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
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
AMA and other medical associations are kicked out of CDC vaccine workgroups
U.S. health officials have told more than a half-dozen of the nation's top medical organizations that they will no longer help establish vaccination recommendations. The government told the organizations on Thursday via email that their experts are being disinvited from the workgroups that have been the backbone of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The organizations include the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 'I'm concerned and distressed,' said Dr. William Schaffner, a Vanderbilt University vaccine expert who for decades has been involved with ACIP and its workgroups. He said the move will likely propel a confusing fragmentation of vaccine guidance, as patients may hear the government say one thing and hear their doctors say another. One email said the organizations are 'special interest groups and therefore are expected to have a 'bias' based on their constituency and/or population that they represent.' A federal health official on Friday confirmed the action, which was first reported by Bloomberg. The decision was the latest development in what has become a saga involving the ACIP. The committee, created in 1964, makes recommendations to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on how vaccines that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration should be used. CDC directors have traditionally almost always approved those recommendations, which are widely heeded by doctors and greenlight insurance coverage for shots. U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement before becoming the U.S. government's top health official, and in June abruptly fired the entire ACIP after accusing them of being too closely aligned with manufacturers. He handpicked replacements that include several vaccine skeptics. The workgroups typically include committee members and experts from medical and scientific organizations. At workgroup meetings, members evaluate data from vaccine manufacturers and the CDC, and formulate vaccination recommendation proposals to be presented to the full committee. The structure was created for several reasons, Schaffner said. The professional groups provide input about what might and might not be possible for doctors to implement. And it helped build respect and trust in ACIP recommendations, having the buy-in of respected medical organizations, he said. Workgroup members are vetted for conflicts of interest, to make sure than no one who had, say, made money from working on a hepatitis vaccine was placed on the hepatitis committee, Schaffner noted. Also disinvited from the groups were the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American Geriatrics Society, the American Osteopathic Association, the National Medical Association and the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. In a joint statement Friday, the AMA and several of the other organizations said: 'To remove our deep medical expertise from this vital and once transparent process is irresponsible, dangerous to our nation's health, and will further undermine public and clinician trust in vaccines.' They urged the administration to reconsider the move "so we can continue to feel confident in its vaccine recommendations for our patients.' Some of the professional organizations have criticized Kennedy's changes to the ACIP, and three of the disinvited groups last month joined a lawsuit against the government over Kennedy's decision to stop recommending COVID-19 vaccines for most children and pregnant women. In a social media post Friday, one of the Kennedy-appointed ACIP members — Retsef Levi — wrote that the working groups 'will engage experts from even broader set of disciplines!' Levi, a business management professor, also wrote that working group membership 'will be based on merit & expertise — not membership in organizations proven to have (conflicts of interest) and radical & narrow view of public health!' HHS officials have not said which people are going to be added to the ACIP workgroups. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Why the US is burning $10m worth of birth control
There are few better metaphors for the receding status of American women than one offered up by the Trump administration at a medical waste disposal facility outside Paris this week: rather than distribute nearly $10m worth of birth control, which had been purchased by USAID and was destined to be given to women in low-income countries, primarily in Africa, the Americans decided to burn it. The incinerated contraceptives included 900,000 birth control implants, 2m doses of injectable long-acting birth control, 2m packs of contraceptive pills and 50,000 IUDs. The medicine is just the latest in the far-reaching fallout from cuts made by the so-called 'department of government efficiency,' or Doge, a project in which Elon Musk and a group of his very young, overwhelmingly male acolytes unilaterally slashed congressionally appropriated funding to government programs they did not like. The cuts have been devastating for non-profits that work to improve women's health and safety worldwide. Sarah Shaw, an associate director at the global family planning group MSI Reproductive Choices, says that the cuts will put women at risk as they strain their health with unplanned pregnancies and seek out illegal abortions; other women who are denied access to birth control will lose out on the opportunities for education, professional development or remunerative work that can help them escape abuse, rise out of poverty, pursue their talents and ambitions and better provide for the children they already have. When MSI attempted to buy the contraceptives, the administration would only accept full price, which the organization couldn't afford, she said. Several non-profits, including MSI, had offered to pay to ship and repackage the supplies, according to another representative. But the Trump administration refused, partially due to federal rules the prohibit the US from providing such goods to groups that perform, provide referrals for or offer education about abortions. In addition to the cost of purchasing the contraceptives, American taxpayers will now be on the hook for about $167,000 for the cost of burning them. It's just the latest in a series of signs that the Trump administration is turning against the provision of birth control, particularly the safe, effective and woman-controlled hormonal methods that have been a cornerstone of healthcare policy for decades and which were a precondition of women's advancement in work and education over the past 60 years. In April, the Trump administration abruptly announced that it was suspending a large swath of the domestic service grants distributed under Title X, the program meant to help low-income Americans access birth control, STD treatment and other sexual and reproductive healthcare. Of the 86 Title X grants awarded for fiscal year 2024, nearly 25% were 'temporarily withheld', mostly based on highly suspect allegations that the grant-receiving institutions – including 13 Planned Parenthood affiliates – had failed to comply with Trump executive orders banning things like DEI programs. Eight states now receive zero Title X dollars: California, Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Tennessee and Utah. Alaska, Minnesota and Pennsylvania have also lost most of their contraception funding. The domestic cuts – along with the exclusion of Planned Parenthood clinics from Medicaid reimbursements – mean that American women, too, are now facing dramatically greater obstacles to accessing birth control. Clinics that relied on Title X funding are now set to close: 11 Planned Parenthood clinics already have, including in Democratically controlled states like California. Planned Parenthood says that cumulatively, the cuts could lead the organization to close about 200 of its 600 clinics nationwide – a devastating cut to abortion providers in particular that will make a wide range of reproductive services inaccessible to women regardless of where they live. But the Trump administration is not merely forcing these programs for women's health and dignity go up in flames. They are redirecting them to better suit their preferred cultural outcome: one in which women's lives, ambitions and talents are all subordinated to the task of childbearing. The New York Times reported last month that the White House is redirecting Title X funds that once went to birth control to instead fund an 'infertility training center' and programs in something called 'restorative reproductive medicine'. If Title X's original aim was to help American women control their fertility so as to build healthier families and to enable them to pursue other aims – like learning or work – in the new administration's version, the program exists mainly to encourage women to have more children. But the switch should not be seen as a genuine investment in infertility, an often devastating condition with which many Americans struggle. Because the new Title X priorities do not, by and large, direct more money to IVF. Trump promised, on the campaign trail, to make IVF free. But the procedure, which has opponents on the Christian right, is not included in the administration's new priority of 'restorative' reproductive medicine, a practice that avoids controversial fertility treatments; instead, doctors seek the 'root cause' of a woman's infertility, which may involve telling them they can conceive with proper diet and exercise. In government, money allocation is a statement of values. With its dramatic cuts to contraceptive funding at home and abroad, the Trump administration is making its values clear. It does not value women's health; it does not value their dignity, their control over their own lives, their aspirations, their earning potential, their desire to be freed from ignorance, or poverty, or the abuse they suffer under the hands of husbands and fathers. It does not value their ability to control their own bodies, and by extension, it does not value their ability to enter the public sphere. It does not value their dreams, their gifts, their hard work or invention or aspiration to anything other than making babies. American women, like women everywhere, depend on birth control to live lives of freedom and to pursue their dreams. But because of the Trump administration, those dreams are going up in smoke. Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump officials plan coverage for weight loss drugs under Medicare and Medicaid
The Trump administration is planning a pilot program to cover 'miracle' weight loss drugs under the government health insurance systems for low-income people and retirees, Medicaid and Medicare, in a move aimed at tackling the US's chronic obesity problem. Such a plan was previously proposed by the Biden administration in its final months before Donald Trump re-entered the White House after winning a second term in office in the 2024 election. Now the Trump administration intends a five-year experiment in which the Medicaid program and Medicare drug coverage plans will have the option of covering the cost of drugs selling under the names Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound for 'weight management' purposes, the Washington Post reported on Friday morning, citing documents from the government's Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). This type of medication, known as GLP-1 drugs and originally developed to treat type 2 diabetes, have gained popularity for their ability to reduce body weight by suppressing appetite and slowing digestion. But their high cost, typically between $5,000 and $7,000 a year, has raised concerns about long-term affordability and such a plan now under consideration by Donald Trump would come at a hefty cost to the public purse. Insurance coverage for such drugs is currently typically approved when patients have other conditions that are often tied to obesity, such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer. The new proposed plan would permit state Medicaid programs and Medicare Part D insurance plans to voluntarily cover GLP-1 drugs, including those from the market leaders Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, the report said. Lilly and Novo are leaders in the weight-loss drug market, which some analysts expect could bring in more than $150bn in revenue by the next decade. Lilly's shares were up nearly 2% in premarket trading on Friday. The initiative is slated to begin in April 2026 for Medicaid and January 2027 for Medicare. If it clears the way, it would mark a shift in federal policy after the administration said earlier this year that the programs would not cover weight loss drugs. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Lilly and Novo did not respond to Reuters' request for comment. The plan could expose division between CMS head Mehmet Oz, who has previously praised such drugs, and health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has criticized their high cost and how they are not a substitute for a healthy lifestyle.
