ReviewJournal of the National Cancer Institute2024
Revisiting the standard blueprint for biomarker development to address emerging cancer early detection technologies.
Review in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Late-Stage Outcomes as Surrogates for Mortality in Cancer Screening Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Strong association between reduction of late-stage cancers and reduction of cancer-specific mortality in meta-regression of randomized screening trials across multiple cancer types.Journal of medical screening · 2024Pooled it
- Development and validation of risk stratification models for hepatocellular cancer: A framework from the translational liver cancer consortium.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Review
- Urinary 27-nor-5β-cholestane-3α,7α,12α,24medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Bridging the Precancerous Gap in Colorectal Cancer Through AI-Enhanced Liquid Biopsy, Endoscopy, and Digital Pathology.Cancers · 2026Review
- Bias in Meta-Analytic Modeling of Surrogate Endpoints in Cancer Screening Trials.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Bayes at the Bedside: Biomarkers in Situations of Clinical Uncertainty.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Multi-cancer early detection: from promise to practice and the next frontier.Cancer biology & medicine · 2025Article
- Liquid biopsy-based multi-cancer early detection: an exploration road from evidence to implementation.Science bulletin · 2025Review
- Modeled Benefit of Individual Cancer Signal Origin Prediction for Multi-Cancer Early Detection.Cancer research communications · 2025Article
- Artificial neural network detection of pancreatic cancer from proton (1H) magnetic resonance spectroscopy patterns of plasma metabolites.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests: State of the Art and Implications for Radiologists.Radiology · 2025Review
- Early detection of pancreatic cancer: Study design and analytical considerations in biomarker discovery and early phase validation studies.Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.] · 2024Review
- Protein Biomarkers in Lung Cancer Screening: Technical Considerations and Feasibility Assessment.Archivos de bronconeumologia · 2024Review
- Designing Rigorous and Efficient Clinical Utility Studies for Early Detection Biomarkers.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Alternative endpoints to mortality in cancer screening trials.Molecular oncology · 2024Review
- Biomarkers in Cancer Screening: Promises and Challenges in Cancer Early Detection.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Novel liquid biopsy technologies are creating a watershed moment in cancer early detection. Evidence supporting population screening is nascent, but a rush to market the new tests is prompting cancer early detection researchers to revisit the standard blueprint that the Early Detection Research Network established to evaluate novel screening biomarkers. In this commentary, we review the Early Detection Research Network's Phases of Biomarker Development (PBD) for rigorous evaluation of novel early detection biomarkers and discuss both hazards and opportunities involved in expedited evaluation. According to the PBD, for a biomarker-based test to be considered for population screening, 1) test sensitivity in a prospective screening setting must be adequate, 2) the shift to early curable stages must be meaningful, and 3) any stage shift must translate into clinically significant mortality benefit. In the past, determining mortality benefit has required lengthy randomized screening trials, but interest is growing in expedited trial designs with shorter-term endpoints. Whether and how best to use such endpoints in a manner that retains the rigor of the PBD remains to be determined. We discuss how computational disease modeling can be harnessed to learn about screening impact and meet the needs of the moment.
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.