Multicancer Detection Tests for Population-Wide Screening of Asymptomatic Individuals: A Systematic Review.

IF 5.5 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Suzanne Hughes, Priscilla Chan, Chelsea Carle Harrison, Susan Yuill, Katherine Barron, Qingwei Luo, Sibel Saya, Javiera Martinez-Gutierrez, Peter Sasieni, Natalie Taylor, Karen Canfell, Jon Emery, Nehmat Houssami, Julia Steinberg
{"title":"Multicancer Detection Tests for Population-Wide Screening of Asymptomatic Individuals: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Suzanne Hughes, Priscilla Chan, Chelsea Carle Harrison, Susan Yuill, Katherine Barron, Qingwei Luo, Sibel Saya, Javiera Martinez-Gutierrez, Peter Sasieni, Natalie Taylor, Karen Canfell, Jon Emery, Nehmat Houssami, Julia Steinberg","doi":"10.1200/OP-26-00570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Multicancer detection (MCD) tests aim to detect different cancer types using a single test. However, evidence on their potential for screening asymptomatic populations remains limited. We consolidated evidence from prospective cohort studies evaluating blood-based MCD tests in primarily asymptomatic adults to contextualize upcoming randomized controlled trial results.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We updated and extended a prior review (to September 2023), conducting comprehensive Medline/Embase searches to February 1, 2026. Key outcomes included cancers detected and not detected by MCD tests, false-positive MCD tests, and diagnostic investigation pathways. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2,723 screened records (244 previously shortlisted to 2023, 2,479 records for 2023-2026), we included 18 articles (12 studies, nine MCD tests); of these, 11 articles had not appeared in prior reviews. Cancer detection rates varied widely between studies, for example, new MCD-test-detected invasive cancers diagnosed ≤12 months post-test ranging from 18.8 (95% CI, 11.0 to 30.1) to 43.8 (95% CI, 29.4 to 62.8) per 10,000 tested, with MCD-test-detected invasive stage I to II cancers ranging from 9.0 (95% CI, 4.2 to 17.2) to 21.0 (95% CI, 11.6 to 35.5) per 10,000 tested. False-positives exceeded MCD-test-detected cancers (eg, approximately 1.6-fold in PATHFINDER, 1.5-fold K-DETEK, 4.2-fold DETECT-A, 8.1-fold SeekInCare studies). Diagnostic investigation pathways were prespecified/suggested in four of eight interventional studies. Where reported, the median time to diagnostic resolution varied from <0.1 months to 4 months for MCD-test-detected cancers, with substantially higher 75th percentiles (3.1-7 months), and similar patterns were observed for false-positive MCD tests. No study was judged to have overall low RoB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial heterogeneity in cancer yield metrics likely reflects differences in MCD technologies, diagnostic pathways, follow-up duration, and background standard-of-care screening. Long-term follow-up, randomized trials, fully-paired test comparisons, and implementation research are essential to determine the potential of MCD tests for population screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2600570"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-26-00570","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Multicancer detection (MCD) tests aim to detect different cancer types using a single test. However, evidence on their potential for screening asymptomatic populations remains limited. We consolidated evidence from prospective cohort studies evaluating blood-based MCD tests in primarily asymptomatic adults to contextualize upcoming randomized controlled trial results.

Materials and methods: We updated and extended a prior review (to September 2023), conducting comprehensive Medline/Embase searches to February 1, 2026. Key outcomes included cancers detected and not detected by MCD tests, false-positive MCD tests, and diagnostic investigation pathways. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.

Results: From 2,723 screened records (244 previously shortlisted to 2023, 2,479 records for 2023-2026), we included 18 articles (12 studies, nine MCD tests); of these, 11 articles had not appeared in prior reviews. Cancer detection rates varied widely between studies, for example, new MCD-test-detected invasive cancers diagnosed ≤12 months post-test ranging from 18.8 (95% CI, 11.0 to 30.1) to 43.8 (95% CI, 29.4 to 62.8) per 10,000 tested, with MCD-test-detected invasive stage I to II cancers ranging from 9.0 (95% CI, 4.2 to 17.2) to 21.0 (95% CI, 11.6 to 35.5) per 10,000 tested. False-positives exceeded MCD-test-detected cancers (eg, approximately 1.6-fold in PATHFINDER, 1.5-fold K-DETEK, 4.2-fold DETECT-A, 8.1-fold SeekInCare studies). Diagnostic investigation pathways were prespecified/suggested in four of eight interventional studies. Where reported, the median time to diagnostic resolution varied from <0.1 months to 4 months for MCD-test-detected cancers, with substantially higher 75th percentiles (3.1-7 months), and similar patterns were observed for false-positive MCD tests. No study was judged to have overall low RoB.

Conclusion: Substantial heterogeneity in cancer yield metrics likely reflects differences in MCD technologies, diagnostic pathways, follow-up duration, and background standard-of-care screening. Long-term follow-up, randomized trials, fully-paired test comparisons, and implementation research are essential to determine the potential of MCD tests for population screening.

多癌检测试验用于无症状个体的全人群筛查:系统综述
目的:多癌检测(MCD)的目的是通过一次检测来检测不同类型的癌症。然而,关于它们筛查无症状人群的潜力的证据仍然有限。我们整合了来自前瞻性队列研究的证据,这些研究评估了主要无症状成人的血液MCD检测,以背景化即将进行的随机对照试验结果。材料和方法:我们更新并延长了先前的综述(至2023年9月),进行了全面的Medline/Embase检索至2026年2月1日。主要结果包括MCD检测检测到和未检测到的癌症、MCD检测假阳性和诊断调查途径。使用改进的诊断准确性研究质量评估-2工具评估偏倚风险(RoB)。结果:从2,723条筛选记录中(244条先前入围至2023年,2,479条为2023-2026年),我们纳入了18篇文章(12项研究,9项MCD试验);其中,11篇文章没有出现在之前的综述中。不同研究之间的癌症检出率差异很大,例如,检测后≤12个月,mcd检测检测到的新浸润性癌症的诊断率从每10,000例检测18.8例(95% CI, 11.0至30.1)到43.8例(95% CI, 29.4至62.8)不等,mcd检测检测到的浸润性I至II期癌症的诊断率从每10,000例检测9.0例(95% CI, 4.2至17.2)到21.0例(95% CI, 11.6至35.5)不等。假阳性超过mcd检测检测到的癌症(例如,在PATHFINDER研究中约1.6倍,K-DETEK研究1.5倍,DETECT-A研究4.2倍,SeekInCare研究8.1倍)。在8项介入研究中,有4项预先指定/建议了诊断性调查途径。结论:肿瘤产量指标的实质性异质性可能反映了MCD技术、诊断途径、随访时间和背景标准筛查的差异。长期随访、随机试验、完全配对测试比较和实施研究对于确定MCD测试在人群筛查中的潜力至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书