I think that's a really good point. In fact, for many lab tests where the results are completely "cut-and-dry", this suggestion totally makes sense. For us, one thing we consider is that the diagnostic yield for these types of sequencing tests is only ~40%-50% in the best case. We know from the literature that if we perform a reanalysis 6 months-1 year, the chances that we find something in patients that don't have a result increases quite substantially as does how we interpret known variants. Thus, continual reanalysis is very important to many of the patients that we work with. Unfortunately, it's too expensive to resequence every time we need to run such a reanalysis algorithm.