Share
138 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 185
clock Created with Sketch. 16/04/25
18:39
Share
Originally posted by ttppxx:
↑
"Much has been made about clinicians' willingness to switch products etc. I see it slightly differently (based on my profession). It will be the easiest litigation I will ever be involved in if a clinician doesn't recommend a patient undergo a 64Cu scan in circumstances where they have a rising PSA following radical prostatectomy and it transpires that they had lesions which could have been detected and treated...but weren't because the Cu64 scan wasn't recommended... Medicol-Legal risk: You are right: failing to recommend a more sensitive scan is not only unethical, but it becomes a medico-legal liability. Why would anyone take the risk?Ethics: We should be comforted in the knowledge that clinicians don't arbitrarily stick with old modalities for no good reason. If 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA is proven to be clinically superior, and they know about it, they will recommend it to anyone who needs the test ahead of anything else in the relevant indication, provided 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA is available and accessible. That is just standard practice.Its a TRACER: We should also remember that 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA is a tracer (a drug) that is injected into the patient, as opposed to the scanning machine (remember the debate about scanners)! All from the same people who were making it sound like 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA is not compatible with the new LAFOV scanners! Of course it is! Next Day Inconvenience: And then there was the misinformation line in relation to the so called 'Next Day inconvenience', as if to say that 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA does not work same day! We need to remember that, a patient who wants same day scanning, still gets the injection and then get scanned same day at 1 - 4 hour (Ga68 is within 1 hour, and F18 is up to 2 hours). The choice of tracer is, again simplified for them: 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA is already superior on day one, with higher sensitivity / low false negative results, versus what they get if they had Illuccix or Pylarify. What people seemed to miss was that the competition between Same day and Next day is between Clarity versus Clarity (64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA versus 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA). Day One is already looking like it will be won, in favour of 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA! Availability at scale: Clarity’s focus (once superiority is confirmed) will have to be on ensuring drug availability, and payer alignment. It is interesting that the companion therapy drug 67Cu-SAR-bisPSMA, has just had its formulation improved, with supply and scalability seeming like the key issues being addressed! You would think that the same will follow for 64Cu-SAR-bisPSMA.
Expand
ttppxx,
(20min delay)