List date(s) this work was published or aired.
20-Jun-12
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
One of the snazzy new medical ideas showcased at the 2012 TEDMED conference was an “inflammation test,” purporting to be able to predict a person’s risk of having a cardiac event using a panel of different biomarkers. The company making the test, Cleveland Heartlab, is a spin-off from the world renowned Cleveland Clinic, which receives royalty payments from sales of the test and was also one of the sponsors of the TEDMED meeting. Many experts in the field of biomarkers are excited at the idea that a combination panel could be used to predict future events: the problem, say others, is that the “CVD Inflammatory Profile” test has not been rigorously proven to actually lead to interventions that cut the risk of future adverse events. And while the company is turning a profit from sales of its test, naysayers point out that most people can already gauge their risk of future heart disease based on simple things like bodyweight and blood pressure, yet still aren’t taking steps to improve their health.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Personal interviews, literature reviews, publicly available financial information
Explain types of human sources used.
Interviews with company leadership, physician experts
Results:
No ‘results’ per se, but a reminder to physicians that the hottest, flashiest tests need to prove their mettle before they supplant proven interventions.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
no
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Speak to as many people as possible.