From my quick research, Truscreen seems to be only a screening tool, not a diagnostic tool. So if a positive response was seen from Truscreen (incl. false positives) would you still need to undertake a HPV/Pap to diagnose? If so, it could change the reimbursement equation from your straightforward unit vs test comparison.
I wonder what the breakage/error rate is with the devices and how long they last for? If governments need to continue to replace devices they may be less inclined to widely adopt them compared to standard lab tests for which they may already own or fund these labs.
I'm not a holder but have just been reading around and it seems the HPV test is still preferred (even in China) as it can occur at the same time as the Pap and that Truscreen might only be an additive in medical practice, not a replacement of current standard procedures. This might not be the case for extremely rural locations though, but I can't imagine its much of the total global cervical cancer diagnostic market.
I also wonder whether Goverments would invest more money into preventing cervical cancer and funding treatment options over spending money on new screening tools which require a large upfront capital investment woth questionable cost savings.
Finally I found it hard to find good quality recent data on its use and benefits over standard conventional practice, aside from some papers that seemed very promotional. just my thoughts, happy to be corrected!
TRU Price at posting:
11.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
