cpi

Hi Ubetido

I had not responded earlier as I was attempting to get a bit more info on the upcoming journal articles, but unfortunately IMI have not got back to me yet.

To answer some of your questions, the CPI is effectively electronic interpretation of ECG signals. Historically, ECGs have been interpreted visually, particularly in the "field" by clinicians. The CPI is based on a set of algorithms that analyse the electronic wave form over an extended period (many minutes). The uniqueness of the CPI is that Monash Uni, through Dr Ginzburg, have worked for nearly 20 years to come up with an accurate, reproducible interpretation of those wave forms and correlate them with (some) common underlying cardiac diseases. The value of the CPI to clinicians is that it provides accurate interpretation, can be recorded electronically for future comparison and the results can be presented in a way that they can understand.

The article published last year (Alternative Risk Markers in Coronary Artery Disease (ARMCAD Study):
Interim Analysis Heart, Lung and Circulation, Volume 16, Supplement 2,
2007, Pages S127-S128 D. Kotecha, H. Krum, B. Billah, M. Flather, L.
Roberts and D. Eccleston) was significant in that it showed that for cardiologists who KNEW there was a problem with EVERY patient they were reviewing the ECG of, they were only able to accurately identify a problem in approx. 55% of the patients, based on visual interpretation of the ECG. The CPI lifts this figure well in to the 90s for many common cardiac conditions.

The presentation to the ACC in March will be another significant step towards reinforcing the scientific credibility of the Monash work (now owned by IMI) and establishing the CPI as a legitimate tool in the (non-invasive) diagnosis and ongoing management of cardiac conditions.

Two of the reasons IMI have not been overly forceful in releasing more info on the CPI to the market is that it is critical to get the peer review and scientific acceptance of the CPI AND patents are not yet finalised in some countries. This is significant. The value of the CPI is in the intellectual property of the algorithms and the scientific basis to their interpretation and correlation to clinical conditions. That is what differentiates the CPI from anything else. The technology that is used to "transport" the "CPI intellectual property" around is irrelevant - it can be the Internet, or it can be mobile phone, which IMI are working on now. At the end of the day it is the IP of the CPI that is of value. The challenge is getting that IP in to/on to existing ECG equipment/software and coming up with processes for its storage, consumption etc etc - very big challenge.

It may well be that IMI can only do this with a serious multi-national partner or such. The likes of Seimens etc spring to mind. Time will tell.