I was replying to your point that Cu64 seems more relevant in high PSA, which I would argue is the opposite. Cu64 is even more relevant in lower PSA readings.
Someone with BCr, shouldn’t have any PSA. Any PSA increase would be concerning, and would prompt the clinician to be performing a diagnostic scan. Yes, someone in the field currently would know about a better diagnostic, but if this is proved out in P3 and gets approved, clinicians should be more aware of Cu64 and would be doing an injustice to be providing a less sensitive scan when they know that there is a more sensitive option.
At the end of the day, when you have a diagnostic imaging agent that is 50% more sensitive than other agents, it seems nearly negligent not to be performing such a scan. And when you don’t know at what PSA level Ga68 and F18 starts picking up lesions that is getting picked up by Cu64, why would you choose those other two? I think this will be determined to a degree with the coPSMA trial, and very importantly how often the treatment outcome changes.
CU6 Price at posting:
$2.29 Sentiment: None 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)