the firefighters is, as I mentioned, they’re very committed that the level of passion and commitment to their members is high. And so our ability to engage with entities that are self-insured, that -- where the conversation is a very direct one and one that that drives -- that’s driven by their the commitment to do right by their patients is a big opportunity for us and something that we’ll look forward to. I’m not really prepared to give you a sort of a number. I think right now, we’re going to stick with our trajectories with regard to test volume. We continue -- just to clarify something that comes up occasionally, but this is not a pivot, large traditional approach to primary care physicians, specialists and institutions, that’s unchanged and we continue to drive that hard. And we’re certainly working on for figuring out how to do both logistically, but so far so good. So we expect to see a good number, probably, in the next couple of quarters, you’ll be able to give you a little bit more fleshed out targets as to what we need to do.

Okay. Great. Maybe just my last question, as we think about the rest of the year, great to see MultiPlan coverage. Just curious if you think you’re getting -- I know it sounds like the conversations with payers is improving and the fact that you’re getting paid on some of the denials is excellent. These are relatively small numbers in early days. But do you think as the year progresses, you might be able to sign whether it’s a large national commercial payer or at least some of the regional payers. How should we think…

Yeah.

… about payer coverage?

Yeah. I think the lessons -- the main -- there’s two lessons. One is, really, really want to get the point home that the price is holding. I mean, I really feel like we now have enough that we can feel confident about our -- that the price between Medicare as a floor and our $2,500 list price based on out-of-network payments, based on payments from, as Dennis mentioned, larger plans that are out-of-network, that respect that price is really, like, we’re developing increasing confidence that our pricing is going to hold. On the larger plans, our expectation, we’ve had multiple advisory board meetings and conversations. So we have a good finger on the pulse as to what the larger plans are going to expect based on active and retired engagements with active and retired medical directors. And the message is quite clear that the -- that -- in order to get a larger plan, it’s likely to require us to have that meaningful clinical utility data later in the year. But in the interim, our conversations with the secondary PPOs, like MultiPlan and smaller plans will continue. So I think it’s not a binary event. But I wouldn’t necessarily project that we’ll knock down one of the larger plans until we have some meaningful clinical utility data here.

Okay. That makes sense. Thanks so much.

Great. Thanks, Mark.

[Operator Instructions] And our final question comes from Edward Woo from Ascendiant Capital. Your line is open.

Good morning, Ed.

Good morning and congratulations on the quarter. In terms of the 40 salespeople that you have, what’s the average tenure and how do you characterize in terms of the productivity and whether there will be room for improvement?

Yeah. So that’s a great question. I don’t have a hard number for you, but we are -- it is certainly increasing, now that we’ve plateaued the number, probably, about six months to nine months is, I would say, would be the median. So we have a good median. The median rep has now had a decent time in the field. And as I mentioned on our previous calls, by plateauing our team, it’s freed up the sales leadership to be more active in the field and more active in strategic accounts. We closed a large strategic account a couple of weeks ago that will -- and just more time with them, because they’re not spending all the time interviewing and recruiting. So that six-month to nine-month median number will obviously go up as the year progresses and we found that just more time in the field and more experience interacting with physicians and engaging with accounts and trying to make them stickier. Obviously, an increasing experience will help and that number will go up steadily over the year.

Great. Well, thank you for answering my questions and I wish you guys good luck. Thank you.

Thank you. Thanks a lot, Ed.

And we have no further questions in queue. I’ll turn the call back over to our host.

Great. So, hey, thank you everybody for taking the time and for spending the morning with us on our update call. We appreciate everybody’s effort and everybody’s support. Feel free to contact us with any further questions, you can get information on our website, luciddx.com or by contacting Mike Parks at mp@lucid -- @pavmed.com for any further questions. So thank you very much.

This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for attending and have a pleasant day.