Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37479515›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

P

Laura A V Marlow, Ninian Schmeising-Barnes, Jane Warwick, Jo Waller

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05611632 (A Randomized, Controlled Trial to Assess the Clinical Utility of a Multi-cancer Early Detection), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05611632 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

A Randomized, Controlled Trial to Assess the Clinical Utility of a Multi-cancer Early Detection (MCED) Test for Population Screening in the United Kingdom (UK) When Added to Standard of Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorGRAIL, Inc.Ran2021 to 2031Enrolled142,318ConditionsCancerArmsMulti-cancer early detection test (Galleri test)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Laura A V MarlowKing's Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK l.marlow@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1709-2397
Ninian Schmeising-BarnesKing's Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Jane WarwickKing's Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Jo WallerKing's Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4025-9132

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMulti-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests look for cancer signals in cell-free deoxyribonucleic acid. These tests have the potential to detect cancers at an earlier (asymptomatic) stage, improving cancer outcomes. Any screening method needs careful consideration of the psychological harms prior to implementation. The aim of this research is to explore the psychological impact of having a cancer signal detected following an MCED blood test. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The project is embedded in the NHS-Galleri trial (ISRCTN91431511; NCT05611632), a large clinical trial in eight Cancer Alliances in England. In the trial, over 140 000 members of the general population aged 50-77 have been randomised 1:1 to either the intervention (blood tested with MCED test) or control (blood stored) arm. The proposed project focuses on participants in the intervention arm, who have a cancer signal detected. All participants who have a cancer signal detected (expected to be around 700 assuming a 1% test positive rate) will be sent a questionnaire at three timepoints: soon after receiving their result, 6 months and approximately 12 months later. The primary outcome is anxiety, assessed using the short-form 6-item Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. We will also assess the psychological consequences of screening (using the Psychological Consequences of Screening Questionnaire), reassurance/concern about the test result, understanding of results and help/health-seeking behaviour. A subsample of 40 participants (20 with a cancer diagnosis and 20 for whom no cancer was found) will be invited to take part in a one-to-one semistructured interview. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this work has been granted by the Wales Research Ethics Committee as part of the NHS-Galleri trial (Ref 21/WA/0141). Consent to be sent questionnaires is collected as part of the main trial. A separate consent form will be required for interview. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsNeoplasmsAgedAnxietyAnxiety DisordersHumansMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicState MedicineCell-Free Nucleic AcidsClinical TrialMass ScreeningONCOLOGYPREVENTIVE MEDICINEPUBLIC HEALTHQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID37479515
PMCPMC10364178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.