CU6 - Media and Industry News, page-975

Thanks again! So there is a SOC re-test done - makes more sense of the follow up period.

But leads to another question: are these patients - who have been scanned with cancer found - not allowed any treatment until after the follow up SOC scan? Otherwise, wouldn't it be possible for cu64 to have picked up a tumour that the SOC missed, receive some form of treatment that shrinks the tumour over a 6 months period, then be scanned again using the SOC which (due to the tumour shrinkage), again fails to identify it? We'd be back to a false positive, even though the tumour did exist ...

There is an obvious, desirable, risk that cu64 picks up more tumours than the SOC. If this number is too high to biopsy all the cu64-positives / SOC-negatives, either (a) the SOC is being used to check again 6 months down the track (but with the risk of false-false-positive as described above) or the tumour is being defaulted as a false positive (most undesirable).

Lets say on average cu64 picks up 10 more positives than the SOC. Wouldn't it be possible just to biopsy 2 of the 10 for each patient and then - based on a large sample size - conclude the accuracy of cu64 across all of these biopsies? Obviates the need for a 6-month follow up, and doesn't have any implication to the timing of treatment.

I must still be missing something.