Improved blood tests for cancer screening: general or specific?
- PMID: 22128772
- PMCID: PMC3285105
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-499
Improved blood tests for cancer screening: general or specific?
Abstract
Diagnosis of cancer at an early stage leads to improved survival. However, most current blood tests detect single biomarkers that are of limited suitability for screening, and existing screening programmes look only for cancers of one particular type. A new approach is needed. Recent developments suggest the possibility of blood-based screening for multiple tumour types. It may be feasible to develop a high-sensitivity general screen for cancer using multiple proteins and nucleic acids present in the blood of cancer patients, based on the biological characteristics of cancer. Positive samples in the general screen would be submitted automatically for secondary screening using tests to help define the likelihood of cancer and provide some indication of its type. Only those at high risk would be referred for further clinical assessment to permit early treatment and mitigate potential overdiagnosis. While the assays required for each step exist, they have not been used in this way. Recent experience of screening for breast, cervical and ovarian cancers suggest that there is likely to be widespread acceptance of such a strategy.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Outcomes from ovarian cancer screening in the PLCO trial: Histologic heterogeneity impacts detection, overdiagnosis and survival.Eur J Cancer. 2017 Dec;87:182-188. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.015. Epub 2017 Nov 21. Eur J Cancer. 2017. PMID: 29156299 Clinical Trial.
-
Status of tumor markers in ovarian cancer screening.J Clin Oncol. 2003 May 15;21(10 Suppl):200s-205s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.01.068. J Clin Oncol. 2003. PMID: 12743135 Review.
-
Soluble epidermal growth factor receptor (sEGFR) [corrected] and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) as screening and diagnostic tests for epithelial ovarian cancer.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Feb;14(2):306-18. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0423. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005. PMID: 15734951
-
Screening for ovarian cancer.Ann Acad Med Singap. 1998 Sep;27(5):676-82. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1998. PMID: 9919339 Review.
-
Ovarian cancer screening. The use of serial complementary tumor markers to improve sensitivity and specificity for early detection.Cancer. 1995 Nov 15;76(10 Suppl):2092-6. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19951115)76:10+<2092::aid-cncr2820761331>3.0.co;2-t. Cancer. 1995. PMID: 8635006 Review.
Cited by
-
Brain tumour differentiation: rapid stratified serum diagnostics via attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy.J Neurooncol. 2016 May;127(3):463-72. doi: 10.1007/s11060-016-2060-x. Epub 2016 Feb 13. J Neurooncol. 2016. PMID: 26874961 Free PMC article.
-
Does risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm excel human epididymis protein 4 and CA125 in predicting epithelial ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis.BMC Cancer. 2012 Jun 19;12:258. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-258. BMC Cancer. 2012. PMID: 22712526 Free PMC article.
-
The evidence base for circulating tumour DNA blood-based biomarkers for the early detection of cancer: a systematic mapping review.BMC Cancer. 2017 Oct 23;17(1):697. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3693-7. BMC Cancer. 2017. PMID: 29061138 Free PMC article.
-
Building the Evidence Base of Blood-Based Biomarkers for Early Detection of Cancer: A Rapid Systematic Mapping Review.EBioMedicine. 2016 Aug;10:164-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Jul 6. EBioMedicine. 2016. PMID: 27426280 Free PMC article.
-
Aging clocks & mortality timers, methylation, glycomic, telomeric and more. A window to measuring biological age.Aging Med (Milton). 2022 Feb 5;5(2):120-125. doi: 10.1002/agm2.12197. eCollection 2022 Jun. Aging Med (Milton). 2022. PMID: 35783114 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Ahlquist DA, Sargent DJ, Loprinzi CL, Levin TR, Rex DK, Ahnen DJ, Knigge K, Lance MP, Burgart LJ, Hamilton SR, Allison JE, Lawson MJ, Devens ME, Harrington JJ, Hillman SL. Stool DNA and occult blood testing for screen detection of colorectal neoplasia. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:441–450. W81. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira SM, McCormack VA, Shiel S, Perry N, Dos Santos Silva IM. Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK breast screening program and systematic review of published data. Radiology. 2009;251:347–358. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2512081235. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Kitchener HC, Blanks R, Cubie H, Desai M, Dunn G, Legood R, Gray A, Sadique Z, Moss S. MAVARIC Trial Study Group. MAVARIC: a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial. Health Technol Assess. 2011;15:iii–iv. ix-xi, 1-170. - PubMed
-
- Dillner J, Rebolj M, Birembaut P, Petry KU, Szarewski A, Munk C, de Sanjose S, Naucler P, Lloveras B, Kjaer S, Cuzick J, van Ballegooijen M, Clavel C, Iftner T. Joint European Cohort Study. Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study. BMJ. 2008;337:a1754. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1754. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Zeliadt SB, Hoffman RM, Etzioni R, Gore JL, Kessler LG, Lin DW. Influence of publication of US and European prostate cancer screening trials on PSA testing practices. J Natl Cancer Inst. pp. 520–523. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources