PEB - Pacific Edge Ltd

[skid]

It has been touted on this thread that big pharma has a major influence and corrupt politicians can decide what the medical professionals can do and say; and, who will succeed and who will fail. It’s very hard to keep a secret in this world and whistle blower policies to protect informants are not just available in New Zealand. And, the clinical trial results and urological publications fairly and openly challenge the findings of all published material.....(I think this argument against Pacific Edge by some is nothing short of absolute rubbish).

You shouldn’t be punished for doing the right thing. This is the law in many cases. For a century and half, Congress has offered certain whistleblowers both legal protection and monetary rewards — and lately it has expanded the incentives to report many types of wrongdoing.

HyperLink: American Whistle Blower Protection


It has been touted on this thread that Pacific Edge Limited need to take on a (big pharma) Joint Venture partner to have any chance at all of being successful in America. Well, the big pharma below aren’t having it all their own way either in the urological field, that’s for sure. The marketing program that Pacific Edge has in place was carefully prepared using independent consultants where necessary, and is being carefully implemented.

I think that investors may be slowly just starting to realise how much of an impact this upstart, back water company (PEB) is having in the urological world. Pacific Edge are giving urologists an opportunity to test drive via ‘User Programs’ the CxBladder test. There has been a few tests around previously and there are a few on the horizon. The comparison graphic shows the performance of CxBladder.

CxBladder Clinical Trial Test Result~1.

Attachment 7178

Urine cytology has been used >60 years for the diagnosis of Urothelial Cancer and now it has the adjuncts of ‘Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization’ (FISH) and ImmunoCyt tests.

Abbott Molecular – UroVysion (FISH) Test.

UroVysion Fluorescence in Situ Hybridisation (FISH) assay. Medical Services Advisory Committee (MASC) - Australian Assessment - 2005

In general, under any plausible variation of evidence of accuracy, costs or rates of recurrence, the use of the UroVysion test remained more costly than current practice given the expected diagnostic pathways.

Recommendation: MSAC recommended that on the strength of evidence pertaining to UroVysion Fluorescence In Situ Hybridisation (FISH) assay public funding should not be supported for this procedure.


Australia & New Zealand Horizon Scanning Network - 2009

2009 HEALTHPACT Action: Tests including BladderChek® and UroVysion FISH assay, designed for the detection of bladder cancer in high risk patients, have poor sensitivity and poor positive predictive values. It is not recommended that these assays be used in asymptomatic patients but they may be useful in the monitoring of patients with transitional cell carcinoma between Cystoscopies. Therefore it is recommended that this technology not be assessed further.


Comparison of ImmunoCyt, UroVysion, & Urine Cytology in Detection of Recurrent Urothelial Carcinoma - 2009

Conclusion: UroVysion has a specificity that is comparable to Cytology in Cystoscopically negative cases. UroVysion may still have value as a confirmatory test for either Cytology or ImmunoCyt.


UroVysion, Urine Cytology, and the College of American Pathologists - 2010

UroVysion (Abbott Molecular) is an FDA approved test for the diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma. Although widely used, there are a variety of different ways to evaluate and interpret the test, and questions remain about the test’s cost effectiveness and reproducibility in actual clinical practice.


Evaluation of UroVysion and Cytology for Bladder Cancer Detection - 2013

Valid results of both UroVysion and Cytology examinations from the same urine sample. UroVysion tests were performed as per the manufacturer’s instructions.

Conclusions: UroVysion was more sensitive than Cytology in detecting UCC, but produced more false positive results. Our data suggest that the use of UroVysion as a reflex test following an ambiguous Cytological diagnosis may play an effective role for UCC detection.


Oh, and by the way, big pharma certainly didn’t manipulate this organisation.

CENTRES for MEDICARE and MEDICAID 2011

Abbott's molecular test, UroVysion, effective January 1, 2011. CMS has announced a separate code which covers that test and moreover appears to be aimed specifically at that test. The financial impact is dramatic, basically resulting in a 50% cut in Medicare reimbursement.


I would suggest that Pacific Edge are not taking it to the big boys at all; but, are just doing their own thing marketing a major shift in Bladder Cancer testing technology. Their professional, fully trained urological Account Executives are working with the clinicians to introduce this into their clinical pathways and this is being done by the 'User Program'. Now, that is called "putting your money where your mouth is"!

We shall see how the commercial roll-out is proceeding when the 2015 results are released. To comment now on the success or failure of the uptake of the CxBladder test would be premature and based on totally unfounded information and thus would be a tad irresponsible.

Fair post..the only thing I would query is the part about whistle blower protection --(but this is most likely more relevant in the political arena.)--(Dont know if you have seen this doco --its ofcourse not directly related--but it is a fair comment on whistle blowers in general)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3hCR_yCvkk

Meanwhile i think some would feel alot more at ease if we started to see at least a few news clips over there bringing all your points to light. Maybe we will in time

[NT001]

Fair post..(but) I think some would feel alot more at ease if we started to see at least a few news clips over there bringing all your points to light. Maybe we will in time

I wouldn't bet on it, Skid. What journalist or news medium in NZ or anywhere else has the resources or motivation to research and publish a comparative evaluation of the various means of diagnosing and monitoring bladder cancer just to put "at ease" a few PEB shareholders who can't DTOR?

Any such evaluation has to be based on the assessments of extremely highly qualified practitioners or scientific or professional organisations, who rarely come out with headline-grabbing declarations that one method is clearly better than its competitors. For starters there are professional, legal and commercial restrictions on this. Even the Bladder Cancer WebCafe site which appears to be well informed and responsibly run carries a protective disclaimer saying:

The information contained in these pages is not meant to be taken as an endorsement of any medical approach, procedure, or treatment of any kind.

There are occasional articles on the topic in peer-reviewed medical publications (although not many) that are open to public scrutiny, and which people like Hancocks watch out for and are kind enough to bring to our attention. And of course Pacific Edge - the company that some of us continually attack for not giving us any hard information - publishes material on its website that we either don't read or we choose to disbelieve on the grounds that it's designed only to serve the interests of the company's untrustworthy leadership.

But PEB itself needs to be a bit careful not to antagonise the entire US urological sector and medical establishment by pumping out claims that may be considered contentious, at least by its competitors. So it's really up to us to make best use of what info is available from limited sources.

[skid]

I wouldn't bet on it, Skid. What journalist or news medium in NZ or anywhere else has the resources or motivation to research and publish a comparative evaluation of the various means of diagnosing and monitoring bladder cancer just to put "at ease" a few PEB shareholders who can't DTOR?

Any such evaluation has to be based on the assessments of extremely highly qualified practitioners or scientific or professional organisations, who rarely come out with headline-grabbing declarations that one method is clearly better than its competitors. For starters there are professional, legal and commercial restrictions on this. Even the Bladder Cancer WebCafe site which appears to be well informed and responsibly run carries a protective disclaimer saying:

The information contained in these pages is not meant to be taken as an endorsement of any medical approach, procedure, or treatment of any kind.

There are occasional articles on the topic in peer-reviewed medical publications (although not many) that are open to public scrutiny, and which people like Hancocks watch out for and are kind enough to bring to our attention. And of course Pacific Edge - the company that some of us continually attack for not giving us any hard information - publishes material on its website that we either don't read or we choose to disbelieve on the grounds that it's designed only to serve the interests of the company's untrustworthy leadership.

But PEB itself needs to be a bit careful not to antagonise the entire US urological sector and medical establishment by pumping out claims that may be considered contentious, at least by its competitors. So it's really up to us to make best use of what info is available from limited sources.

Did you see carpenter joes post and link?--that sort of thing---or perhaps a mention in the American cancer ass web site-(is that to much to ask?)--PEB is lost in the jungle in terms of recognition atm

The point of this is not to put PEB posters at ease--Its to bring the company recognition and help it move forward-(and make some money)-that,would put posters at ease (they probably wouldnt mind to much if the SP rose out of the low 70s either)--Its when others talk about PEB,that the rubber meets the road.IMO

[Carpenterjoe]

Found this company/website interesting

http://mdxhealth.com/

I believe

They have similar products/pipeline

Illustrates/confirms the market possibilities/Demand

Assists in valuing PEB

Good one to keep an eye on.

Reassures me that FDA approval is not required to achieve market penetration.

[NT001]

Did you see carpenter joes post and link?..PEB is lost in the jungle in terms of recognition atm

Had a quick look at the link and couldn't actually locate what article you were looking at. But that's the nature of the beast. If you were a shareholder in one of CxBladder's competitors, you'd probably have the same complaint. You want instant daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly half-yearly and annual detailed updates. As a longterm PEB shareholder I'm content to await the outcome of the contest. Don't care what the SP is tomorrow. Or on Tuesday. Or on Wednesday. But then, in my younger days I was a middle distance runner. It taught me a lot that proved invaluable in later life.

[skid]

Had a quick look at the link and couldn't actually locate what article you were looking at. But that's the nature of the beast. If you were a shareholder in one of CxBladder's competitors, you'd probably have the same complaint. You want instant daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly half-yearly and annual detailed updates. As a longterm PEB shareholder I'm content to await the outcome of the contest. Don't care what the SP is tomorrow. Or on Tuesday. Or on Wednesday. But then, in my younger days I was a middle distance runner. It taught me a lot that proved invaluable in later life.

Its the Kaiser link (its still there)--talks about the benefits of early detection with the test--guess the point is -its coming from somewhere other than the company itself.(that makes the test)

The SP example is just an indication that no one really knows if goals are being achieved at this point in time,so its indicative (to an extent)of just how the company is going(which I assume you do have an interest in)

suppose I should clarify SP is indicative of how investors ,including institutions perceive the company is doing(mr market)

[Minerbarejet]

Investors, institutions, and every Tom, Dick and Harry can have all the perceptions they like about where the company is going,
it is of little consequence. The only ones that know how the company is going are the company accountants and management.
In a leakfree and tightly run company this will be revealed every six months. Any other announcements that may be considered price sensitive i.e. patents, deals signed, will be released as soon as possible after the fact.
That is why there was some surprise expressed by DD when Tom Dick and Harry, investors and institutions drove the price up to 1.70 odd.
False perception by the punters not PEB.
Dont expect more than the above apart from some analysts giving their views every now and then.
As I have said before, boil the jug, make a cup of something, sit back and relax. Or alternatively pour 5 fingers of whiskey and pass out.

[Tsuba]

I think the 5 fingers of whiskey maybe contributing to some of the emotions here. Not good for ones BALANCE.

[skid]

Investors, institutions, and every Tom, Dick and Harry can have all the perceptions they like about where the company is going,
it is of little consequence. The only ones that know how the company is going are the company accountants and management.
In a leakfree and tightly run company this will be revealed every six months. Any other announcements that may be considered price sensitive i.e. patents, deals signed, will be released as soon as possible after the fact.
That is why there was some surprise expressed by DD when Tom Dick and Harry, investors and institutions drove the price up to 1.70 odd.
False perception by the punters not PEB.
Dont expect more than the above apart from some analysts giving their views every now and then.
As I have said before, boil the jug, make a cup of something, sit back and relax. Or alternatively pour 5 fingers of whiskey and pass out.

I wonder if DD was surprised at the Tom,Dick and Harry posters who were talking the company up when it was at its highs

[Minerbarejet]

I wonder if DD was surprised at the Tom,Dick and Harry posters who were talking the company up when it was at its highs

Probably just as surprised at the Tom, Dick and Harry posters who are talking the company down when it is at its lows.