Marc D. Grodman, M.D., CEO, commented: "BioReference continues to grow; we continue to innovate and we continue to expand. In many ways we are defined by our history of extraordinary growth and in many ways, we are better defined by our willingness to defend our determination to compete in the marketplace. That determination to compete has allowed us to create new and disruptive testing solutions, new bioinformatics solutions and almost 4000 jobs since our beginnings over 26 years ago. Our performance in the third quarter was quite similar to the results we reported in the immediately preceding second quarter: growth in all elements of our business but especially strong in our genetics area through GeneDx. The operations and financial results of the Company met or exceeded our expectations for the quarter while our industry and healthcare in general were in a state of flux. Despite these extrinsic pressures, we were able to sustain our growth. We have seen recent changes that we believe will allow us to maintain our growth and improve some of the financial metrics that have been under pressure from temporary conditions. We recently announced two strategic acquisitions. We expanded our facilities in Florida based on previously announced acquisitions in order to achieve our goal of having a strong local presence in the South. Our recent acquisition in California provides us with a similar presence on the West Coast. We also started accepting specimens at GeneDx for our new inherited cancers panels and we completed enrollment in major payer programs that significantly expand our roster of in-network participation. These are the building blocks for continued growth and expansion."
Dr. Grodman continued: "There are macro conditions in the laboratory industry that need some discussion. In July, CMS proposed some major changes to the way they want to reimburse laboratories. On the one hand, their proposal regarding the Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) appears misguided. In all my years in this industry I have never seen such unity among all the groups – laboratories, pathologists, hospitals, academic medical centers, suppliers, device manufacturers – to rally against the proposal. There has been great pressure directed at CMS from every possible angle to demonstrate the impact of this proposal as well as to highlight its inappropriateness. We are quite hopeful that CMS will recognize that this proposal should not be put into effect. CMS also proposed some adjustments to the Clinical Fee Schedule. These are part of the laboratory landscape and the industry will deal with this issue in a measured way."