Interesting, page-1660

The case for screening prostate cancer is a separate issue that can be explored later if our imaging techniques are shown to have greater efficacy.

But, in my opinion, the first thing to tick off is the detection of metastatic disease. Go look up a picture of a bone scan and see how terrible the quality of imaging is. While PET is obviously much better, there is still so much room for improvement. This is low hanging fruit and an area where we can rapidly expand.

Screening is a tougher issue. In order to advocate for the use of the IBX systems as a screening test, one fundamental question needs to be answered: will the nanoparticles detect all types of prostate cancer with a high degree of accuracy?

As a pathologist, I can tell you that there are MANY forms of prostate cancer: ductal adenocarcinoma, acinar adenocarcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, neuroendocrine carcinoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, BCC, SCC, etc. Biopsy can differentiate between all these different forms currently. Will Magsense do the same? That remains to be seen.

Obviously everyone would prefer to have a simple scan rather than an ultrasound guided transrectal biopsy, but screening is a complex and highly nuanced field.