The results are excellent; and its worth comparing and contrasting with competing (ok, complementary) ways of detecting for breast cancer just to see how good they are.
I think the market was expecting a perfect result; 100% detection of breast cancer, no false positives, 100% detection of negative cases; and also people assume that mammography is 100% accurate (which isn't the case). So when the announcement came out with figures like 77%, 82% etc, the market got spooked. Imagine what the success rate of mammography if it was conducted on 20-30 year olds?? I reckon it wouldnt be anywhere near 70%.
When we all go for medical tests, we assume that they are 100%, which isn't the case. Only experienced clinicians would be able to look at the latest results and pretty darn good (which translates to excellent in my books).
Sometime in the future when the Fermiscan test becomes commonplace, it will assume the credence of mammography and womenfolk will go and have the test assuming it is 100% accurate.
I would bet on this becoming an almost yearly test for all women 20years and over (a la cervical cancer/pap smear tests). I would hypothesize that the stage of breast cancer development would affect the result you would get from the particle accelerator. Hence, if you get a negative result today, you may still get a positive result the following year. Thats my take on it anyway.
I'm with Gill on this one - I'd say once any decent corp with a medical bias and the expertise to qualify the results will swoop on this baby. I'm thinking the likes of Symbion. This would be a perfect addition to what they already do.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?