Sounds good but it would also be lying.
More truthful would be, "Probably, it is not, but we do miss a significant amount".
Best Wishes
Paper Tiger
Printable View
This can't be very good for the company https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/249695.pdf
Balance will explain.
Oh dear - market is not even reacting this time round to the 'good' news from PEB.
Oh for the days when such an announcement sent the sp rocketing upwards - egged on with 'tens of thousands' .
Maybe the bigger issue is about how much PEB needs to raise by way of yet another rights issue - and whether any underwriters can be found.
Thanks Balance for your response, although your angle is from a market (share price) point of view solely, rather than what this means for the company. Perhaps another credibility tick?
The market already responded when the Kaiser announcement came out on the 14th Nov. I wouldn't think it would have got to the 60c-70c range from this announcement.
Yes, another rights issue is likely, provided a big transformational customer doesn't make a move prior 6 months from now, but in my view (as I have said before) it means the company will take longer to meet their stated objectives. I don't think there will be an issue finding underwriters as many of the big ones take a long-term view.
To quote from the release:
"demonstrated high test sensitivity (93%) and high negative predictive value (97%)"
If you do not understand sensitivity and negative predictive value are you may be impressed.
If you do understand what sensitivity and negative predictive value are you know that you are being fed marketing effluent.
Come on guys what was the specificity?
Best Wishes
Paper Tiger
Implications of non-detected cancer
There is no known data on the risk of disease progression for people with missed diagnoses, but we can extrapolate from data on patients who have been diagnosed, staged and treated. Studies of treated patients show that several factors affect disease recurrence and progression to invasive bladder disease, including grade and stage of disease and number of tumours.(52) Risk of progression is
· 0.2% after a year for lowest risk patients, including those with low grade disease and stage Ta;
· about 1% at 12 months post-treatment for those with carcinoma in-situ;
· 9% risk of progression to invasive disease at five years for patients with Ta or T1 disease without CIS treated solely with TURBT;
· between 7 and 40% at 5 years for patients with Ta or T1 disease with CIS.
These data suggest that, in low risk disease, a delay of a few months would probably not be associated with disease progression to a state where treatment options are fundamentally changed.
However the impact on clinical outcomes of a delay, of for example a number of months, in diagnosis of bladder cancer should also be considered in the context of current practice. Time to diagnosis includes the time from presentation in primary care, through initial investigation, referral to secondary care and waiting time until the specialist assessment. If the introduction of an alternative diagnostic pathway reduced the overall time to diagnosis, a delay of some months for a subset of patients may not make a significant difference from the status quo.
The non-detection and consequent delay in diagnosis of patients with higher stage disease is associated with greater risk of progression to a disease stage that affects treatment options and outcomes.
National Health Committee – Tier 3: The effectiveness of urinary biomarker genotypes (Cxbladder Detect) in the
investigation of haematuria in Primary Care
Study results
· Outperformed comparative tests as an adjunct to cystoscopy.
· Has a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97%.
· Detected 100% of T1-T3, Tis and upper tract tumors.
· Detected 97% of high-grade tumors.
· Detected 68% of Ta tumors as compared to cytology at 35%.
· Distinguished between low grade Ta tumors and other detected urothelial carcinomas with a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 90%
· Robust to BPH, cystitis/UTI, hematuria secondary to warfarin, prostatitis and urolithiasis.
· Detected six urothelial carcinoma not identified by cystoscopy during the clinical work-up but confirmed at the 12 month follow-up:
o 1 x T2 single renal pelvis.
o 1 x Unk multiple high grade bladder tumors.
o 1 x T2 single high grade bladder tumor.
o 3 x Renal pelvic / distal uteric tumors (detected by CT; not path confirmed).
· Has an overall sensitivity of 82% at 85% specificity
Attachment 8507