ArticleCancer2026
Early cancer detection in a large American Cancer Society cohort study: Retrospective analysis of methylated DNA biomarkers.
Article in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeled Sojourn Time and Sensitivity for Detecting Preclinical Cancers Retrospectively by a Multicancer Early Detection Test.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer biobank studies can inform the natural history of cancer and possibilities for earlier detection. The authors investigated the detectability of a cell-free DNA methylation-based cancer signal in biobanked plasma samples from the large American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study 3.
methodsIn total, 303,692 participants provided a blood sample at enrollment (2006-2013) and were followed for cancer incidence and mortality through state cancer registries. Samples were obtained from participants with and without a diagnosis of cancer (up to 3 years after enrollment), and their prediagnostic plasma samples were tested for cancer signals.
resultsFor 1371 participants without cancer, zero cancer signals were detected. For 1383 participants who were diagnosed with cancer within a 3-year period, cancer signal detection depended on the time between blood draw and cancer diagnosis. Among all cancers, detectability was 15.2%, 6.0%, and 2.3% for samples collected 1, 2, and 3 year(s) before diagnosis, respectively. Among cancers that went on to be fatal, detectability was 55.1%, 21.6%, and 5.1%, respectively; among nonfatal cancers, detectability was 10.2%, 4.1%, and 1.8%, respectively. Cancer signal detection occurred, on average, 323 days before clinical diagnosis, with 40% of signal detections occurring greater than 1 year prior, including some cases up to 3 years prior.
conclusionsCancer signal detection rates change rapidly as lead time approaches clinical diagnosis. The average lead time of approximately 1 year supports annual screening intervals.
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.