Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

Verisante Technology Inc V.VER.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  VRSEF

Verisante Technology, Inc. is a Canada-based company. The Company does not operate any active business other than to identify and complete a reverse takeover (RTO) with a company in one of its target sectors that demonstrates significant growth potential and/or value creation opportunities for shareholders. The Company may pursue a target in any industry, it intends to focus its search on companies that meet its acquisition target characteristics within the life sciences sectors.


TSXV:VER.H - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by electricsocketson Mar 01, 2013 11:18am
344 Views
Post# 21062159

RE: FDA approval

RE: FDA approval

my guess is FDA approval will be very late 2014 or early 2015 - this will likely be a full PMA application with required US clinical trials as a class III device - anything less would be a pleasant and unexpected surprise. I expect that once the company announces the confirmed FDA process with timelines the market should start taking notice and valuing accordingly. 

IMO - comparing melafind to verisante aura for FDA approval process is apples to oranges for the most part - as the devices are entirely different as are the uses. Very generally they are both to assist in the identification of melanoma - but that is a very broad based analysis when looking at the background science of each device. 

I wrote about my opinion on the Melafind FDA process in an earlier seekingalpha blog post - interesting bits as follows: 

 

(Melafind)Statistical method used to calculate the device sensitivity at 98% was chosen by Mela Sciences as a one-sided exact Mid-p binomial method. Some view this as a weaker statistical evaluation. The FDA certainly voiced this concern despite approving. Comparing this method to the Clopper-Pearson, Score methods and the two-sided Mid-p method the FDA showed much lower results.

Please see: www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees...

and

www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees...

Most importantly in my mind, is the issue of Melafind Non-Evaluables- these were not included in the assessment of melafind's accuracy but should be taken into consideration. Let's put this into perspective: in Melafind's clinical study, of the 1831 enrolled lesions, 162 were deemed to be non-evaluable, meaning scanned with no result given, of which included 27 pathology confirmed melanomas. Once hair is shaved, alcohol applied and suspicious lession scanned using the Melafind device, approximately 9% of all these scanned lesions were non-evaluable by the device and of those lesions, 16.7% were confirmed melanomas.

*****

Again just my thoughts & personal opinions, nothing more. Those FDA links about melafind are good reads - better than any NR link on the company website.....

good luck & do your own DD. 

Bullboard Posts