Member Info for sebo10

I am a doctor just not a medical one - I earned my PhD in other words. Most medics get one as an honorary title. Technology in the 1970s is nowhere near what we can do today. I'm amazed the test got approved for anything as its completely unreliable. What it did was to give doctors a reason to investigate further, they have to balance cost Vs benefits too. PSA had no competition in the 1970s as MRI scanners didn't exist yet and the other options were invasive ones. Of course, some cancers were detected but they should have compared with the control of flipping a coin? I suspect flipping a coin is equally as effective.

Approach is spelled incorrectly for a start...

Many Pharma ventures have made all the right noises but then never got the product into production - testing couldn't be scaled, too expensive, too slow etc. This is different, they are rolling out the test and it really works. They have a good website with lots of data and links. The market has jumped because it sees a likely take-over bid. All the upfront work is done, the lab is up and running. A UK lab will be running from early next year. The bidder has everything they need to make an absolute fortune.

MRI scans are expensive, I can't imagine that the NHS would repeat one every 3 years. The 1 in 7 stat is against the stat that only 3 in 10 cancers get detected. I think that talk of x100 is interesting but many billions MCAP is surely in reach. Opposition to PSA is because there is no evidence that it really makes any difference beyond forcing the doctor to carry out more tests to check a highly unreliable test.

Read BBC article on using short cycle radiotherapy to treat early stage prostate cancer. It's highly effective, they just need testing that will catch the cancer early.

They have launched in the US for good reason. They don't need FDA approval for lab based tests that use cutting edge technology. The doctor can order the test freely. Since a massive percentage of the US market use private medical insurance....I don't see what the issue is.

PSA is widely used and yet accuracy is terrible. Doctors will forgo biopsies if the can as these are very expensive and there is limited capacity in any health system. The trials have been validated and peer reviewed, it wasn't a small number of men either and they were all asymptomatic

It would save money required for unnecessary biopsies and other invasive tests. It would pay for itself. The cost of treating a patient would was given a false negative and is now stage 3 is vastly more expensive.

Only 25% of people referred for biopsies due to elevated PSA were found to have cancer. That's 75% on healthy people!

If all men expected to be referred for biopsies were given the PSE that would be 2 million men in the US alone. It would dramatically reduce the need for biopsies which can come with complications such as infection.

You had the best chance over the last week, news takes time to sink in. I don't think we'll see any retrace, this will go higher and higher...

Less than 5% of negative results will need further investigation versus about 50% for the standard PSA. This will enable a 90% reduction in the number of biopsies taken. World leading result!

Bamb, can you read? That article was over a decade old and talks about a completely unrelated PSA test by another company...wtf!

Never been a horse man, but this seems amazing. Multi-billion dollar testing business without any other test. Those who traded this over the last week thinking that it would only do x3 clearly didn't do any research at all....more fool them.

Unbelievable numbers, Mcap clearly heading to the billions. They can achieve a false negative rate of 1% in theory. That's a massive improvement that will transform prostate cancer survival rates.

Surely 50 -100 MCAP at this stage? 50M for starters?

This surprised me, it was driven by the news from the North Sea. Government basically cancels going green. I expected a pump to x2 or x3 but not higher. I sold out a couple months back unfortunately. The share had been stagnate for ages and I saw perhaps wrongly other better opportunities medium-term.

I think that MB was naïve clearly to favour a settlement with India. We have lost a month for nothing, it will be a few years it seems before we see the colour of our money. MB's tone was downbeat in today's RNS, I don't think that the market has much faith in the short-term. Some selling and then back in the bottom draw for me. Sorry.

There are people like you all over the Aim boards. Really nasty types who ramp rubbish to trap people (so they can exit)

I have put more than 80% of my portfolio value in this today. Given the state of Aim at the moment - I can't lose.