Breakthrough blood test detects cancer years before symptoms appear
Researchers from the Johns Hopkins University in the US found that genetic material shed by tumours can be detected in the bloodstream much before patients get their first diagnosis.
The study, published in the journal Cancer Discovery, found that these genetic mutations caused by cancer, can be detected in the blood over three years in advance for some patients.
'Three years earlier provides time for intervention. The tumours are likely to be much less advanced and more likely to be curable,' said study co-author Yuxuan Wang.
In the research, scientists assessed blood plasma samples collected from participants of a large NIH-funded study to investigate risk factors for heart attack, stroke, heart failure and other cardiovascular diseases.
Researchers developed highly accurate and sensitive genome sequencing techniques to analyse blood samples from 52 of the earlier study's participants.
Twenty-six of the participants were diagnosed with cancer within six months after sample collection, and 26 who were not diagnosed served as the control group for comparison.
Eight of the 52 participants scored positively in a multicancer early detection (MCED) laboratory test conducted at the time their blood samples were taken.
The MCED test is designed to detect multiple cancers in their early stages from a single blood sample by analysing cancer-signature molecules in the blood, including DNA and proteins.
All eight were diagnosed with cancer within four months following blood collection.
For six of these 8 participants, additional blood samples were collected about 3 to 3.5 years before cancer diagnosis.
In four of these cases, mutations linked to tumour growth could be identified in their earlier blood samples.
The findings point to 'the promise of MCED tests in detecting cancers very early', researchers say.
It may lead to more standardised blood tests to screen people either annually or every two years, which could boost early detection and prevent cancers from becoming treatment-resistant tumours.
'These results demonstrate that it is possible to detect circulating tumour DNA more than three years prior to clinical diagnosis, and provide benchmark sensitivities required for this purpose,' scientists wrote.
'Detecting cancers years before their clinical diagnosis could help provide management with a more favourable outcome,' said Nickolas Papadopoulos, another author of the study.
Scientists hope the findings can be validated in a larger-scale trial involving more participants.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
32 minutes ago
- Scientific American
New Interstellar Object Stuns Scientists as It Zooms through Solar System
Late in the evening on July 1, a telescope in Chile that is part of the global, NASA-funded Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) picked up on a new moving dot in the sky, an object moving past the orbit of Jupiter. When Larry Denneau, software engineer at ATLAS, alerted the International Astronomical Union's Minor Planet Center to the observation, 'it looked like a completely routine discovery.' That would soon change. To his surprise, the object—provisionally named A11pI3Z—turned out to be the third interstellar visitor known to science. Now, mere days after its discovery, frenzied follow-up work by astronomers around the world to further scrutinize A11pI3Z and look for additional apparitions in archival observations has given the object a new, more official name: Comet 3I/Atlas, for the telescope that first discovered it. What seems to have been the clinching evidence for its interstellar nature emerged from the efforts of a group of amateur astronomers, called the Deep Random Survey, who were first to track the object down in images other ATLAS telescopes had captured in late June. 'We had quite a bit of confusion from the get-go,' says Sam Deen, a member of the group. 'Our systems are usually tuned to expect that a new discovery is an object firmly stuck inside the solar system,' but Atlas was playing outside of those rules. The earlier observations—which soon also included 'pre-discovery' sightings from the Zwicky Transient Facility at Palomar Observatory in San Diego, California as well as other telescopes—allowed a more precise calculation of the object's trajectory. Whatever it was, the object was zooming down toward the inner solar system at almost 70 kilometers per second. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. That's 'far faster than any solar system object should be able to move,' Deen notes, because such speeds ensure objects will slip through the sun's gravitational grasp. Anything moving so quickly simply can't hang around long; rather than following a typical parabolic orbit, 3I/Atlas's blistering speed is carving out a hyperbolic orbit, a path that takes the object swooping through the inner solar system before soaring back out into the interstellar void. It most likely came from the outskirts of some other planetary system, ejected from its tenuous twirling around some alien sun by gravitational interactions with a giant planet or another passing star. Exactly where it came from and when it began its galactic journey, however, no one can say. There is no threat to Earth, as during its brief sojourn in the solar system 3I/Atlas is projected to come no nearer than about 240 million kilometers to our planet. The object will make its closest approach to the sun on October 30, reaching a distance of about 210 million kilometers, just within the orbit of Mars. As it approaches in coming months, astronomers will intensify their studies, hoping to learn more about this mysterious visitor. What's already relatively clear, however, is 3I/Atlas's cometary nature; more than 100 observations have now trickled in from telescopes around the globe, including some that show hints the object is enveloped in a cloud of gas and dust and trailing a tail of debris as ices on its surface warm in the sun's radiance. Astronomers normally use a distant object's brightness as a proxy for its size, with brighter objects tending to be bigger as well. But a comet's ejected material is usually bright, too, interfering with such crude estimates. Consequently, 'right now we really don't know how big it is; it could be anywhere from 5 to 50 kilometers in diameter,' Denneau says. Closer looks with more powerful observatories, including the keen-eyed infrared James Webb Space Telescope, should soon help clarify its dimensions and also its composition. 'I am interested in whether the comet looks like objects from our own solar system,' Denneau says. 'The answer is interesting either way. If it has the same composition as a normal comet, it means that other solar systems may be built similarly to ours. If it's completely different, then we might wonder why that is.' The first interstellar object observed, 1I/' Oumuamua, appeared on the scene in 2017 and perplexed researchers with its oddly elongated shape and a bizarrely accelerating trajectory. Those strange features led some researchers to propose an idea— now convincingly debunked —that 'Oumuamua was a derelict alien spacecraft adrift in the Milky Way. Then in 2019 came the second observed interstellar object, 2I/Borisov, which bore all the hallmarks of a run-of-the-mill comet and thus inspired few if any outlandish claims of alien involvement. '[ATLAS] will be a tiebreaker of sorts,' says Mario Juric, an astronomer at the University of Washington and discovery software lead at the recently completed Vera C. Rubin Observatory in Chile. '[Will it] give us a sense 'Oumuamua was the odd one out, or is the universe a lot more interesting than we imagined?' Rubin— a unique telescope with a panoramic view that will survey the entire overhead sky every few days—is seen as especially critical for solving the lingering mysteries of these first emissaries from interstellar space. As the observatory's survey progresses in months and years to come, it should uncover many more visitors from the great beyond, allowing astronomers to begin studying them as a population rather than scattered, isolated one-offs. Ultimately, if Rubin or another facility manages to spot an interstellar object fortuitously poised to pass relatively close to Earth, astronomers might even be able to gain an extremely close-up view via a spacecraft rendezvous. The European Space Agency (ESA) already has such a mission in the works, in fact—Comet Interceptor, a sentinel spacecraft set to launch as early as 2029 to await some inbound destination. 'There is a small chance that Comet Interceptor might be able to visit an interstellar object if one is found on the right trajectory, and the new Vera C. Rubin observatory should give us an increased rate of discovery of these objects,' says Colin Snodgrass, an astronomer at the University of Edinburgh who is part of the ESA mission. All of which has astronomers on the edges of their seats, eager to dive deeper into a new frontier in our cosmic understanding. 'This is probably the most excited I've been about any astronomical discovery in years,' Deen says.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
NASA Detects Visitor From Outside Solar System
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Scientists have just discovered a rare interstellar object hurtling through the solar system, and it's expected to make its closest approach to Earth on October 30. Officially named 3I/ATLAS, the comet was first observed on July 1 by the NASA-funded ATLAS (Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System) survey telescope in Rio Hurtado, Chile, one of the best places in the world for stargazing. Approaching from the constellation of Sagittarius, 3I/ATLAS is currently located about 420 million miles away—and does not pose a threat to our planet. On its current trajectory, it will only come within 150 million miles of us at the most. Pre-discovery observations of the comet date back to June 14, with numerous telescopes around the world reporting additional sightings since. Its size and physical properties are currently being investigated by astronomers across the globe. This diagram shows the trajectory of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS as it passes through the solar system. It will make its closest approach to the Sun in October. This diagram shows the trajectory of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS as it passes through the solar system. It will make its closest approach to the Sun in October. NASA/JPL-Caltech Only two other interstellar objects have ever been identified by scientists. 2I/Borisov, reported in 2019, and 'Oumuamua, in 2017, which briefly tricked some astronomers into believing it was an alien probe, before the theory was debunked. Currently about 416 million miles form the sun, 3I/ATLAS will make its closest approach to a planet in October, coming within 37 million miles of Mars. The comet should remain visible to ground-based telescopes all through September, according to NASA, after which it will pass too close to the Sun to observe. It will then reappear on the other side of the Sun by early December. Scientists are able to determine when a celestial object has interstellar origins based on its trajectory, which is tracked by measuring its changing position in the sky while taking into account all the known forces acting on it, including gravity of the Sun and the planets. Objects that come from inside our solar system tend to move along a closed elliptical orbit, while interstellar objects follow a hyperbolic orbit, and move fast enough to be able to escape gravity. While only three interstellar objects have ever been identified, a study published in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society in 2021, suggests that celestial bodies from out of our solar system may actually be more common than previously thought —outnumbering "domestic" material in the Oort cloud which surrounds the solar system. Do you have a science story to share with Newsweek? Do you have a question about interstellar objects? Let us know via science@ Reference Siraj, A., & Loeb, A. (2021). Interstellar objects outnumber Solar system objects in the Oort cloud. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 507(1), L16–L18.
Scientific American
5 hours ago
- Scientific American
U.S. Budget Cuts Are Robbing Early-Career Scientists of Their Future
As a young doctoral researcher at a university in the southern U.S., Camilo felt like he was finally closing in on his dream of becoming a leader in the next generation of HIV scholars. His recent work has helped hundreds of LGBTQ+ Latino people access HIV prevention programs and preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medication that reduces HIV infection risk. But these lifesaving efforts—and Camilo's hopes of a career focused on directly helping people in his community—came to a screeching halt one recent Friday afternoon: he opened an e-mail that said a National Institutes of Health grant, vital to his work, had been terminated. 'I saw an image of a floating pair of scissors clipping my future,' says Camilo, who asked to use a pseudonym, citing fear of retaliation. Since researchers first began receiving grant termination letters in late February, massive chunks of federal funding for science and health have been canceled on a near-weekly basis. The Trump administration has framed these cuts as a way to reduce wasteful spending, refocus research priorities and eliminate ideological bias. Grants have been flagged for containing keywords such as 'women,' 'diverse,' 'minority' and 'racially.' Camilo's research checked all the boxes for the administration's crackdown on so-called diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) research. He had been expecting the bad news, but when it came, it was still crushing. 'You're losing everything,' he says. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Grant Watch, a project tracking Trump's scientific funding cancellations, has tallied more than 2,482 terminated NIH grants worth $8.7 billion and 1,669 terminated National Science Foundation grants worth $1.5 billion as of mid-June. An NSF spokesperson declined an interview request from Scientific American but wrote in an e-mail that 'we remain committed to awarding grants and funding all areas of science and engineering.' The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to direct requests for an interview for this article. An NIH representative did not respond to a list of written questions but said the agency 'is taking action to terminate research funding that is not aligned with NIH and HHS priorities.' 'I saw an image of a floating pair of scissors clipping my future.' —Camilo, doctoral researcher On June 16 Judge William Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled against cuts to hundreds of grants for projects through the NIH, calling these cuts 'void and illegal' and indicating that funding must be reinstated. Experts expect the Trump administration will appeal the ruling, which does not apply to all of the terminated grants compiled by Grant Watch. Virtually every research sector has been disrupted in some way since Trump took office and issued a slew of executive orders affecting science and health care. Tens of thousands of federal employees at the HHS, NIH and other science- and health-related agencies have been laid off. Universities are bracing for major federal funding cuts by freezing new hiring and cutting graduate student positions. Private research companies and industries have also seen some federal support severed—including support for the development of new vaccines and cancer treatments. 'When you cut fellowships and grants, you're cutting the people that are doing the work.' —Andrew Pekosz, virologist, Johns Hopkins University Of the many thousands of researchers grappling with the fallout, one group is being disproportionately affected: early-career scientists. Senior researchers often have a diversity of funding streams, but for those starting out in the field, 'grants serve as the foundation for an entire career of work,' says Megan Ranney, dean of the Yale School of Public Health. With the cuts, 'there are some [early-career researchers] who we will undoubtedly lose from the scientific and health enterprises.' Scientific American posted on a Reddit space for scientists, researchers and lab workers to ask people how they are grappling with the professional and personal whiplash of these interruptions. More than 50 people responded with public comments; dozens more sent private messages expressing fears, frustrations and concerns. We interviewed several of them—and other junior researchers—about how the cuts are affecting their current and future work and what the long-term consequences may be for the U.S. Research Interrupted Students and postdoctoral researchers perform the vast majority of research at academic institutions, so in addition to disrupting individual lives, the cuts have thrown whole laboratories into disarray. 'When you cut fellowships and grants, you're cutting the people that are doing the work,' says Andrew Pekosz, a virologist who leads a lab at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Pekosz's lab had recently lost a COVID-related grant that was supposed to run until September. which forced him to dismiss a postdoc and a research associate because he lacked funding for their salaries. He was able to cobble together support for a Ph.D. student on the project but had to shorten the timeline for the research. Although the lab's grant is among those that Judge Young ordered the NIH to restore, much damage has already been done. 'There's just an overwhelming sense of insecurity.' —Sierra Wilson, Ph.D. student, University of Pittsburgh Labs that still have funding are also working under high pressure and low morale. 'We're constantly asking our PI [principal investigator], 'Is everything going to be okay? Are we going to be safe?'' says R.K., an undergraduate student at a lab in the Midwest that's investigating treatments for a genetic disease. (R.K. asked to be identified by his initials, citing fear that speaking out could harm his future career.) At weekly meetings, he says, the lab's principal investigator has been pushing the team to publish more papers 'in order to show our progress to donor organizations.' If the researchers' NIH funding shrinks, he says, 'we would need to persuade our other donors for more money to make up the gap.' Applied across thousands of U.S. labs, these losses—both tangible and psychological—will add up, Pekosz says. 'We're going to see a massive downsizing of biomedical research efforts because there simply is not going to be the funding available to maintain the current level,' he says. Recent data suggest this is likely to prove correct. For example, according to a 2023 JAMA Health Forum paper, of the 356 drugs that gained Food and Drug Administration approval between 2010 and 2019, more than 84 percent received research funding from the NIH before approval. This research was powered by early-career workers: billions of dollars in NIH funding supported graduate students, postdocs and research staff who conducted the work. Under the current budget cuts, however, 'all of this is at risk,' says Fred Ledley, a co-author of the 2023 paper and a professor of natural and applied sciences at Bentley University. Deeply Personal The termination letter for Calimo's grant, which is not affected by Judge Young's ruling, said that it 'no longer [effectuated] agency priorities' and that 'research programs based primarily on artificial and non-scientific categories, including amorphous equity objectives, are antithetical to the scientific inquiry, do nothing to expand our knowledge of living systems, provide low returns on investment, and ultimately do not enhance health, lengthen life or reduce illness.' Not only did these claims completely contradict the original score that NIH grant reviewers gave Camilo's application, reading the letter made him feel like he was being 'attacked,' he says. Early-career grants are both crucial stepping stones to larger grants and recognition of a rising researcher's potential. The way the Trump administration's termination letters are worded 'delegitimates the scientists and the work they do,' Ranney says. 'There's often a deeply personal aspect.' 'I just feel very let down and betrayed by my country.' —Alex, postdoc, University of Colorado Sometimes, that personal aspect is literally about the researchers themselves. Sierra Wilson, a Ph.D. student at the University of Pittsburgh, assumed her liver-regeneration research would be safe from the cuts. But because Wilson is a first-generation college student from a low-income household, her funding came from a program that aimed to increase diversity in biomedical research, and according to the NIH spokesperson, that program is now 'expired.' When Wilson read her termination letter in late April, she suspected it must be related not to her research but to her classification as an underrepresented scholar. In her case, she says, the federal cuts appear to be targeting 'people themselves—which feels more discriminatory.' The NIH spokesperson did not respond to Scientific American's question about the allegation that the termination of grants in the now expired program appeared to be based on researchers' identity or background. According to the spokesperson, 'Grantees may appeal terminations for nonalignment with agency priorities.' Wilson sent an appeal request in May, but she does not expect a timely resolution, and to her knowledge, her grant is not affected by Judge Young's decision. University personnel who helped her with the appeals process told her that they expect she will have graduated by the time the NIH gets back to her. A number of junior researchers say all these blows are taking a heavy toll on their mental health. One of them is Alex, a postdoc at the University of Colorado, whose last name has been withheld for privacy at her request. Alex, who says she comes from a low socioeconomic background and served in the military before pursuing research developing flu vaccines, reports recurring nightmares about losing her postdoctoral job. She 'spirals' each time she sees bad news about science at stake, she says, and has recently developed blood pressure issues. 'I just feel very let down and betrayed by my country,' she says. 'I feel ashamed I even served it.' The Lost Generation of Scientists Scientists who are just entering their field can spark fresh ideas and bring an appetite for change. But dwindling funding and opportunities threaten to 'choke off' this influx of new talent—further constraining the already competitive job market—Pekosz says. He has even seen signs of the scientist-hiring drought spilling over into industry. His graduating Ph.D. students are struggling to secure jobs, he says, adding that his inbox is full of e-mails from prospective students as well as laid-off federal scientists seeking positions in his lab. Wilson has fading hopes for securing a job in academia when she graduates this fall. 'With all these grant and job terminations, the market is flooded, and people aren't hiring because [they don't know] how things will work out,' Wilson says. 'There's just an overwhelming sense of insecurity.' Many scientists, including early-career ones, are contemplating leaving the U.S. to find better support for their research. R.K., who plans to pursue a dual medical degree and Ph.D., is now considering applying to programs in Asia and Europe. Alex, likewise, is strongly thinking about leaving the country. 'I would love to be a PI,' she says. 'But there's no hope left here.' If available scientific talent continues to decline in the U.S., experts anticipate a potential domino effect on the economy. In 2024 every dollar invested in NIH research generated a $2.56 return, so the U.S. economy will likely feel the aftershocks of the recent cuts relatively quickly, Ranney says. In the longer term, scientific discoveries 'will start to stagnate,' she says. 'We need to recognize that we have a tremendous amount of power.' —Tyler Yasaka, medical and Ph.D. student, University of Pittsburgh There's also a likelihood that science fields will become a less appealing choice for incoming college students. 'I worry that we're going to see a loss of basic scientific skill and knowledge as fewer people go into science,' Ranney says. If the pipeline of new talent slows, the nation's position as a global leader in science will be difficult to maintain—or to recover once it's gone, she says. It's going to be impossible to replace all the lost federal funding, Ranney says. The remaining hope, then, is that 'we can reverse course,' she says. Some scientists are uniting and pushing back. Tyler Yasaka, a dual medical and Ph.D. student at the University of Pittsburgh, is part of an informal committee at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Hillman Cancer Center that's brainstorming actions researchers and students can take, such as advocating for science in front of elected officials at Capitol Hill. He is also independently launching a podcast to share scientists' experiences with funding. 'I think most scientists aren't comfortable speaking out publicly, but if we value democracy, we have an obligation to use our voices,' Yasaka says. 'We need to recognize that we have a tremendous amount of power.' Fortunately for Camilo, his university has found institutional funds to support the remainder of his Ph.D. But he no longer sees a clear path forward after graduation to continue his research on HIV and LGBTQ+ health among Latinos in the U.S.—public health issues that are personally important to him. 'It's sad and upsetting,' he says. 'I do not want to give up on my community.'
