SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Biomaven who wrote (6170)4/17/2002 8:47:16 AM
From: dalroi  Respond to of 52153
 
Peter,

another caution is the now questioned screening mammography
there was an article in the lancet which showed no difference in mastectomie rate etc due to screening mammografie for early detection of breast cancer

cheers

Stefaan



To: Biomaven who wrote (6170)4/20/2002 9:08:14 AM
From: Archie Meeties  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
Bio,

In the case of neuroblastoma, prognosis is best correlated to the amplification of the n-myc gene, not stage or grade. A small tumor with huge n-myc amplification carries a worse prognosis than a large one with few amplification. Most cancer staging is based on simple physical measurements, degree of organ involvement, and degree of mtastases. The work with neuroblastoma suggests that the usual ways of staging/grading cancer may be artificial and even misleading.

For cancer screening to be viable, it needs to be sensitive to early, agressive tumors. My concern with studies publishing sensitivity and specificity data is this data is being gathered from patients who are already diagnosed. This is preselecting a group of patients which do not have occult disease. The protein makeup of the patients who have occult disease might be much different from those already diagnosed.

That said, good early cancer screening would be a huge coup in the management of recurrent disease and in families with a strong history of cancer.

ciao.