Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39637415›Full record

ReviewCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center

Blood-Based Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests (MCEDs) as a Potential Approach to Address Current Gaps in Cancer Screening.

Chantelle Carbonell, John M Hutchinson, Robert J Hilsden, Huiming Yang, Darren R Brenner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Chantelle CarbonellDepartment of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0009-0004-6384-3424
John M HutchinsonDepartment of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0937-2882
Robert J HilsdenDepartment of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Huiming YangScreening Programs, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Darren R BrennerDepartment of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Screening and early detection is one of the most effective approaches to reduce the population-level impact of cancer. Novel approaches to screening such as multi-cancer early detection tests (MCEDs) may further reduce cancer incidence and mortality. Many MCEDs detect fragments of circulating DNA containing mutations that originated from tumour cells, thereby informing both the presence of cancer and the cell-type of origin. In this review, we examine the current evidence of MCEDs as a potential tool to improve population-based cancer outcomes. We review the role of MCEDs to address low participation rates, disparities among underserved populations, changing epidemiology of common cancers, and the absence of screening tests for many cancer types. MCEDs have the potential to increase participation in cancer screening programs, as they may be less invasive than other procedures, and can screen for multiple cancer types in one appointment. Additionally, due to the lack of specialized collection equipment needed for these tests, underscreened populations and targeted populations could gain greater access to screening. Finally, because MCEDs can detect cancer types without screening tests that are moderately common and increasing in western populations, efficacious tests for these sites could alleviate the cancer burden and improve patient outcomes. While these tests offer great promise, considerable limitations and evidence gaps must be addressed. Notable limitations include scenarios where early detection does not improve survival outcomes, the costs and impact on health care resources for false positives, and false reassurance with subsequent lack of adherence to existing screening protocols.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHumansMass ScreeningBiomarkers, Tumorcancer managementcancer screeningDNA testingmulti-cancer early detectionreview articlesupplementary cancer testing

Identifiers

PMID39637415
PMCPMC11622387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.