Re: Prostate Px

[Guest guest]

Tom,

What concerned me when I looked at their

site is the vagueness of what they do and how they do it. Here’s a

typical statement:

<snip> Aureon’s prognostic

tests provide personalized, objective risk assessment both at diagnosis and

after surgery. Prostate Px+ uses biopsy tissue at diagnosis to predict serious

disease progression as well as possible pathology changes post-surgery and is

especially helpful for patients classified as intermediate risk. Post-Op Px

provides objective information for post-surgical patients with a high risk

feature (e.g., positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension) or any

anxiety. <snip>

There are no references to studies to

support their claims, just references to work they’ve done and how well

it all works. The fact that the City of Yonkers

gave them the Yonkers Hidden Treasure Award in 2010 doesn’t help much in

assessing the value of the test, in my book anyhow.

As a matter of interest, did you see a

copy of their report? Can you get hold of a copy to see precisely what it says

and what test they are using to make their predictions?

All the best

Terry Herbert in Melbourne

Australia

If you found the Yana

site useful and would like to make some small donation towards the costs of

running the site, you can do so at http://www.yananow.org/donations.htm

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Tom

Sent: Thursday, 17 February 2011

6:01 AM

To:

natural_prostate_treatments ; ProstateCancerSupport

Subject:

Prostate Px

Has anyone had the above test? I had it

two years ago indicating I had low aggressive CA.It gave me a better piece of

mind.

Here is the URL. Your doc can order it,

and the company accepts allowed reimbursement.

http://www.aureon.com/prognostic-tests-about-prostatepx-patients.htm

[Guest guest]

Terry Herbert wrote:

....

> There are no references to studies to support their claims,

> just references to work they’ve done and how well it all works.

....

I found this link on their website:

http://www.aureon.com/resource-center-technical-publications.htm

It's got links to their published papers. Most of them seem to

be in computer, electronics, and medical equipment journals.

It looks like their specialty is using stains and fluorescent

dies on biopsy samples to make various cancer biomarkers more

visible. Then they use computerized image processing to produce

measures of how much of the biomarkers are present and where

they are located relative to other structures in the cells.

Does it work? Well, that's a good question. My guess is that

the concept is excellent. In the long run, I think computer

image processing is going to be more precise and accurate than a

human looking through a microscope and saying, " Hmmm, looks like

a 4 to me, and maybe that other one is a 3. " The computer will

be able to get very precise quantitative measures of what it

sees.

However, we're in the early stages of this kind of stuff. I

should think it will take years to validate the results and

refine the tests.

In the meantime those crotch sniffing dogs that can detect

prostate and colorectal cancer might overtake the computers :^)

Alan