ArticleCancer2025
The impact of multicancer early detection tests on cancer stage shift: A 10-year microsimulation model.
Article in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance and safety of a multi-cancer early detection test: the PATHFINDER 2 study.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Late-Stage Presentation and Diagnostic Gaps in Romanian Lung Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Tertiary Center Analysis with Implications for Scalable Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Paired Capillary and Venous Serum Specimen Agreement for Protein Biomarker Measurements and Risk Category Outputs in a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tool.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The impact of multicancer early detection tests on cancer stage shift: A 10-year microsimulation model.Cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEarly detection of cancer improves survival following diagnosis. However, routine screening is limited to a few cancer types. Multicancer early detection (MCED) tests could revolutionize cancer screening by simultaneously detecting multiple cancer types. This study evaluates the potential impact of an MCED test on stage shift in the US general population.
methodsA microsimulation model of 14 solid tumor cancer types that account for nearly 80% of cancer incidence and mortality was developed. The model was calibrated to reproduce annual incidence rates reported in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer diagnosis could arise from standard-of-care procedures or annual MCED testing. MCED sensitivities were derived from a large, multicenter, prospective, case control study. Ten-year disease progression was simulated for 5 million US adults aged 50 to 84 years. The primary outcome was stage shift resulting from MCED testing.
resultsOver 10 years, supplemental MCED testing led to a 10% increase in Stage I diagnoses, 20% increase in Stage II diagnoses, 34% increase in Stage III diagnoses, and 45% decrease in Stage IV diagnoses, relative to the standard of care alone. The largest absolute reductions in Stage IV diagnoses were in lung (400 vs. 765 per 100,000), colorectal (96 vs. 236), and pancreatic (89 vs. 211) cancer. The largest relative reductions were in cervical (83%), liver (74%), and colorectal (59%) cancer.
conclusionMCED testing has the potential to substantially reduce late-stage cancer diagnoses, improve outcomes across multiple cancer types, and address a critical gap in screening.
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.