Weekapaug, Cytyc published a strongly worded press release about the TEC advisory service press release the day the TEC release appeared -- in fact, Cytyc's release gave the TEC report greater attention than it might otherwise have achieved.
There has been no opportunity to do more since that time because the full TEC study was not due for publication for another two weeks, a fact that I thought was grossly unfair. To release conclusions that would clearly damage a business without giving anyone access to the complete data for a full two weeks seems unconscionable to me. I have received enough half-baked studies over the transom to make me a skeptic -- I like to compare the numbers in the summary to the tables in the back, and it is appalling how often they don't match up.
(Which is NOT to say that the TEC study was badly done, because, of course, I haven't seen it. I just don't like the early release of the conclusions.)
I suspect that we will hear more once Cytyc actually has a chance to look at the study, instead of TEC's press release about it. This should be shortly, since the hit took place about a week ago, if memory serves me right.
With regard to your second point. Of course, success for Cytyc depends on widespread adoption, and achievement of a critical mass -- i.e. becoming the standard of care. That is the case with all new technologies -- there is a lot riding on the early adopters (VHS or Beta, Monsieur?), because they pull their peers in their wake. But this is not a new issue with Cytyc.
Cheers
Chuck Edwards |
