Affymetrix and Advanced Cell Diagnostics...Same company?

I am new to FISH and I was wondering...Does Affymetrix and Advanced Cell Diagnostics sell the same products with different markings? Are they really the same company? Do they both buy the same oligos from the same oligo supplier and then label differently?

When I reorder the same product from Advanced Cell Diagnostics I get different results. Same is true with the "similar" product from Affymetrix. When I compare the results between Affy and ACD, the results are within a factor of 2 to 3 fold between replicates. The "blobs" are a hard thing to get used to counting and can vary widely within the same cell or tissue.

Any suggestions?

Any truth to the rumor that

Any truth to the rumor that ACD is up for sale?

Digital Pathology is a flash

Digital Pathology is a flash in the pants term and "micro economy" that will run its course and die akin to Y2K, savings and loan, and the past real estate boom and bust.

Sure, companies like ACD and Aperio will make some bucks and run, but it is we, the end user clinicians that will be left behind.

I have been in molecular

I have been in molecular diagnostics for over 25 years and I have never seen more hype and poorer delivery than with ACD. This bDNA technology failed with Bayer at the helm. ACD is the laughing stock within molecular diagnostic and digital pathology companies.

Does anyone know who is

Does anyone know who is currently making the pile of oligos that comprise the ACD rnascope assay? Last I heard it was Bioneer from Korea.

Interesting thread about ACD.

Interesting thread about ACD.

Their CEO is an arrogant one, all the time trying to distance himself from AFFY, when they sell the same products. What now is AFFY (Genospectra), already tested the market with bDNA products and failed. Changing the name to ACD and selling the same products will, in the end, aggravate and piss off the market, shaming those who sell and use ACD rnascope.

We too tried rnascope, it was

We too tried rnascope, it was too expensive for our liking and the results were suspect. We could not quantitate and for those reasons we dumped the product.

ACD = Advancing Clinical

ACD = Advancing Clinical Deception.

We dropped these guys after the second experiment. You can't quantitate blobs no matter what company you hire. PE? innovative multiplexing? Who are you trying to convince? There is a sucker born every minute crowd? We ran the same samples on the Ventana and PE systems and got wildly different answers. No matter how or what you count, the 2 answers were so far apart that our pathologist called one positive and the other negative. And we too had problems with different lots of rnascope probes. ACD has no idea about the clinical validation requirements or cGMP production.

Say what you will about the volume of press releases, this company is all talk.

Roche/Ventana doesn't need to

Roche/Ventana doesn't need to acquire, they have their own technology that is better. What they needed is to sell more instruments and ACD afforded them a way, since they do not have the time or resources to launch their own reagent solution. For now it will suffice tolet ACD build the market then Ventana will swoop in and take over at some point (at least that's how it was sold internally)

All you have to do is watch

All you have to do is watch the PR releases coming out of ACD- none of this is true. The technology is so pervasive and used for so many applications ACD needs to partner with other companies so that their thousands of customers can use the technology the way THEY want. PE is so the multiplex signals can be seen simultaneously with PE's software, Ventana (Roche) so the technology can be used to run 60 slides at a time, Definiens to quantitate, etc. Obviously the person commenting is ignorant and doesn't even take the time to look at the details before making comments. What ever happened to you to make you so bitter against a successful scientific company? As a scientist you would think should be supporting new innovation.

My ACD rep told me that ACD

My ACD rep told me that ACD wanted Roche to buy them. Roche has all but abandoned rnascope. Then ACD went to PE and wanted PE to buy them. That deal has not played itself out yet. They are running out of the 12M VC funds, have never turned a profit and are desperate to be bought, trying anything to find more customers in a hurry.

rnascope is not a long term solution and ACD is not a long term company.

Every time we order a new

Every time we order a new rnascope assay for the same target, we see different results when we compare with our previous order. To the poster below, do you run a standard alongside your unknown? We do, and our results vary by a factor or 2 to 5 fold. Can't trust ANY quantitation, but yes/no is o.k. as long as the expression level of the unknown is high.

Interesting, I have never had

Interesting, I have never had that issues with them or the results. They were great and very helpful. I use RNAscope HD (V2) on the Ventana Discovery for automation.

This company has no identity,

This company has no identity, so be careful. They rip and run as fast as they can, throwing you and your science against the wall to find a product that they can sell.

They don't care about the science or your scientific reputation. In fact, they even screwed over Frank and Affy. We had these guys in and they tried to sell us on products that had failed in recent publications. When we pointed this out, we never saw them again.

Benchmark Ultra IHC/ISH

Benchmark Ultra IHC/ISH Staining Instrument

Manufacturer: Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson
Supply and design: Flextronics, SMC Corp. of America, Baymar Solutions, and Intuition Design
Price: $160,000

So for your application, you

So for your application, you have an ACD version 2 assay. What machine do you run this on? Validated? What is the price of that machine? Do you quantitate, with what software? How many licenses do you needed to commercialize your assay? What is the cost/test? I am guessing that you are interrogating either tissues, smears or HPV infected cells?

Have you ever tried comparable Affy products? Do you know where either company gets their oligos?

Thanks.

My understanding is it

My understanding is it depends on the sensitivity you are looking for. If you have high expressing gene use V1 if you have low expressing gene or don't know the expression pattern start with V2 or their HD version (High Definition). I think Affy has just one version that is comparable to the V1 at ACD. I haven't seen a High Definition version on their website. In terms of product development, I have seen companies have different types of products based on the application so I don't think that either Affy or ACD did this to screw the scientists... it is just the nature of product development and science. It is up to you to decide based on literature which product fits your needs... maybe ask them for references based on your area of research- scientists usually will give good advice. I use ACD HD for my work.

To further the thoughts

To further the thoughts below, does ACD or Affy have a version 2 for all their products? Are we all being fooled into buying Version 1 products and reporting data that is compromised? Will they come back around and make a version 3 and claim it is yet again better?

No thanks!

Thanks. I guess all 20M of

Thanks. I guess all 20M of investment was spent on HPV version 2 and the infrastructure to support an FDA filing? They can't have more than 2 to 3 Million in sales/year with a burn rate of 5M or so per year.

The products are different.

The products are different. ACD version 2 or HD has significant increase in sensitivity and gives better morphology. ACD version1 and Affy maybe more similar but with slightly different workflows. It took ACD 4 more years of RnD to develop V2 and is used in many clinical trials with 10's of publications in many areas of science in just a couple years. Hope this helps...

ACD is already distributing

ACD is already distributing the HPV kit in China. This is spite of published results in the U.S. that showed the test was poorly discriminative, led to multiple false positives and the authors disputed ACD's reported specificity.

Ventana doesn't care, because

Ventana doesn't care, because they aren't able to see the big picture. ACD is selling the reagents to the customers and if it results in a box sale good enough (its not like Ventana has any sales efforts around their Discovery units anyway...another strategic blunder but I digress). where it might get interesting though is ACD's HPV IVD (can you believe I just strung those letters out like that?)submission on the Benchmark. If this gets traction then how will Roche reply, given the unparralleled investment they've made in HPV dx?
I'm sure the Fighter Pilot will use this as a case study, for the classes he now teaches at JosephSmith University

Interesting! This might also

Interesting! This might also explain why ACD made competing deal with PE and their platforms. Ventana must have been miffed. It is a frustrating and limited business model when you sell a consumable without control of your own platform.

Thank you again.

They are miffed because they

They are miffed because they let the non-array rights slip away. As to the side by side comparison, wellcome to in-situ RNA detection and the myriad of variables. That is one of the reasons ACD has automated on the Benchmark, in order to take out one of the variables (human). Unfortunately, Ventana has no idea how to capitalize on this (both individuals that pushed the deal are long gone). Instead TAR stumbles from project to project convincing the buffoons on the VLT the "we can do build something better," all the while the opportunity passes them by.

Thanks for the insider 411.

Thanks for the insider 411. Question still remains that if you order the comparable products from both companies (bDNA), or reorder from the same company and run tests side by side, they give different results? Go Figure?

Maybe this is why Affy is miffed? Really makes the tech look less than. Who or what to believe?

The have a common history

The have a common history with the ACD founder selling Panomics to Affy, but retaining certain rights (non-array) to the technology to found ACD. Affy is a bit miffed so there is/was a lawsuit.

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.