SynthesisCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2022
A Quantitative Framework to Study Potential Benefits and Harms of Multi-Cancer Early Detection Testing.
Synthesis in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumor-educated platelets in cancer diagnostics and prognostics: A critical appraisal and roadmap for clinical translation.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- A Socio-ecological Analysis of Factors Influencing the Perceived Value of Multicancer Early Detection Testing in the United States.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Modeled Benefit of Individual Cancer Signal Origin Prediction for Multi-Cancer Early Detection.Cancer research communications · 2025Article
- Tumor localization strategies of multicancer early detection tests: a quantitative assessment.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Estimating the Burden of False Positives and Implementation Costs From Adding Multiple Single Cancer Tests or a Single Multi-Cancer Test to Standard-Of-Care Screening.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Multi-cancer early detection tests: Attributes for clinical implementation.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2025Article
- Increasing power in screening trials by testing control-arm specimens: application to multicancer detection screening.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Increasing power in screening trials by testing control-arm specimens: application to multicancer detection screening.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Projecting the Impact of Multi-Cancer Early Detection on Late-Stage Incidence Using Multi-State Disease Modeling.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Primary care patient interests in joining a planned multi-cancer early detection clinical trial.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Opportunities for Early Cancer Detection: The Rise of ctDNA Methylation-Based Pan-Cancer Screening Technologies.Epigenomes · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMulti-cancer tests offer screening for multiple cancers with one blood draw, but the potential population impact is poorly understood.
methodsWe formulate mathematical expressions for expected numbers of: (i) individuals exposed to unnecessary confirmation tests (EUC), (ii) cancers detected (CD), and (iii) lives saved (LS) given test performance, disease incidence and mortality, and mortality reduction. We add colorectal, liver, lung, ovary, and pancreatic cancer to a test for breast cancer, approximating prevalence at ages 50, 60, or 70 using incidence over the next 5 years and mortality using corresponding probabilities of cancer death over 15 years in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry.
resultsEUC is overwhelmingly determined by specificity. For a given specificity, EUC/CD is most favorable for higher prevalence cancers. Under 99% specificity and sensitivities as published for a 50-cancer test, EUC/CD is 1.1 for breast + lung versus 1.3 for breast + liver at age 50. Under a common mortality reduction associated with screening, EUC/LS> is most favorable when the test includes higher mortality cancers (e.g., 19.9 for breast + lung vs. 30.4 for breast + liver at age 50 assuming a common 10% mortality reduction).
conclusionsPublished multi-cancer test performance suggests a favorable tradeoff of EUC to CD, yet the full burden of unnecessary confirmations will depend on the posttest work-up protocol. Harm-benefit tradeoffs will be improved if tests prioritize more prevalent and/or lethal cancers for which curative treatments exist. IMPACT: The population impact of multi-cancer testing will depend not only on test performance but also on disease characteristics and efficacy of early treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.