CDX Diagnostics Experiences. Care to share?

[Torsed]

---

Members don't see this ad.

CDx Diagnostics Helps Physicians Detect Cancer Cells Early

CDx Diagnostics provides AI-enabled tissue analysis and 3D imaging for early detection of precancerous esophageal cells. Learn more: CDx Diagnostics

www.cdxdiagnostics.com

I’ve argued against GI docs using this testing like candy. Even argued with Dr Odze at that GI path course (2018?) that Harvard and Brigham does (great course by the way). Dr Odze said it’s a wider area of sampling etc etc. Sort of shut me up for a tad.

To date, I’ve never had Endo CDX results differ from my biopsy results, not once in 4 to 5 years. Maybe I’m an anomaly.

I’ve talked to some of the UM Gi group and they thinks it’s a money maker with questionable over utilization. I get it’s use with Barrett’s surveillance.

So I get a recent Endo CDX report back and there is Dr Odze name at the bottom. Hmmmm.......became a Judas I guess.

Anyone else have experiences with this? Care to enlighten the chorus here? Personally, I’m nearly to the point of not caring anymore about path shenanigans.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

The concept of pathologist as gatekeeper died off years ago. We can't stop specialists from ordering anything. Look at all the different places you are sending specimens for oncologists. It is insane. Basically you wait the labs out. Many fall by the waste side and go out of business at some point.

 

[Doormat]

In my opinion, this EndoCDX test is like the "know error" test that Strand diagnostics in Indianapolis markets to urologists. The know error test does STR DNA fingerprint analysis of a cheek swab and a prostate core biopsy to ensure the prostate biopsy came from the patient. This kind of testing is outrageous profiteering. Of course the GI docs want in. My approach would be to meet with the commercial insurers in your state and make sure that they adhere to their "no payment for non-FDA cleared tests." Make sure the patient has to pay every cent for this unnecessary and wasteful test. There will be pushback and a bunch of 1-star Yelp and google ratings for the money greedy gastroenterologists.

In my opinion, Dr. Odze fundamentally believes that he is a superior human being compared to the rest of us and that he deserves more oxygen in a room than anyone else.

 

[AZpath]

It's a scam.
I keep it out of my hospital.
They do not have hospital privileges.

 

[AZpath]

Odze is a paid consultant for sure.

 

[yaah]

For certain tests, you can somewhat combat it by sending the block to the physician office, and have them send it on their own. That way they deal with the billing issues and the hassle. Doesn't always work, but can be a strategy.

But yes, the "know error" thing is the worst of the worst. How do you know the cheek swab has been labeled appropriately? Need a "know know error" next.

 

[Med Director New England]

For certain tests, you can somewhat combat it by sending the block to the physician office, and have them send it on their own. That way they deal with the billing issues and the hassle. Doesn't always work, but can be a strategy.

But yes, the "know error" thing is the worst of the worst. How do you know the cheek swab has been labeled appropriately? Need a "know know error" next.

The CDx test is done from its own brush scraping , separate from any biopsies taken. The company markets directly to GIs. They typically send the brush samples w/o involving the path group interpreting the biopsies.

know error what a sham. The only thing I like about know error is the patient labels and signs there own req for the cheek swab. This is a actually a good idea - patients should sign there own paper req’s. This alone would reduce errors as much as a second molecular ID test.

 

[AZpath]

They send a disposable endoscopic brush that has to cost them 50-100 dollars.
So this test involves a kickback.

 

[Doormat]

Correct., That is a kickback. If I recall correctly, years ago Bostwick labs used to supply a special cytobrush as part of their $1000 Pap smear kit. Providing this brush at no cost to the provider was ruled a kickback by the OIG.