Latest from Watsonhelper on Yahoo: AMYVID Compari

Quote:

---

AMYVID Comparison - FACTS

FACTS FROM LILY below; This is approved by the way, CMS won't approve it, but you get the point. If you read this data and looked at a range of 69-95% less trained readers, then a median sensitivity of 82% with media based training in study three, with all images inclusive of Fleiss' kappa at .83%, what on earth do people think a 95% means. This is ALZ, deadly, no remorse, no going back. There are so many variables in any study, 80% without trained readers and further analysis is incredible. CD values in the 90+ range is also beyond incredible. I don't see anyone crapping on Amyvid?

Across all readers and all autopsied patients, Amyvid PET demonstrated (range 69 percent to 95 percent) and specificity of (range 90 percent to 100 percent) for readers trained in person (study two), and median sensitivity of 82 percent (range 69 percent to 92 percent) and specificity (range 90 percent to 95 percent) for readers trained using an electronic media-based training (study three). Additionally, inter-reader reproducibility analysis for all images in study three showed an OVERALL Fleiss' kappa statistic of 0.83% (95 percent CI: 0.78 to 0.88).

---