The Oncology Institute, Inc.

of appetite or interest level from other folks in similar types of arrangements?

Yeah, sure. So this is, and I'm glad you asked about it, it's an exciting milestone for the company because it enables us to manage a larger portion of the total spend related to oncology patients. So it expands our TAM or quote-unquote share of wallet with our customers. And We think we can do a great job improving outcomes and costs beyond just the drug costs and physician costs associated with oncology, but also hospitalization costs related to oncology patients. We have seen an increase in interest from our primary care partners in putting us at risk for total cost of care, not just the oncology drugs and oncology physician nursing services. I think that in part is because it's just a nice alignment, because we manage holistically our patients, and so our partners want to put us at risk for all costs. It's also, I think, representative of some other specialties who, you know, for example, nephrology, where the total cost of care arrangements are more common. The primary care groups are doing total cost of care arrangements with other specialties, and they're saying, hey, these are working for other specialties. Let's try it out in oncology. So we have seen a lot of interest in that this year.

Got it. Okay. And then, Brad, on the oncology GPO discussion, is there any way you can quantify the cost savings that you're expecting and maybe the timeframe to realize them and maybe what is in the guidance for that initiative?

Yeah, sure. We have not We're not ready to release publicly what the expected cost savings are. It was not enough to cause us to change our guidance for the year. But given that we just started participation this, you know, last month, we haven't wanted to, we want to see a few months play out before we put a stake in the ground on quantifying it. But suffice it to say, we don't think it's enough to cause us to change our full year guidance.

Gotcha. Okay. No, that's awesome. And then maybe last question for me. As I look at the one oncology deal and obviously getting closer with ABC here, any thoughts on what that could potentially do to the industry or to your business more specifically?

Yeah, sure. I mean, first off, I think it demonstrates substantial demand for oncologists. and oncology practices and represents an interest by uh and you know behind the scenes we're aware of a number of participants who were uh you know we believe we're looking at that deal um represents a sort of a broad interest in owning and managing oncology practices uh because of how much of the spend we control so broadly speaking i think it demonstrates a strong demand for companies like ours You know, I think in some ways it does demonstrate that there is still a lot of money to be made in fee-for-service oncology. And, you know, that's, I think, demonstrated by, you know, drug distributors, you know, interest in controlling the oncologist. You know, we try to focus on value-based oncology, and we're trying to demonstrate that Value-based oncology can also be profitable, and we're trying to convince our customers to reward us for the savings we create when we both improve outcomes and lower costs. Gotcha. Okay, awesome. Thank you, guys.

You're welcome.

Thank you. As a reminder, press star 1 to ask a question at this time. Our next question is from Sandy Dapper with Guggenheim Partners. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, this is Mitchell on for Sandy. Hey, Mitchell. Hey, how's it going? Good. One question on guidance. You know, we've seen over the past several years that you've grown revenue sequentially throughout the year. And here, if we look at the 1Q print and we annualize it, we get to right around the midpoint of the full year guide. So just trying to understand what's embedded in that guide and, you know, any color there would be helpful. Yeah, sure.

I'll start and, Mihir, jump in anywhere you'd like. You know, we were very pleased with top line growth this quarter. You know, 25% organic growth is really spectacular. And so we started the year very strong from a revenue perspective. Mihir, anything you want to add to that?

No, I think you covered it right. And also reminding the group that our guidance does not include any acquisition for the year. So from Q1 to Q4, we believe we should be able to – we are comfortable with our guidance where we are.

Awesome. Thank you. That's helpful. And then just one more, just kind of on the broader environment. Has anything changed in the acqui-hire environment in terms of multiples and just kind of broadly? Are people more or less willing to sell their practices? And just any color on the pipeline there would be helpful. Yeah, sure.

I'm always cautious to draw macro insights from a small number of acqui-hires and acquisitions that we are pursuing at any one time. So while I'm cautious, I would be happy to do it. You know, we have seen, just as the overall market has contracted a little bit, I think there is some lag to sellers' expectations realigning with, you know, current market multiples. But on balance, they have come down a little bit. So I think sellers are more realistic and starting to understand that some of the The valuation multiples that existed in 2021 don't exist today. And so, slowly with a little bit of lag, we have seen those expectations come down.

Got it. Thanks. That's all I had. Appreciate it. Great. You're welcome.

Thank you. As a reminder, press star 1 to ask a question at this time. There are no further questions at this time. I would like to turn the floor back over to Brad Hively for closing comments.

Great. Well, thank you all for joining our call today. We look forward to following up with you in the coming weeks. We're very excited about TOI's path ahead and we look forward to updating you on our progress on our next earnings call. Thank you and have a good day.

This concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your