Sat, Aug 30, 2014, 1:12 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Cytosorbents Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • couchtripping2 couchtripping2 Dec 27, 2011 5:53 AM Flag

    Enter CytoSorb---A New Avenue for Sepsis Treatment

     

    (part 2)

    I found the article enlightening in what it did say but also, particularly in what it did not say that Dr. LOL fails to mention. Indeed in the bulk of and most informative piece of the article, Dr. Angus succinctly lays out and astutely offers his analyses of the current medical and scientific zeitgeist that informs modern sepsis research and treatment. His paper is a must for anyone not in the sepsis medical/research field and wanting a concise, quick, easy to read overview of the myriad of difficulties so prevalent in the treatment of sepsis. Having said this, what I took away from the article, so pertinent for Cytosorbents, is that Dr. Angus calls into question the two central tenets of modern sepsis research. One, “the host response in sepsis is unhelpfully exuberant, and thus agents that block or suppress the host response should improve outcome.” and two, “the host response represents a “final common pathway,” and thus agents that manipulate this pathway should work regardless of the source of infection” (p.2615). Dr. Angus’s paper leads one to realize that, as is the case in so many areas of modern medicine, there is no magic bullet treatment, no final definitive pathogenic pathway of disease or specific patient response to pathogen or treatment. Thus, there is no specific cure for sepsis to date or in the foreseeable future and that current treatments have been palliative at best. Thus, Dr. Angus’s question: “is the current approach to the discovery and evaluation of potential therapies in need of overhaul?” (p.2614). Enter CytoSorb---a new avenue for sepsis treatment. 

    This is all good and well until you come back to the fact that Dr. Angus never mentions Cytosorbent’s treatment device as Dr. LOL correctly points out. Why is this? The answer comes when you look at what Dr. Angus does mention and by implication what he does not mention regarding specific newer therapeutic approaches. He focuses solely on and mentions only briefly two drug medications, Eli Lilly’s Xigris and Eisai’s Eritoran, neither of which fared well in recent worldwide clinical trials. Beyond the obvious question of why Dr. Angus would only mention these two recent medications that faired poorly in treating sepsis, the more important question is why Dr. LOL does not state the obvious? The fact that Dr. Angus had no intention of reviewing other non-medication alternative novel approaches to the treatment of sepsis. Thus, he would not mention CytoSorbents blood purification device period because it is not a medication, whether or not he knows of it and regardless of what he would or would not think of it. This is what Dr. LOL fails to mention. Clearly, she is able to distill down and separate pertinent from irrelevant information based on her concise overview of Dr. Angus’s article. Basically, she has withheld crucial information that discredits her arguments regarding the efficacy of Cytosorb. Why would she do this? In essence, she lies by omission. 

    This topic is deleted.
 
CTSO
0.23-0.01(-2.95%)Aug 29 3:59 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.