Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39807974›Full record

ReviewRadiology2025

Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests: State of the Art and Implications for Radiologists.

Stella K Kang, Roman Gulati, Nathalie Moise, Chin Hur, Elena B Elkin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiology, 2025. 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. Review
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.

Stella K KangFrom the Departments of Radiology and Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (S.K.K.); Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Wash (R.G.); Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY (N.M., C.H.); Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY (C.H., E.B.E.); and Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (E.B.E.).ORCID 0000-0003-2402-3787
Roman GulatiFrom the Departments of Radiology and Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (S.K.K.); Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Wash (R.G.); Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY (N.M., C.H.); Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY (C.H., E.B.E.); and Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (E.B.E.).ORCID 0000-0002-7592-6567
Nathalie MoiseFrom the Departments of Radiology and Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (S.K.K.); Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Wash (R.G.); Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY (N.M., C.H.); Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY (C.H., E.B.E.); and Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (E.B.E.).
Chin HurFrom the Departments of Radiology and Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (S.K.K.); Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Wash (R.G.); Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY (N.M., C.H.); Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY (C.H., E.B.E.); and Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (E.B.E.).
Elena B ElkinFrom the Departments of Radiology and Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (S.K.K.); Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Wash (R.G.); Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY (N.M., C.H.); Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY (C.H., E.B.E.); and Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (E.B.E.).

Funding

Tumor Biology and Microenvironment ProgramP30CA013696 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Anil K Rustgi · 1985 to 2026
$115.3M
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
Optimizing Oral Cancer Screening and Precision Management of Potentially Malignant Oral LesionsR01DE030169 · NIDCR · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI KANG, STELLA · 2021 to 2025
$2.7M
Statistical modeling to support population and translational cancer researchR50CA221836 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Roman Gulati · 2017 to 2026
$2.0M
Tailored Screening for Urinary System Cancers in Patients with Chronic Kidney DiseaseR01CA262375 · NCI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Stella Kang · 2022 to 2026
$1.7M
Multidisciplinary Training in Gastrointestinal CancersT32CA285274 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Julian Abrams, Anil K Rustgi · 2024 to 2026
$897k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA013696NCI NIH HHS R01 CA262375NCI NIH HHS R35 CA274442NCI NIH HHS R50 CA221836NCI NIH HHS T32 CA285274NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE030169
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are already being marketed as noninvasive, convenient opportunities to test for multiple cancer types with a single blood sample. The technology varies-involving detection of circulating tumor DNA, fragments of DNA, RNA, or proteins unique to each targeted cancer. The priorities and tradeoffs of reaching diagnostic resolution in the setting of possible false positives and negatives remain under active study. Given the well-established role of imaging in lesion detection and characterization for most cancers, radiologists have an essential role to play in selecting diagnostic pathways, determining the validity of test results, resolving false-positive MCED test results, and evaluating tradeoffs for clinical policy. Appropriate access to and use of imaging tests will also factor into clinical guidelines. Thus, all clinicians potentially involved with MCED tests for cancer screening will need to weigh the benefits and harms of MCED testing, including consideration of how the tests will be used alongside or in place of other screening options, how diagnostic confirmation tests should be selected, and what the implications are for policy and reimbursement decisions. Further, patients will need regular support to make informed decisions about screening using MCED tests in the context of their personal cancer risks, health-related values, and access to care.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHumansRadiologistsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID39807974
PMCPMC11783158

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.