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

Qiagen NV Message Board

  • kcam57 kcam57 Mar 28, 2008 1:18 PM Flag

    Getting our foot in a very large door

    This looks encouraging... wonder if this is the "rapid" HPV test.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • is he willfully ignorant, just plain dumb, or malicious?

      i don't have a problem with having a different opinion but this latest in the Annals is right up there with Crum's effusive editorial in the NEJM several years ago touting the eradication of cervical cancer by vaccination

      is there anything more clearly demonstrated by 100s of thousands of patients with long-term follow up (see portland study for the longest follow up) than what exactly is the significance of a normal pap with persistent hpv infection at 12 months?

      granted, no, you can't (yet) know if it's a new infection or true persistence, but even when genotyping arrives how can you tell if it's the same hpv 16 or a new one? and given how common 16 is...

      you have to read and understand the data from well done clinical trials...beyond that you are just talking your own book, whatever ax that is to grind...

      if you can't depend on large randomized trials, repeated over and over in diverse populations, what can you believe in?

      to take a surveillance study done in high risk populations with very high prevalence and try to generalize it to the general population...this is the kind of stuff that makes you lose all faith in medical "experts" ... it's not the dumbest thing i've read (that was probably sawaya's nejm article on how you could increase intervals and double cervical cancer incidence!) but it's up there...

      in separate news, genprobe begins their trial which is huge and expected to last 2 years (at least) ... they are trying to validate an entirely different (and potentially better, i admit) approach using e6 and e7 mrna but who knows...that's why they do target completion 1H 2010, submission maybe late 2010, fda approval maybe 2012...if they don't lose out on the roche arbitration

      seriously, sawaya borders on the criminally stupid

      • 2 Replies to incas58
      • And I bet he wasn't even nominated for the "Otto Warburg".... what a dumbass.

        Can't wait to see what he says when the experts start to promote the HPV/reflex pap concept.

        Nice to see that GPRO is 2 + years away.... that's the only (somewhat) serious threat I can see. Fat lady will be halfway through the song by then!

      • i mean it's more of the same only worse ... his "landmark" nejm study basically proved a point that Kinney made with well done studies years ago...increase the interval, increase CC incidence (maybe save a couple of bucks on screening to give back 10x as much on treatment later, and lose lives) basically a stance that says we can do a worse job than we're already doing

        now he's saying that despite what we know (which apparently he doesn't) and have known since 1998-1999 about the massively increased RR of persistent HPV infection (regardless of type) despite a normal pap, that those who have the highest risk (those who screen in STD clinics for example...generally poor and/or minority and without other health care) we should put them in a "gray" area as if we don't know that they are at higher risk

        again, yes, prevalence in these settings is high, because that's where the cancers HAPPEN! and to settle for just saying business as usual (let them have paps!) just cements his place as a know-nothing, head-in-the-sand, uneducated, hack ...

        you don't have to look to far to be disappointed in the medical world (docs, pharma, guidelines makers) these days and this is is just icing on the cake ...

        haven't had a rant like that in years...

        i wish Kinney would publish the Kaiser data, i can't believe they haven't alrady...real world data ...


22.88-0.19(-0.82%)10:18 AMEDT