PhD candidate Ms Janice Withnall, from the UWS School of Education, is carrying out the project in a bid to better understand the experiences of women who have successfully stopped drinking.
National statistics show that alcohol-related illness hospitalises 95,000 Australians a year. Of that group, 7 per cent are women who are alcohol dependent.
However, Ms Withnall says the numbers of midlife women aged 35 to 55 years who are living with the painful flow-on effects from their own alcohol misuse - like health problems, damage to self-esteem, and impact on career, business and family - is increasing. The figure may be as high as 13 per cent, according to the 2005 Australian Longitudinal Study of Womens Health and the Australian Bureau of Statistics health data.
"Women progress from alcohol use to alcoholism more rapidly than men in a process of acceleration known as 'telescoping.' Research has shown that alcoholism is becoming the third leading cause of death in women aged 35 to 55," Ms Withnall says.
"There is little research internationally that specifically looks at midlife women and their experiences with alcohol, the negative impact it can have on their lives, families and communities. Likewise, little is understood of midlife women in sober recovery in Australia."
While we don't know all the reasons why these women appear to be more at risk compared to other age groups, there are some clues, according to Ms Withnall.
"This group of women is what we call the 'sandwich generation' - they face different pressures from different directions. These are women who may have childcare responsibilities, or look after elderly parents, on top of also experiencing their own relationship and career pressures," she says.
"We hope to shed more light on the recovery issue, increase our knowledge, and improve care and support for Australian women to achieve long and satisfying lives."
Professionals who focus on alcohol and drug harm and have helped women to maintain sobriety are also being asked to take part in the study, which will be in the form of a survey and interviews.
The study is designed to preserve anonymity and confidentiality, and has been approved by the UWS Ethics Committee.
Contact: Lyn Danninger
Research Australia
вторник, 31 января 2012 г.
вторник, 24 января 2012 г.
US Commercial Genetic Testing Does Not Detect All Cancer-associated Mutations In Certain Genes
Despite a negative (normal) genetic test for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, about 12 percent of breast cancer patients from high-risk families carried previously undetected cancer-associated mutations, according to a study in the March 22/29 issue of JAMA, a theme issue on women's health.
Co-author Mary-Claire King, Ph.D., of the University of Washington, Seattle, presented the findings of the study today at a JAMA media briefing on women's health in New York.
Inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose to high risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Lifetime risks of breast cancer are as high as 80 percent among U.S. women with mutations in these genes, according to background information in the article. Risks for young women with inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are particularly increased. Among white women in the U.S., 5 percent to 10 percent of breast cancer cases are due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Inherited mutations in other genes, including CHEK2, TP53 and PTEN, can also influence risk of breast cancer.
Clinical options for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer include screening starting at a young age, the use of highly sensitive detection methods, and prophylactic surgeries of the ovaries or breast. Because prophylactic surgeries, while highly effective in reducing risk, are also highly invasive, it is particularly important to distinguish mutation carriers from noncarriers with similarly severe family histories. Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are possible candidates for such surgeries. Genetic testing to identify harmful BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in as-yet unaffected women with severe family histories of breast or ovarian cancer has become an integral part of clinical practice in many communities. To provide accurate and complete information to high-risk patients, it is critical to understand the implications of a negative test result.
Dr. King and colleagues conducted a study to determine the frequency and types of undetected cancer-predisposing mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, TP53, and PTEN among patients with breast cancer from high-risk families (4 or more cases of breast or ovarian cancer) with negative results from commercial genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Between 2002-2005, the researchers evaluated DNA and RNA samples from 300 breast cancer probands (initial member of a family to come under study) and used multiple different screening approaches to identify mutations of all genomic classes in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, TP53, and PTEN.
The researchers found that of the 300 probands, 52 (17 percent) carried previously undetected mutations, including 35 (12 percent) with genomic rearrangements of BRCA1 or BRCA2, 14 (5 percent) with CHEK2 mutations, and 3 (1 percent) with TP53 mutations. No inherited mutations were detected in PTEN. At BRCA1 and BRCA2, 22 different genomic rearrangements were found. Of these, 14 were not previously described and all were individually rare. Inherited rearrangements of BRCA1 were more frequent among probands diagnosed when younger than 40 years (16 percent) than among probands diagnosed when 40 years or older (6.5 percent).
"Women at high risk and their clinicians want accurate assessment of genetic risk prior to embarking on ... invasive and expensive risk management options. Our results suggest that genetic testing, as currently carried out in the United States, does not provide all available information to women at risk. Our data indicate that 12 percent of those from high-risk families with breast cancer and with negative (wild-type) commercial genetic test results for BRCA1 and BRCA2 nonetheless carry cancer-predisposing genomic deletions or duplications in one of these genes," the authors write.
"The clinical dilemma is what to offer to women with a high probability of carrying a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 but with negative commercial test results. Technically, the answer is at hand. The mutations identified in our study that were missed by commercial testing are detectable using other approaches that are currently available," the researchers write. They add that for families testing negative (wild type) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 by conventional sequencing, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA - a molecular method to detect genetic variation) followed by sequence confirmation of breakpoints in patients' genomic DNA is the current best choice for evaluating the wide range of genomic rearrangements in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Clinical testing using MLPA is currently not available in the U.S.
"As more breast cancer susceptibility genes of different penetrances are identified, clinicians will be increasingly challenged to offer the most appropriate genetic tests, to assist patients in interpreting the results, and to optimize risk reduction strategies," the authors conclude. "Effective methods for identifying these mutations should be made available to women at high risk."
(JAMA. 2006;295:1379-1388. Available pre-embargo to the media at mailto:www.jamamedia)
Editor's Note: For funding/support information, please see the JAMA article.
Contact: Clare Hagerty
JAMA and Archives Journals
Co-author Mary-Claire King, Ph.D., of the University of Washington, Seattle, presented the findings of the study today at a JAMA media briefing on women's health in New York.
Inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose to high risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Lifetime risks of breast cancer are as high as 80 percent among U.S. women with mutations in these genes, according to background information in the article. Risks for young women with inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are particularly increased. Among white women in the U.S., 5 percent to 10 percent of breast cancer cases are due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Inherited mutations in other genes, including CHEK2, TP53 and PTEN, can also influence risk of breast cancer.
Clinical options for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer include screening starting at a young age, the use of highly sensitive detection methods, and prophylactic surgeries of the ovaries or breast. Because prophylactic surgeries, while highly effective in reducing risk, are also highly invasive, it is particularly important to distinguish mutation carriers from noncarriers with similarly severe family histories. Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are possible candidates for such surgeries. Genetic testing to identify harmful BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in as-yet unaffected women with severe family histories of breast or ovarian cancer has become an integral part of clinical practice in many communities. To provide accurate and complete information to high-risk patients, it is critical to understand the implications of a negative test result.
Dr. King and colleagues conducted a study to determine the frequency and types of undetected cancer-predisposing mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, TP53, and PTEN among patients with breast cancer from high-risk families (4 or more cases of breast or ovarian cancer) with negative results from commercial genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Between 2002-2005, the researchers evaluated DNA and RNA samples from 300 breast cancer probands (initial member of a family to come under study) and used multiple different screening approaches to identify mutations of all genomic classes in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, TP53, and PTEN.
The researchers found that of the 300 probands, 52 (17 percent) carried previously undetected mutations, including 35 (12 percent) with genomic rearrangements of BRCA1 or BRCA2, 14 (5 percent) with CHEK2 mutations, and 3 (1 percent) with TP53 mutations. No inherited mutations were detected in PTEN. At BRCA1 and BRCA2, 22 different genomic rearrangements were found. Of these, 14 were not previously described and all were individually rare. Inherited rearrangements of BRCA1 were more frequent among probands diagnosed when younger than 40 years (16 percent) than among probands diagnosed when 40 years or older (6.5 percent).
"Women at high risk and their clinicians want accurate assessment of genetic risk prior to embarking on ... invasive and expensive risk management options. Our results suggest that genetic testing, as currently carried out in the United States, does not provide all available information to women at risk. Our data indicate that 12 percent of those from high-risk families with breast cancer and with negative (wild-type) commercial genetic test results for BRCA1 and BRCA2 nonetheless carry cancer-predisposing genomic deletions or duplications in one of these genes," the authors write.
"The clinical dilemma is what to offer to women with a high probability of carrying a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 but with negative commercial test results. Technically, the answer is at hand. The mutations identified in our study that were missed by commercial testing are detectable using other approaches that are currently available," the researchers write. They add that for families testing negative (wild type) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 by conventional sequencing, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA - a molecular method to detect genetic variation) followed by sequence confirmation of breakpoints in patients' genomic DNA is the current best choice for evaluating the wide range of genomic rearrangements in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Clinical testing using MLPA is currently not available in the U.S.
"As more breast cancer susceptibility genes of different penetrances are identified, clinicians will be increasingly challenged to offer the most appropriate genetic tests, to assist patients in interpreting the results, and to optimize risk reduction strategies," the authors conclude. "Effective methods for identifying these mutations should be made available to women at high risk."
(JAMA. 2006;295:1379-1388. Available pre-embargo to the media at mailto:www.jamamedia)
Editor's Note: For funding/support information, please see the JAMA article.
Contact: Clare Hagerty
JAMA and Archives Journals
вторник, 17 января 2012 г.
Discovery Of Behavorial Link Between Insomnia And Tension-Type Headaches
Using sleep or napping to cope with chronic pain caused by tension-type headaches could lead to chronic insomnia according to a new study by researchers at Rush University Medical Center. The study, published in the February 15 issue of the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, found that napping to relieve headache pain could serve as a behavioral link between headache and sleep disturbance.
The study compared a group of 32 women who were confirmed to have tension-type headaches, as classified by the International Headache Society System, to a control group of 33 women who experience minimal pain.
Eighty-one percent of the women in the headache group reported going to sleep as a way of managing their headaches; this method was also rated as the most effective self-management strategy for pain.
Principal investigator and lead author, Jason C. Ong, PhD, assistant professor of behavioral sciences at Rush University Medical Center, said the extent to which the headache sufferers rated sleep as being an effective method for coping with pain was somewhat surprising.
"Insomnia is a common complaint among headache sufferers. While napping may relieve pain, it may also decrease the brain's need for sleep at night, leading to reduced ability to initiate and maintain sleep at night," said Ong.
The study found 58 percent of those with tension-type headaches reported sleep problems as a trigger of headaches compared to 18 percent of those who only suffer minimal headache pain. Similar studies have found that sleep disturbances, which include difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, have been identified as a risk factor for developing chronic headaches.
Women in the headache group also reported a significantly higher rating of pain interfering with sleep compared to the control group. No significant differences were found between the groups on use of medication to relieve headaches.
Ong encourages further behavioral treatment studies to examine alternative coping strategies for pain that do not involve sleep. He notes that clinicians should be sensitive to the dilemma of managing pain and sleep disturbances.
In addition, the study concludes that medical experts should assess daytime napping behaviors among individuals who report insomnia and headaches. Such an assessment may be important for developing behavioral sleep interventions.
The study involved 65 women recruited from undergraduate psychology courses at a university located in the southeastern U.S. The average age of members of the headache group was 21.9 years, while the average age of the control group was 18.9 years.
The average time since the first headache of any type was 9.4 years for participants in the headache group, with an average of 8.11 headache days per month. Participants reported an average of 12.2 tension-type headaches over the past year, and 2.1 tension-type headaches in the past month, with a median duration of 2.0 hours. The average tension-type headache intensity rating using a 0-to-10 scale was 5.6. Six participants in the headache group also met criteria for migraine disorder.
Founded in 1978, the Sleep Disorders Center at Rush was the first such center in Illinois and the first in the region to receive accreditation from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (then the American Sleep Disorders Association). The staff of the Sleep Disorders Service and Research Center has established a national reputation for clinical excellence, for innovation in sleep medicine research and for providing superior training to the next generation of sleep professionals.
RushUniversity Medical Center is an academic medical center that encompasses the more than 600 staffed-bed hospital (including Rush Children's Hospital), the Johnston R. Bowman Health Center and Rush University. Rush University, with more than 1,730 students, is home to one of the first medical schools in the Midwest, and one of the nation's top-ranked nursing colleges. Rush University also offers graduate programs in allied health and the basic sciences. Rush is noted for bringing together clinical care and research to address major health problems, including arthritis and orthopedic disorders, cancer, heart disease, mental illness, neurological disorders and diseases associated with aging.
The Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine (JCSM), is the official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM). AASM is a professional membership organization dedicated to the advancement of sleep medicine and sleep-related research. As the national accrediting body for sleep disorders centers and laboratories for sleep related breathing disorders, the AASM promotes the highest standards of patient care. The organization serves its members and advances the field of sleep health care by setting the clinical standards for the field of sleep medicine, advocating for recognition, diagnosis and treatment of sleep disorders, educating professionals dedicated to providing optimal sleep health care and fostering the development and application of scientific knowledge.
Source: Kim Waterman
Rush University Medical Center
The study compared a group of 32 women who were confirmed to have tension-type headaches, as classified by the International Headache Society System, to a control group of 33 women who experience minimal pain.
Eighty-one percent of the women in the headache group reported going to sleep as a way of managing their headaches; this method was also rated as the most effective self-management strategy for pain.
Principal investigator and lead author, Jason C. Ong, PhD, assistant professor of behavioral sciences at Rush University Medical Center, said the extent to which the headache sufferers rated sleep as being an effective method for coping with pain was somewhat surprising.
"Insomnia is a common complaint among headache sufferers. While napping may relieve pain, it may also decrease the brain's need for sleep at night, leading to reduced ability to initiate and maintain sleep at night," said Ong.
The study found 58 percent of those with tension-type headaches reported sleep problems as a trigger of headaches compared to 18 percent of those who only suffer minimal headache pain. Similar studies have found that sleep disturbances, which include difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, have been identified as a risk factor for developing chronic headaches.
Women in the headache group also reported a significantly higher rating of pain interfering with sleep compared to the control group. No significant differences were found between the groups on use of medication to relieve headaches.
Ong encourages further behavioral treatment studies to examine alternative coping strategies for pain that do not involve sleep. He notes that clinicians should be sensitive to the dilemma of managing pain and sleep disturbances.
In addition, the study concludes that medical experts should assess daytime napping behaviors among individuals who report insomnia and headaches. Such an assessment may be important for developing behavioral sleep interventions.
The study involved 65 women recruited from undergraduate psychology courses at a university located in the southeastern U.S. The average age of members of the headache group was 21.9 years, while the average age of the control group was 18.9 years.
The average time since the first headache of any type was 9.4 years for participants in the headache group, with an average of 8.11 headache days per month. Participants reported an average of 12.2 tension-type headaches over the past year, and 2.1 tension-type headaches in the past month, with a median duration of 2.0 hours. The average tension-type headache intensity rating using a 0-to-10 scale was 5.6. Six participants in the headache group also met criteria for migraine disorder.
Founded in 1978, the Sleep Disorders Center at Rush was the first such center in Illinois and the first in the region to receive accreditation from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (then the American Sleep Disorders Association). The staff of the Sleep Disorders Service and Research Center has established a national reputation for clinical excellence, for innovation in sleep medicine research and for providing superior training to the next generation of sleep professionals.
RushUniversity Medical Center is an academic medical center that encompasses the more than 600 staffed-bed hospital (including Rush Children's Hospital), the Johnston R. Bowman Health Center and Rush University. Rush University, with more than 1,730 students, is home to one of the first medical schools in the Midwest, and one of the nation's top-ranked nursing colleges. Rush University also offers graduate programs in allied health and the basic sciences. Rush is noted for bringing together clinical care and research to address major health problems, including arthritis and orthopedic disorders, cancer, heart disease, mental illness, neurological disorders and diseases associated with aging.
The Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine (JCSM), is the official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM). AASM is a professional membership organization dedicated to the advancement of sleep medicine and sleep-related research. As the national accrediting body for sleep disorders centers and laboratories for sleep related breathing disorders, the AASM promotes the highest standards of patient care. The organization serves its members and advances the field of sleep health care by setting the clinical standards for the field of sleep medicine, advocating for recognition, diagnosis and treatment of sleep disorders, educating professionals dedicated to providing optimal sleep health care and fostering the development and application of scientific knowledge.
Source: Kim Waterman
Rush University Medical Center
вторник, 10 января 2012 г.
Women's Health Initiative Investigators' Letter To Editor Responds To Wall Street Journal Article On WHI Findings
A recent Wall Street Journal article about the findings of the five-year, $725 million NIH-sponsored Women's Health Initiative on the effects of hormone replacement therapy included some "misperceptions," Jacques Rossouw -- chief of the WHI branch at the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute -- and Marcia Stefanick -- chair of the WHI executive committee and a professor at Stanford University -- write in a Journal letter to the editor (Rossouw/Stefanick, Wall Street Journal, 7/21).
WHI researchers in July 2002 ended the study on combination HRT three years early because they determined that the treatment might increase the risk for heart disease, invasive breast cancer and other health problems. According to the Journal article, in the five years since the study was released, many in the medical community have said "some aspects" of the initial findings "were either misleading" or "overgeneralized in large part because they excluded many of the study's own investigators and physicians from the first review" (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 7/9).
According to Rossouw and Stefanick, NIH and WHI researchers "are jointly responsible for all scientific articles arising from the study," and both "parties stand by the original findings and conclusions." The most recent analysis of data from the study, conducted earlier this year, "included some data not available" to researchers in 2002, Rossouw and Stefanick write. "The latest analyses add some further reassurance to women wishing to take hormone therapy in the short term for the relief of hot flashes and night sweats," Rossouw and Stefanick write, adding, "They don't provide evidence that even estrogen alone can help prevent heart attacks in the long term." Rossouw and Stefanick conclude that "more effective options" than HRT use are recommended to lower heart disease risk, "including adopting healthy lifestyles and identifying and treating risk factors, such as high blood cholesterol and high blood pressure" (Wall Street Journal, 7/21).
WHI researchers in July 2002 ended the study on combination HRT three years early because they determined that the treatment might increase the risk for heart disease, invasive breast cancer and other health problems. According to the Journal article, in the five years since the study was released, many in the medical community have said "some aspects" of the initial findings "were either misleading" or "overgeneralized in large part because they excluded many of the study's own investigators and physicians from the first review" (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 7/9).
According to Rossouw and Stefanick, NIH and WHI researchers "are jointly responsible for all scientific articles arising from the study," and both "parties stand by the original findings and conclusions." The most recent analysis of data from the study, conducted earlier this year, "included some data not available" to researchers in 2002, Rossouw and Stefanick write. "The latest analyses add some further reassurance to women wishing to take hormone therapy in the short term for the relief of hot flashes and night sweats," Rossouw and Stefanick write, adding, "They don't provide evidence that even estrogen alone can help prevent heart attacks in the long term." Rossouw and Stefanick conclude that "more effective options" than HRT use are recommended to lower heart disease risk, "including adopting healthy lifestyles and identifying and treating risk factors, such as high blood cholesterol and high blood pressure" (Wall Street Journal, 7/21).
Correction
The Journal on Saturday printed a correction that says the article on WHI "incorrectly sa[id] the WHI intended to address only whether the heart protection women get from taking hormones at a younger age continues with long-term use." According to the correction, WHI clinical trials were "designed to answer many questions" (Wall Street Journal, 7/21).
"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
вторник, 3 января 2012 г.
World First Early Stage Diagnostic Test For Ovarian Cancer
There is new hope for women around the world, with the launch of an early detection test for ovarian cancer. The test, developed in Melbourne by HealthLinx scientists in collaboration with ARL Pathology, is called the OvPlex™ Panel and works by identifying whether five biomarkers (proteins) are present in a blood sample.
Two Victorian women have become the first test recipients.
Chairman of HealthLinx Limited (ASX-HTX), Professor Greg Rice, who helped develop the technology, said: "OvPlex™ is a new type of blood test. The difference between current blood tests and OvPlex™ is that OvPlex™ measures five different substances in blood that are associated with ovarian cancer and builds a diagnostic based on that information rather than relying on a single marker for the disease. This is really what I see as a new generation of diagnostics."
CEO of ARL Pathology, Pam Davey, said: "Women all around the world will benefit from this. This test has not been available. By putting the five biomarkers together, we really increase the chances of detecting ovarian cancer early."
1500 Australian women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year; 800 of those women will die.
Around the world, 230,000 new cases are diagnosed each year, with more than 142,000 women dying.
Professor Rice said: "The reason why it is the most lethal of the reproductive tract cancers is that 75 per cent of women with ovarian cancer are not diagnosed until late stage disease. Their chances of surviving five years are probably only 20 per cent. But if the disease is diagnosed at early stage, where it is contained within the ovary, the chance of surviving five years rises to eighty per cent.
"That is why it is so important to try and develop better tests for diagnosing ovarian cancer, particularly early stage disease. That is where we can really make a difference."
HealthLinx scientists stress this is not a general community screening test, rather a diagnostic test.
The test will be available through general practitioners in Melbourne from 29th October, before being rolled out to other states across Australia. It will cost around $200. Results are available within a fortnight.
About HealthLinx Limited (ASX:HTX)
HealthLinx uses biomarkers to develop best practice diagnostics that detect and monitor diseases. First commercial targets are:
- Ovarian cancer diagnostic (OvPlex) targeting US$270m pa market
- Prostate Cancer targeting US$350m pa market
A biomarker is a specific biochemical in the body that measures disease or the effects of treatment. HealthLinx targets important markets with unmet needs and is developing next generation high accuracy diagnostics and will seek to out-license to global partners for worldwide sales.
HealthLinx Limited
Source
Davinia Khong
Monsoon Communications
Level 1 350 Collins Street
Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia
monsoon.au
Two Victorian women have become the first test recipients.
Chairman of HealthLinx Limited (ASX-HTX), Professor Greg Rice, who helped develop the technology, said: "OvPlex™ is a new type of blood test. The difference between current blood tests and OvPlex™ is that OvPlex™ measures five different substances in blood that are associated with ovarian cancer and builds a diagnostic based on that information rather than relying on a single marker for the disease. This is really what I see as a new generation of diagnostics."
CEO of ARL Pathology, Pam Davey, said: "Women all around the world will benefit from this. This test has not been available. By putting the five biomarkers together, we really increase the chances of detecting ovarian cancer early."
1500 Australian women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year; 800 of those women will die.
Around the world, 230,000 new cases are diagnosed each year, with more than 142,000 women dying.
Professor Rice said: "The reason why it is the most lethal of the reproductive tract cancers is that 75 per cent of women with ovarian cancer are not diagnosed until late stage disease. Their chances of surviving five years are probably only 20 per cent. But if the disease is diagnosed at early stage, where it is contained within the ovary, the chance of surviving five years rises to eighty per cent.
"That is why it is so important to try and develop better tests for diagnosing ovarian cancer, particularly early stage disease. That is where we can really make a difference."
HealthLinx scientists stress this is not a general community screening test, rather a diagnostic test.
The test will be available through general practitioners in Melbourne from 29th October, before being rolled out to other states across Australia. It will cost around $200. Results are available within a fortnight.
About HealthLinx Limited (ASX:HTX)
HealthLinx uses biomarkers to develop best practice diagnostics that detect and monitor diseases. First commercial targets are:
- Ovarian cancer diagnostic (OvPlex) targeting US$270m pa market
- Prostate Cancer targeting US$350m pa market
A biomarker is a specific biochemical in the body that measures disease or the effects of treatment. HealthLinx targets important markets with unmet needs and is developing next generation high accuracy diagnostics and will seek to out-license to global partners for worldwide sales.
HealthLinx Limited
Source
Davinia Khong
Monsoon Communications
Level 1 350 Collins Street
Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia
monsoon.au
Подписаться на:
Комментарии (Atom)