Blood-Based Multi-Cancer Detection Using a Novel Variant Calling Assay (DEEPGENTM): Early Clinical Results

Precision Oncology in Breast Cancer Surgery

Outcomes for patients with breast cancer have improved over time due to increased screening and the availability of more effective therapies. It is important to recognize that breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that requires treatment based on molecular characteristics. Early endpoints such as pathologic complete response correlate with event-free survival, allowing the opportunity to consider de-escalation of certain cancer treatments to avoid overtreatment. This article discusses clinical trials of tailoring treatment (eg, I-SPY2) and screening (eg, WISDOM) to individual patients based on their unique risk features.

Predictive Performance of Cell-Free Nucleic Acid-Based Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cancer-screening tests that can detect multiple cancer types, or multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests, have emerged recently as a potential new tool in decreasing cancer morbidity and mortality. Most MCED assays are based on detecting cell-free tumor DNA (CF-DNA) in the blood. MCEDs offer the potential for screening for cancer organ sites with high mortality, both with and without recommended screening. However, their clinical utility has not been established. Before clinical utility can be established, the clinical validity of MCEDs, i.e., their ability to predict cancer status, must be demonstrated. In this study we performed a systematic review of the predictive ability for cancer of cell-free-nucleic acid-based MCED tests.

CONTENT

We searched PubMed for relevant publications from January 2017 to February 2023, using MeSH terms related to multi-cancer detection, circulating DNA, and related concepts. Of 1811 publications assessed, 61 were reviewed in depth and 20 are included in this review. For almost all studies, the cancer cases were assessed at time of diagnosis. Most studies reported specificity (generally 95% or higher) and overall sensitivity (73% median). The median number of cancer types assessed per assay was 5. Many studies also reported sensitivity by stage and/or cancer type. Sensitivity generally increased with stage.

SUMMARY

To date, relatively few published studies have assessed the clinical validity of MCED tests. Most used cancer cases assessed at diagnosis, with generally high specificity and variable sensitivity depending on cancer type and stage. The next steps should be testing in the intended-use population, i.e., asymptomatic persons.

Plasma Epstein-Barr Virus DNA and Risk of Future Nasopharyngeal Cancer

BACKGROUND: We previously conducted a prospective study to show that nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) screening with circulating Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) DNA analysis can improve survival. However, the long-term significance of positive results in individuals without cancer was unclear. METHODS: We conducted a second-round screening at a median of 43 months after the initial screening. Participants with detectable plasma EBV DNA were retested in 4 weeks, and those with persistently positive results were investigated with nasal endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Of the 20,174 volunteers who participated in the first-round screening, 17,838 (88.6%) were rescreened. Among them, 423 (2.37%) had persistently detectable plasma EBV DNA. Twenty-four patients were identified as having NPC. A significantly higher proportion of patients had stage I/II cancer than in a historical cohort (67% vs. 20%; chi-square test, P<0.001), and they had superior 3-year progression-free survival (100% vs. 78.8%). Compared with participants with undetectable plasma EBV DNA in the first round of screening, participants with transiently and persistently positive results in the first round were more likely to have a cancer identified in the second round, with relative risks of 4.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 15.0) and 16.8 (95% confidence interval, 5.7 to 49.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with detectable plasma EBV DNA but without an immediately identifiable NPC were more likely to have the cancer identified in another round of screening performed 3 to 5 years later. (Funded by Kadoorie Charitable Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02063399.)

Shifting the Cancer Screening Paradigm: The Rising Potential of Blood-Based Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests

Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, partly owing to late detection which entails limited and often ineffective therapeutic options. Most cancers lack validated screening procedures, and the ones available disclose several drawbacks, leading to low patient compliance and unnecessary workups, adding up the costs to healthcare systems. Hence, there is a great need for innovative, accurate, and minimally invasive tools for early cancer detection. In recent years, multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests emerged as a promising screening tool, combining molecular analysis of tumor-related markers present in body fluids with artificial intelligence to simultaneously detect a variety of cancers and further discriminate the underlying cancer type. Herein, we aim to provide a highlight of the variety of strategies currently under development concerning MCED, as well as the major factors which are preventing clinical implementation. Although MCED tests depict great potential for clinical application, large-scale clinical validation studies are still lacking.

Opportunities for Early Cancer Detection: The Rise of ctDNA Methylation-Based Pan-Cancer Screening Technologies

The efficiency of conventional screening programs to identify early-stage malignancies can be limited by the low number of cancers recommended for screening as well as the high cumulative false-positive rate, and associated iatrogenic burden, resulting from repeated multimodal testing. The opportunity to use minimally invasive liquid biopsy testing to screen asymptomatic individuals at-risk for multiple cancers simultaneously could benefit from the aggregated diseases prevalence and a fixed specificity. Increasing both latter parameters is paramount to mediate high positive predictive value—a useful metric to evaluate a screening test accuracy and its potential harm-benefit. Thus, the use of a single test for multi-cancer early detection (stMCED) has emerged as an appealing strategy for increasing early cancer detection rate efficiency and benefit population health. A recent flurry of these stMCED technologies have been reported for clinical potential; however, their development is facing unique challenges to effectively improve clinical cost–benefit. One promising avenue is the analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) for detecting DNA methylation biomarker fingerprints of malignancies—a hallmark of disease aetiology and progression holding the potential to be tissue- and cancer-type specific. Utilizing panels of epigenetic biomarkers could potentially help to detect earlier stages of malignancies as well as identify a tumour of origin from blood testing, useful information for follow-up clinical decision making and subsequent patient care improvement. Overall, this review collates the latest and most promising stMCED methodologies, summarizes their clinical performances, and discusses the specific requirements multi-cancer tests should meet to be successfully implemented into screening guidelines.