Dr. Todd Morgan

And of course, folks who listen to you, in addition to getting their information, maybe elsewhere too, I don't know, but mostly here know all about Decipher and that it's a gene expression classifier that can be used also, tons of data to support that it's prognostic. And possibly even can help with decisions around RT versus RT and ADT in the newly diagnosed setting.

And of course, folks who listen to you, in addition to getting their information, maybe elsewhere too, I don't know, but mostly here know all about Decipher and that it's a gene expression classifier that can be used also, tons of data to support that it's prognostic. And possibly even can help with decisions around RT versus RT and ADT in the newly diagnosed setting.

And of course, folks who listen to you, in addition to getting their information, maybe elsewhere too, I don't know, but mostly here know all about Decipher and that it's a gene expression classifier that can be used also, tons of data to support that it's prognostic. And possibly even can help with decisions around RT versus RT and ADT in the newly diagnosed setting.

So these are both classifiers or models that can be used in the post-operative setting. It's still relatively early days for those, but lots of reason to think that they could be used to help, especially around these decisions around intensification, use of ADT or not. And then we did have a little bit of data that we presented using our Tera

So these are both classifiers or models that can be used in the post-operative setting. It's still relatively early days for those, but lots of reason to think that they could be used to help, especially around these decisions around intensification, use of ADT or not. And then we did have a little bit of data that we presented using our Tera

So these are both classifiers or models that can be used in the post-operative setting. It's still relatively early days for those, but lots of reason to think that they could be used to help, especially around these decisions around intensification, use of ADT or not. And then we did have a little bit of data that we presented using our Tera

Suggesting that maybe it could, in addition to being prognostic in this setting, maybe it can help inform who benefits from hormone therapy and who doesn't.

Suggesting that maybe it could, in addition to being prognostic in this setting, maybe it can help inform who benefits from hormone therapy and who doesn't.

Suggesting that maybe it could, in addition to being prognostic in this setting, maybe it can help inform who benefits from hormone therapy and who doesn't.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. We can hope. We can hope.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. We can hope. We can hope.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. We can hope. We can hope.

The principle is that earlier is better. And, you know, it's hard. It's like, it's really hard to get at specific cut points. 0.5, PSA 0.5 is probably the best big picture cut point, but still earlier is probably better. And there's some data from Derek Tilkey and her team at the Martini Clinic

The principle is that earlier is better. And, you know, it's hard. It's like, it's really hard to get at specific cut points. 0.5, PSA 0.5 is probably the best big picture cut point, but still earlier is probably better. And there's some data from Derek Tilkey and her team at the Martini Clinic

The principle is that earlier is better. And, you know, it's hard. It's like, it's really hard to get at specific cut points. 0.5, PSA 0.5 is probably the best big picture cut point, but still earlier is probably better. And there's some data from Derek Tilkey and her team at the Martini Clinic

published in JCO that suggested, now it's retrospective data, but suggested, ah, you know, 0.5 is good, but 0.25 maybe is even better. And it's really hard to tease this out because when you're looking at these questions retrospectively, you're saying, okay, patients who get radiation

published in JCO that suggested, now it's retrospective data, but suggested, ah, you know, 0.5 is good, but 0.25 maybe is even better. And it's really hard to tease this out because when you're looking at these questions retrospectively, you're saying, okay, patients who get radiation

published in JCO that suggested, now it's retrospective data, but suggested, ah, you know, 0.5 is good, but 0.25 maybe is even better. And it's really hard to tease this out because when you're looking at these questions retrospectively, you're saying, okay, patients who get radiation

earlier seem to do better, but also patients with lower PSAs may have a slower doubling time and they may actually just be lower risk patients. And that makes it a little more challenging as always to tease out cause and effect. But guidelines, we feel very, very confident in that 0.5 threshold. We want to give salvage treatment. We want to initiate it before PSA 0.5.

earlier seem to do better, but also patients with lower PSAs may have a slower doubling time and they may actually just be lower risk patients. And that makes it a little more challenging as always to tease out cause and effect. But guidelines, we feel very, very confident in that 0.5 threshold. We want to give salvage treatment. We want to initiate it before PSA 0.5.