I also attended the presentation, the Q&A session was more interesting,
The assay precision was lower than instrument pipetting precision, really?
Zika data was compared with method already out dated,
Method comparison with flow cytometry, data looks too good to be believable,
CBC method comparison now shown,
Potassium method comparison was done using venous blood and NOT capillary,
Ex-employee reported to Wall-street journal that data were cherrypicked,
Those are my main points,
Bottom line too early for this little instrument to do CBC, chemistry, hematology, flow cytometry and molecular biology,
Thanks
Mohmed Ashmaig PhD
Senior Scientist
Research and Development
> On Aug 1, 2016, at 7:17 PM, Gavin Murdock <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Elizabeth Holmes gave her presentation at the AACC. I caught some of it via a periscope stream. A powerpoint included details of a very impressive lab in the box, referred to as 'miniLab' which when a cartridge containing the nanotainer of blood is loaded performs a variety of analysis as directed included haematology, biochemistry, endocrine assays and molecular biology.
>
> The miniLab looked similar in size to a small laser printer.
>
> An exploded view of the miniLab shows its components include liquid-handling robotics, a spectrophotometer (300-800nm), a miniaturised 4-bucket centrifuge capable of 3,000g and some other stuff I didn't catch due to the poor quality of the stream.
>
> She presented some method comparison data using a Siemens ADVIA 1800 as the reference.
>
> K+ data was displayed. I assume this is a spectrophotometric method since I saw no reference to an ISE in miniLab. Interlab CVs - 3.4% at 2.9mmol/L and 2.7% at 6.0 mmol/L. There was some lipid data also.
>
> Overall the potassium and lipid data showed good agreement with the ADVIA. She showed data that claimed that the miniLab had less bias (using NIST standards) than the ADVIA.
>
> Capillary lipids on the miniLab versus venous lipids on the ADVIA showed good agreement. Basically, all the data she presented claimed good agreement.
>
> I'm fairly certain that this data or a variant of it has been presented elsewhere before.
>
> Other snippets I could make out included the use of ALP as the signal generator in some of their antibody based tests and that they have a Zika assay.
>
> No information on the cost of a nanotainer compared to lithium heparin tube. No mention of throughput data.
>
> The problem with the whole presentation is we know what good data looks like but Theranos need to demonstrate that this data has been produced by the miniLab! Unless they allow the data to be collected by an independent investigator people will continue to be skeptical.
>
> ------ACB discussion List Information--------
> This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical biochemistry.
> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are responsible for all message content.
> ACB Web Site
> http://www.acb.org.uk
> Green Laboratories Work
> http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
> List Archives
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
Green Laboratories Work
http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|