We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
I think Bruker et al will drive the sale of BAMS test. Adeptrix is too small.
A quicker route to test in hospitals (than PCR) is key at the moment. Particularly in US where hospitals are reaching capacity in many states.
@Monkshood excellent post and thank you for taking the time to share with the BB.
Just to add, the BAMS test is 'currently' being "tested using patient samples. . . in the UK and the US."
The LFT will be tested at sites in the UK "to begin with."
Everything happens for a reason. So there's a very good reason why the US test is happening in parallel. In addition, Adeptrix are US based.
So UK capacity is certainly relevant, the BAMS test clearly has plans to seek out a bigger audience with US and US FDA driven markets, certainly a part of that.
Monkshood, thankyou for sharing your BAMS research. Interesting and we should get news on it's very soon.
Monkshood, thankyou for sharing your BAMS research. Interesting and we should get news on it's very soon.
Bruker is a $6b size company. They are aware of this BAMS test..
Would not surprise me if somehow they will get involved.
https://twitter.com/buy_buy_bye/status/1280196990211706880
David Wilson contacts
"Further commercial details are not being disclosed but Avacta will receive a royalty on the sales of BAMS test kits by Adeptrix."
I notice David Wilson has a strong contact at Bruker.
Sorry link https://adeptrix.com/store
Adeptrix product prices
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/AVCT/covid-19-antigen-test-collaboration-with-adeptrix-wisb348hgk655pr.html
https://www.thescipreneur.com/a-multiplexed-microarray-platform-affi-bams-for-targeted-proteomics-by-adeptrix/
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/AVCT/covid-19-antigen-test-collaboration-with-adeptrix-wisb348hgk655pr.html
Moookshood, any guesstimate on potential revenues?
Just a short note to augment your excellent post. The number of MALDI-TOF systems is low in UK compared to other regions. An approximate breakdown of total systems worldwide would be 25% USA, 25% Europe, 25% Japan/China and then the remainder RoW. As the route to market is through the system manufacturers installed base then this is a fairly easy distribution. The question is always ‘how much is our cut?’.
Monkshood - thank you for your efforts and your generosity is sharing it. Another pint I owe someone
Plymouth- small molecule
Lewisham and Greenwich -no MS
Maidstone and Tonbridge Wells MS- yes , microbial ID -no
East Kent -microbial ID
Royal Liverpool -small molecule
Whittington Health – yes- microbial ID
University Hospital Birmingham yes -small molecule (surprised they have not got Maldi?)
Cheshire - The department refers organisms for identification to UHNM NHS Trust
I thought that I would look further into what MS’s the hospitals had in their labs. Searches indicated that some trusts did have Maldi ToF’s which they were using for microbial ID’s. The market is dominated almost entirely by one manufacture, Bruker, as this has the best database for identifying the pathogens. I then asked around my contacts for some information about these specific MS’s (it is not a company I have had contact with). The person I talked to originally was from a company that does not supply the basic Maldi ToF’s being used for microbial ID’s, their instruments are more frequently used for small molecule work which, it seems, is often in a different lab and hence was less aware of the installed numbers of ToF’s. I was then given some information, 2nd hand, from an engineer who used to work for Bruker’s and now works for an independent service company.
So, Maldi ToF’s are more common than I was originally told, (apologies RK) although certainly not to the extent of one in every hospital. They generally have them in the pathology labs of a larger Trust cluster. They often actually have two (one as a backup), however the instruments are evidently already at near capacity. They are quite basic and usually set up specifically for Biotyping pathogens .
How easy it would be to do Sars cov2 ? Much will depend on the assay they produce, there are multiple possible routes – whole proteins, on bead tryptic digests etc, the cruder the sample going in, the easier it will be, but this then comes with its own set of problems. If you look at the Adeptrix webpages you can see that they have further automation that they use for sample prep. Once there are more details of the assay, the clearer it will become as to how easy it is to run on the installed instruments.
The main positive is that if you have one instrument then it means you are more likely to have the infrastructure and technical support to expand the instrument number or add further automation if needed. Not having one in the first place it is a much larger barrier. It is also good that they are mainly used in pathology labs -which are used to working with pathogens (rather than, say, a lab measuring hormones), so measuring Sar cov2 is not a big leap (although they are not running BAMS type workflow for the ID’s).
In case anyone thinks that I was deramping and now ramping for nefarious purposes ! then somewhat fortuitously a company used FOI’s to the hospital trusts last September/October asking what MS facilities they have. Do a google search for FOI /NHS/ Mass Spec – a random selection is listed below. As a rule, small molecule work- hormones etc will be on a triple quad and microbial ID on a Maldi ToF (so appropriate for BAMS). As I said previously the most common are facilities for small molecule analysis.
I still stick by my original view that it is not a block buster like the LFT but there is the potential for it to be used more in hospitals than I initially thought.