Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Of course a tumour can be malignant and at an early stage may not have spread beyond the confines of the organ concerned. At that point parsortix is of no value.
Parsortix on present evidence is not a diagnostic tool. It is a means to provide pathologists / immunologists with information on management. The diagnosis of a malignancy will have already been made by other clinical means
I think we are mixing terms. A pelvic mass might imply local spread of an ovarian cancer, or just an mass secondary to the various misfortunes that can occur in a ladies nether parts, infection, inflammation, endometriosis etc,. So a mass, if malignant, means there is local tumour spread beyond the ovary, and indeed the present ovarian study looks to separate out ovarian tumour with local spread from the various benign causes of a pevic mass.
There is no place at present for a Parsortix as a random screening tool, and probably never will be.
Parsortix only becomes of value once a primary tumour begins to shed CTCs into the circulation. If a tumour remains localised, in prostate, breast etc,. Parsortix is of no value. CTCs found by Parsortix imply that the primary tumour MAY be metastasising. However I think , but am not sure on this, that the presence of CTCs does not necessarily always imply that metastates exist.
Regardless of whether there are mets, Parsoretix remains a priceless tool for characterising tumour cells and for predicting the response of chemo or immunotherapy
Sadly, this new study will only be useful in later stage, established disease, and it remains the case that oesophageal malignancy is usually only picked up on upper GI symptoms, or by chance as in this case. It is a horrid condition, and presents too late for much beyond palliation in many cases.
But not a word about progress on Humberside....
Diversified
I am not clear about what requires FDA approval and what does not. I understood that FDA approval -altho' easier and less time consuming than the initial breast application under consideration now - was required for each and every malignancy. This seems tedious, but that is as i understood it. Am I wrong?
A more interesting point is Parsortix having a proprietory downstream analysis system - HyCEAD-Ziplex - which means that Parsortix is not just a one trick pony with a single clever widget. Although Parsortix, the fairly simple widget, will be patented up to the eyeballs, it might not be beyond someone to some up with a 'work around' system to isolate CTCs which gets around the patents, but much harder if the widget is intimately connected to a downstream call analysis system.
baumi
In total agreement.
Dr A
Your analysis is very plausible, and it may be that the DMG will not be built until all the ducks are lined up - including other developments at the park that are nothing to do with PHE. I think the anxiety of a number of posters, including me, is due to uncertainty about the bigger picture that you have put forward. If you are correct, perhaps Peel would take note and issue a statement to that effect, presumably via PHE. All it would need to do would be to be more explicit about the reasons for apparent delay.
As i see it (for what that is worth) PHE are now simply contractors here, paid by Peel to build the DMG. Peel have PHE by the short and curly. They surely have buyers for hydrogen, and I cannot think what Peel's motive is in hanging around. Poland will not move until they see DMG working as described on the tin, nor anywhere in UK will a DMG be built until that happens.