Opportunity, it is frustrating to always be waiting longer. Kag has a very valid point and it is what I mentioned many times long ago. A RECAF test does not point to the abnormal cell growth. Right now, even though RECAF can say there is a problem somewhere, early detection of an actual cancer is almost impossible. It could be compared to the "needle in a haystack" theory. How much are you or the insurers willing to pay to search for the "needle"? IMO, that is the basic problem that RECAF has and at a minimum, there would need to be an imaging test approved to aid the search.
IMO, for now, RECAF needs to be paired with other cancer markers to enhance their performance. I am really surprised that Abbott did not take it into trials as a PSA enhancement because it would definitely filter out some of the false positives and eliminate painful procedures or unnecessary prostate removal.
Abbott had to be aware of those limitations when they licensed the test but somewhere along the way, priorities changed or they thought the market had changed. We just don't know and probably will never know.
Take note that IMA has also recently licensed other cancer markers and entered a collaboration with the licensee right after the deal with Biocurex. IMO, they are wise enough to probably pair up those markers with RECAF for their tests.
The real driver of this test will be therapeutics. If Constab gets their RECAF delivered antigen approved, sales of RECAF would follow.
AI
