I feel like this statistic has been inadvertently misquoted or misunderstood for some time now.
The statistic is not that half the clinicians would change to a 64Cu scan.
The statistic is that the scan would then change the actual treatment. Pretty axiomatic if you ask me. “I wasn’t planning to do external beam there because I didn’t know there was a lesion there. But now I know there’s a lesion there. I’ll now change the treatment plan”.
If I’ve got a rising PSA. I want to know where the lesions are. I don’t want to wait 6 months for an inferior scan to detect them. You’d bloody hope your clinicians have the same thought process.
They’re all about changing patient outcomes there at clarity. Some might call them leaders in innovation.
CU6 Price at posting:
$2.29 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)