Warning: I be neither doctor nor sane�I mean, this is the internet�whadduya want�
EXAS now has data that the sensitivity for PGP is greater than 80 percent due to the improved Effipure DNA extraction. I won�t bore us all with quotes and links to that.
And the price �seems� to have come down. I see $495 on the PGP website. Someone on this board said that if the patient signed a waiver, LabCorp was offering it as low as $200?
At what point is the sensitivity/price ratio compelling? In that regard, it may be useful to compare PGP w. Sigmoidoscopy:
�..Sigmoidoscopy allows examination of the lower third of the large bowel. At colonoscopy, the entire colon is examined from the anus all the way to the ileocecal valve, the junction of the small intestine and the colon. About 65% of all precancerous polyps are found in the distal (lower) third of the colon which is within reach of the sigmoidoscope�� cf�.
► Therefore the BEST case scenario is that sigmoidoscopy is 65% sensitive. Or in other words if it is 100% sensitive, it will still miss 35% of all precancerous polyps because they are beyond the reach of the instrument. And I believe that is for a flexible sigmo that reaches up circa 60 cm. Other (rigid) methods that don�t go as far would be less sensitive. Also I believe specificity is an issue because not all polyps progress to cancer. PGP�s specificity is virturally 100% as I recall.
�..Another problem with screening sigmoidoscopy is that it is not yet paid for by Medicare. Persons over 65 years of age on Medicare must have blood in the stool or another reason to recover the cost of sigmoidoscopy. It has also been noted that if all persons over the age of 50 years were to undergo colonoscopy screening there would be an inadequate number of endoscopists to perform the procedure�� cf�
��Private insurance plans almost always cover the $150 to $200 cost of sigmoidoscopy for screening in healthy individuals over 50, or for diagnostic purposes. Medicare covers the cost for diagnostic exams, and may cover the costs for screening exams��cf�
► My wildeyed hairbrain crackpot conclusion is that cost effectivness DOES matter. At 80%+ sensitive, 90+% specific, PGP could be viewed to the flinty eyed insurance cos as a compelling alternative to sigmo ��..
���..if the PGP price was cut to ~$300 and promoted widely.
The public health capacity issue is another plus that's hard to quantify exactly, but PGP lends itself much more easily to mass testing than ANY kind of scoping.
EXAS and LH are you listening?
Or, the again maybe none of this matters. I'm not a soothsayer either....
Bingo. Your opininion is absolutely correct. The Only problems are that the GI's want to protect thier turf and the FP's, IM's, GYN's etc. don't want to drive up out of pocket testing cost for their patients.
"Docs will use PG+ because by and large they are ethical"
Sure jackass forget about the fact that PG+ is not in guidelines and that if cancer is missed I'm sure then the doc won't be sued --heheheheehe you
You are also a LIAR as most pumpers are when you say "We're supposed to get tested every 3-5 years."
Hello piece of
Go peddle your pumping Bull
jared, you're fairly right, however, your 40% of Americans are getting tested for CR cancer is way off. I think you must have meant that 40% of Americans get a test sometime in their life. That's hardly what is recommended. We're supposed to get tested every 3-5 years. The market for PG+ is actually significantly larger than you even mentioned. To avoid repeat, please visit my posts of about a month or two ago for more info that might be helpful.
once again psibert, you prove to be stupid or ignorant or both. I don't usually lay into people, butt man o man are you off base. You're so far off base, I can only presume you are accumulating and trying to hold the price down with silly posts. Come May, I think we can expect some pretty good movement upward in this stock. We'll see. BTW, all of your points regarding docs etc... are very wrong.
you're a moron psibert. The insurance industry is far more powerful than the docs, and frankly that doesn't even matter. Docs will use PG+ because by and large they are ethical. And the ethical thing to do, if all the tech turns out to be good as we think, is to order a non-intrusive no risk test v an intrusive with risk of complications test.
Most of you guys don't have a clue what you are talking about.....GI's are not the primary target for this test, family practice, ob-gyns, etc...are the focus. These are the facts 4 out 10 people are getting screened for CR cancer as this point, it's a killer and worst of all it's easily treated IF caught soon enough. PG Plus is for those pts that absolutely refuse to get a colonoscopy which is still absolutely the best defense. If everyone got one there would be no problem, PG-Plus is an alternative and that's it, and that's the way it's marketed if you will just pay attention. GI's should be happy it's out there because more people will hopefully get screened and if positive be referred to GI for follow-up and hopeful removal of polyps which would increase their patient flow. It's about getting that
%60 of Americans out there screened by offering a reliable alternative.