Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38419575›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2024

Prediagnostic evaluation of multicancer detection tests: design and analysis considerations.

Stuart G Baker, Ruth Etzioni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Stuart G BakerDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6759-2838
Ruth EtzioniDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9164-6370

Funding

Modeling and analytics for cancer diagnostics: traversing the data-evidence divideR35CA274442 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER CENTER · PI RUTH D ETZIONI · 2022 to 2026
$4.9M
NCI NIH HHS R35 CA274442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is growing interest in multicancer detection tests, which identify molecular signals in the blood that indicate a potential preclinical cancer. A key stage in evaluating these tests is a prediagnostic performance study, in which investigators store specimens from asymptomatic individuals and later test stored specimens from patients with cancer and a random sample of controls to determine predictive performance. Performance metrics include rates of cancer-specific true-positive and false-positive findings and a cancer-specific positive predictive value, with the latter compared with a decision-analytic threshold. The sample size trade-off method, which trades imprecise targeting of the true-positive rate for precise targeting of a zero-false-positive rate can substantially reduce sample size while increasing the lower bound of the positive predictive value. For a 1-year follow-up, with ovarian cancer as the rarest cancer considered, the sample size trade-off method yields a sample size of 163 000 compared with a sample size of 720 000, based on standard calculations. These design and analysis recommendations should be considered in planning a specimen repository and in the prediagnostic evaluation of multicancer detection tests.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansOvarian NeoplasmsPredictive Value of TestsResearch DesignSample SizeBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID38419575
PMCPMC11160505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.