[PLSE][PVCT]
Kiwi - I have not looked at the videos and have no particular reason to do so. There is some familiarity with electroporation from having spent time on ONCS in the past. I don't know what the specific differences are between the two electrical pulse based systems, but the driver of the cancer treatments for both PLSE and for PVCT is based on ablation driven I-O rather than electroporation to the best of my understanding. ONCS on the other hand is using electroporation as a means of drug delivery and makes no claim of ablation from their electrical pulse system.
The treatment differences between PLSE and PVCT (electric pulse v intralesional injection)are of no importance to me at this time. The comparison is of value for a PLSE investor because of the relative stage of development between the two, and because IMHO the difference in the forms of ablation (that leave the cell detritus fragments necessary for I-O) is relatively unimportant while waiting to see if any ablative I-O can show enough clinical relevance.
PLSE going via the medical device route is another consideration (plus or minus.)
Basically, my argument is that there are a variety of ways to achieve ablative I-O if it is efficacious and if it is clinically relevant, and that the market would be competitive. One could argue that the PLSE system would have a marketable advantage, I just don't see where there is currently (sic) justification for a long investment.
