sharetrader
  1. #16991
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kiwidollabill View Post
    I'm puzzled as to how naive they could be by taking the laboratory developed test pathway rather than FDA, particularly when you are reliant on a govt payment schedule. The other main cancer DNA tests I know of (or at least when my knowledge was better in this space a few years ago) all had FDA clearance otherwise they were sold as 'not for diagnostic use'. Moreover, the space for operating LDTs that are clearly for diagnostic use is going to get significantly harder (think the damage Theranos has done). Have they published a pathway to getting FDA cleared at all? Otherwise, getting on the CMS schedule might be essentially a no-go. Unless someone can point to other examples where comparabile LDTs are covered by CMS

    Wow, do you think FDA approval would be any easier?

    Look at CUV, I think its been circa 10 years and two different brand names and they are now just getting FDA approval, Hopefully anyway. Otherwise the 400% i am up will get smashed.


    The goal posts are always changing,

    https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/...eveloped-tests


    The good news is, PEB are one announcement away from being cashflow positive.

  2. #16992
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nigelk View Post
    I think it's more complex than that.
    My read is...

    Patients need bladder tests
    CMS want PEB to do them.
    PEB want to do them, but don't have LCD inclusion
    They can't be deferred (patient safety) PEB don't want another supplier to do them, so they do the tests.
    PEB issues an invoice for the tests done but know they won't get paid until their LCD inclusion is obtained.
    So issues are - will they get LCD inclusion? and, will they be paid for the tests done prior to receiving it?

    Nigelk,

    If you require a better understanding of the reimbursement situation look at MDX health, I spent near on a full week researching this to understand the reimbursement process and have previously posted links showing this. The goal posts are always changing in this industry and it is very high risk. PEB are so close, might be time for DD to buy a few on market.

  3. #16993
    Reincarnated Panthera Snow Leopard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Private Universe
    Posts
    5,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carpenterjoe View Post
    ...
    The good news is, PEB are one announcement away from being cashflow positive.
    ...and have been for many years now and possibly for many years to come. Yep!

    Even if these 17k tests do eventually get paid out it is the ability to generate excess cash on the day to day operations that would make this company viable.
    Last edited by Snow Leopard; 20-06-2019 at 06:58 PM.
    om mani peme hum

  4. #16994
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carpenterjoe View Post
    Wow, do you think FDA approval would be any easier?

    Look at CUV, I think its been circa 10 years and two different brand names and they are now just getting FDA approval, Hopefully anyway. Otherwise the 400% i am up will get smashed.


    The goal posts are always changing,

    https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/...eveloped-tests


    The good news is, PEB are one announcement away from being cashflow positive.
    How does getting money for 17k tests make them cashflow positive? lets say $500 per test by my calcs that is $8,500,000. So would still be operating at a loss.

  5. #16995
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snow Leopard View Post
    ...and have been for many years now and possibly for many years to come. Yep!

    Even if these 17k tests do eventually get paid out it is the ability to generate excess cash on the day to day operations that would make this company viable.

    The "pay out" isn't the important step, the "pay out" will be less than it should, circa half at a guess. But the reimbursement process will be open and ready to go.
    10000 to 20000 tests at circa 1040 NZD per test.

    Wait till guidelines catch up and those announcements will be profit in bags.

    Will PEB need more money. Yes. In what form it comes in, I have no idea.

  6. #16996
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    How does getting money for 17k tests make them cashflow positive? lets say $500 per test by my calcs that is $8,500,000. So would still be operating at a loss.
    Reimbursement rate is circa 1040 NZD per test, current market in only three countries is 15697 tests = $16,000,000 sales. chuck in some overdue reimbursement and the sentiment could be very different. Yes reimbursement rates are different in different countries. I am talking very roughly and with a glass half full.


    Total laboratory throughput (which includes commercial sales as well as
    tests from User Programmes) grew to 15,697 tests in FY19, a 9% increase on
    FY18.


  7. #16997
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carpenterjoe View Post
    Wow, do you think FDA approval would be any easier?

    Look at CUV, I think its been circa 10 years and two different brand names and they are now just getting FDA approval, Hopefully anyway. Otherwise the 400% i am up will get smashed.


    The goal posts are always changing,

    https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/...eveloped-tests


    The good news is, PEB are one announcement away from being cashflow positive.
    The easy short term choice is rarely the best long term one.

    Look at what the real players do to make $
    https://diagnostics.roche.com/global...tion-test.html

    Lots of bankrupted companies were "one announcement away from being cashflow positive"

  8. #16998
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,480

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kiwidollabill View Post
    The easy short term choice is rarely the best long term one.

    Look at what the real players do to make $
    https://diagnostics.roche.com/global...tion-test.html

    Lots of bankrupted companies were "one announcement away from being cashflow positive"
    This is where one has to grudgingly acknowledge the ability of DD & PEB to spin out the story from one capital raising to another.

  9. #16999
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kiwidollabill View Post
    The easy short term choice is rarely the best long term one.

    Look at what the real players do to make $
    https://diagnostics.roche.com/global...tion-test.html

    Lots of bankrupted companies were "one announcement away from being cashflow positive"
    Thanks will do,

    Seems it relies on a Cobas amplification system and the system is rather large and at 50k+ a machine,

    Out of interest do you need an invasive tumor sample to run the test?

    Do you know how long is took Roche to research and gain approval for both technologies?

    At first glance this is a targeted system that is used to decide what drugs to use to save someone from metastatic colorectal cancer, it is not a front line diagnostic test

    At first glace this seems like comparing an apple with a brick.
    This example is why the likes of PEB and MDX need to succeed.

    Yes the big players have deep pockets are able to force decision making at all levels.

    Happy Fridays

  10. #17000
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carpenterjoe View Post
    Thanks will do,

    Seems it relies on a Cobas amplification system and the system is rather large and at 50k+ a machine,

    Out of interest do you need an invasive tumor sample to run the test?

    Do you know how long is took Roche to research and gain approval for both technologies?

    At first glance this is a targeted system that is used to decide what drugs to use to save someone from metastatic colorectal cancer, it is not a front line diagnostic test

    At first glace this seems like comparing an apple with a brick.
    This example is why the likes of PEB and MDX need to succeed.

    Yes the big players have deep pockets are able to force decision making at all levels.

    Happy Fridays
    Do you realise that CXbladder is run on Roche Lightcyclers which are basically the non-FDA version of the Cobas.....????

    I'll just leave the rest, its best not to make assessments on 'at first glance....'

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •