Member Info for CTSFO

The good news is the test is done on 3ml of blood collected in an EDTA tube. This is a global standard way of collecting blood. No kits need to be sent out. This is what they ask for on the order form on their site.

A somewhat tongue in cheek question! Surprised we haven’t had an RNS today saying more shares have been sold. I just want out of this utter cluster feck now. Tossing a coin re selling at a huge loss vs a possible £1.50 a share - still not great tbh.

Dryland, thanks for that post. I would have sworn Albert Einstein had said that.

Taverham, I hope and pray you get an all clear. Fingers crossed mate. 🙏

Taverham, good morning. Looking at the 94% USA order form, they say the result will be issued within 5 days of the sample being received. Not sure how many steps the blood sample is processed through. Fingers crossed we get a UK lab up and running soon.

https://www.94percent.com

Afternoon Newuncle. I do have some hands on knowledge of how the NHS and regulatory agencies operate and interact. 🤫. Trust me, if we’ve been told the truth, this test is speciality changing.

It will be very interesting to see how this develops. I don’t know the complexity of the testing process. But I’d love to see this technology in every DGH’s path lab. Test and screened local to your home. I know they say it’s a 5 day turnaround time, I haven’t looked into why that is. Time for some afternoon hunting through RNSs. But just think, from a patient perspective, if you could be seen and screened / tested within a 24 hour timeframe?

Huge effing huge.

GLA.

Joined up thinking… it’s going to be important to apply pressure to get this test adopted once it becomes available.

The NHS tends to use a ‘department budget’ system. So this test will come out of an urology or pathology budget. It will cost more. Meanwhile the radiology budget remains the same, even though they’ll be doing far fewer MRIs for urology patients. It’s important CEOs and CFOs see the whole picture.

You’re absolutely right they don’t need NICE guidance to sell it. Please let me correct my post.

Doctors will need guidance and assurance that the test does what it says on the tin. A independent body will have to verify the company’s data that it is as sensitive and specific as it claims. The MHRA will do this. Basically it’s saying the care pathway can be safely changed for which group / all patients.

Because it’s potentially expensive, a business case will have to be developed in the NHS to justify its use. Not sure how this will happen between primary care and secondary care. Will GPs start using it? Will it have to be ordered by Consultants in Hospitals? Obvs will be different for patients going private.

So my point about NICE. If NICE approve it, then it becomes the standard of care. It has to be used. Simple as that. The money will have to be found. NICE will also issue the guidelines, so no arguing between primary and secondary care.

Thanks for pointing this out, I’m sorry I didn’t make this clear in my original post. GLA.

W@nking reduces the risk of prostate cancer… he’s almost guaranteed to never get it! 🤣😇

We know the company is developing a lab in the UK to perform this test. That will need its own QA certification. The test +/- lab will need MHRA approval. This is the authorisation agency for all drugs, medical devices, and clinical tests in the UK.

Once this is all in place, then NICE can be asked to look at the cost effectiveness and patient benefits in the use of the tests. Not sure how long this takes. But we all know the standard PSA test is of questionable value. NICE may fast track the PSE analysis once they see how game changing it is.

https://www.ukri.org/councils/mrc/facilities-and-resources/find-an-mrc-facility-or-resource/mrc-regulatory-support-centre/developing-healthcare-products/medical-devices-and-in-vitro-diagnostics/

An honest apology says an lot about a person. 👏👏. You did have a valid point about lack of coverage in the serious medical journals tbf.

This is NOT a deramping or FUD post.

An important point has been raised about lack of coverage re the PSE test in serious medical journals. It has certainly been well covered in the industry specific online newsletters.

A journal such as the BMJ will have a tight editorial policy. Yes this test is great news, but at present there are no independent guidelines to say how and when it should be offered. The test isn’t FDA approved - it doesn’t have to be it’s a laboratory derived test.( see below) - but it does mean UK docs will have to have NICE / MHRA guidance before it can directly influence patient care. No harm in a cheeky little email to the BMJ, but I’m guessing they’d rather run the really big news story that the test is NICE approved and ready for use in the UK.

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics/laboratory-developed-tests

Small correction: it’s the Tintra Foundation selling, not the trust. It’s sold 50,000 shares out of the 200,000 it was gifted from Tintra Trust. Why now? Couldn’t tell you. Simply needs the money, and has quietly sold to avoid a dump in value? Or knows something we don’t?

An interesting day re SP. All those thinking the sp drop signaled doom, gloom, and destruction really need to focus on the fundamentals of this company. Ignore the b o l l o x that is AIM, and the traders out for their 10%

The fundamentals haven’t changed. This product represents a paradigm change in the screening, diagnosis, and ongoing surveillance of prostatic cancer. This product will drive the funding requirements for the other tests in the pipeline. Never has the advice of ‘buy the dip’ been more salient. It’s a dip, not a crash! Hope everyone has a great weekend, DYOR & GLA.

I mentioned screening in a reply to William Anker AKA EarlOfAim. The importance of the huge improvement in false positive / false negative / specificity / sensitivity really needs to emphasised daily.

Earl. You’re right in saying testing doesn’t stop cancer. But it does confirm its presence. This test massively reduces the false positive and false negative rates associated with the standard PSA test. This allows the focused use of resources in those shown to be high risk. Biopsies +/- MRI. Both of which take time, biopsies are painful and carry risks of infection, which can develop into sepsis. This test will be used for screening, initial diagnosis, and ongoing disease surveillance. The global market is huge.

But no one is forcing you to invest here. But I must admit, reading posts like yours makes me glad I sat at the front in class… Dunning Kruger would be proud of you.

You’re absolutely correct. Sorry I missed that.

I’ll try and find the price, time to talk to some colleagues.

Important to note this test is performed at OBD’s own lab, not in the pathology lab of the hospital. Once the test becomes available in hospital, its use will possibly rocket.

Possible next course of events:

Primary Care: NHS GPs will need to have guidance on ordering this test, and appropriate funding. That guidance will probably come from NICE or a learned society of Urologists. Advice may well come from the cancer charities as well. Patients may be able to request it privately, but not sure how that will initially work.

NHS Urologists within the NHS will need to put forward a business case within their hospitals to authorise this test. Again this will be influenced by learned society’s guidelines and NICE.

Private practice surgeons will be able to start using it straight away, though again it will need robust guidelines regarding interpretation of results.

It looks like the test is available and ready to go:

https://www.94percent.com/#requisition-form

👏👏👏👏 Such potential good news for cancer sufferers.