Nonspecific Signs and/or Symptoms of Cancer: A Retrospective, Observational Analysis from a Secondary Care, US Community Oncology Dataset

To help determine the unmet need for improved diagnostic tools to evaluate patients with nonspecific signs and/or symptoms (NSSS) and suspicion of cancer, we examined patient characteristics, diagnostic journey, and cancer incidence of patients with NSSS within The US Oncology Network (The Network), a secondary care community oncology setting. This retrospective, observational cohort study included patients aged ≥40 years with ≥1 NSSS in their problem list at their first visit within The Network (the index date) between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020. Patients were followed longitudinally with electronic health record data for initial cancer diagnosis, new noncancer diagnosis, death, end of study observation period, or 12 months, whichever occurred first. Of 103,984 patients eligible for inclusion, 96,722 presented with only 1 NSSS at index date; 6537/103,984 (6.3%) were diagnosed with 1 primary cancer within 12 months after the index date; 3825/6537 (58.5%) with hematologic malignancy, and 2712/6537 (41.5%) with solid tumor. Among patients diagnosed with cancer (n = 6774), the median time to cancer diagnosis after their first visit within The Network was 5.13 weeks. This study provides a real-world perspective on cancer incidence in patients with NSSS referred to a secondary care setting and highlights the unmet need for improved diagnostic tools to improve cancer outcomes

Performance of a targeted methylation-based multi-cancer early detection test by race and ethnicity.

Disparities in cancer screening and outcomes based on factors such as sex, socioeconomic status, and race and ethnicity in the United States are well documented. A blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test that detects a shared cancer signal across multiple cancer types and also predicts the cancer signal origin was developed and validated in the Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas study (CCGA; NCT02889978). CCGA is a prospective, multicenter, case-control, observational study with longitudinal follow-up (overall N = 15,254). In this pre-specified, exploratory, descriptive analysis, test performance was evaluated among racial and ethnic groups. Overall, 4077 participants comprised the independent validation set with confirmed cancer status (cancer: n = 2823; non-cancer: n = 1254). Participants were stratified into the following racial/ethnic groups: Black (non-Hispanic), Hispanic (all races), Other (non-Hispanic), Other/unknown and White (non-Hispanic). Cancer and non-cancer participants were predominantly White (n = 2316, 82.0% and n = 996, 79.4%, respectively). Across groups, specificity for cancer signal detection ranged from 98.1% [n = 103; 95% CI: 93.2-99.5%] to 100% [n = 85; 95% CI: 95.7-100.0%]. The sensitivity for cancer signal detection across groups ranged from 43.9% [n = 57; 95% CI: 31.8-56.7%] to 63.0% [n = 192; 95% CI: 56.0-69.5%] and generally increased with clinical stage. The MCED test had consistently high specificity and similar sensitivity across racial and ethnic groups, though results are limited by sample size for some groups. Results support the broad applicability of this MCED test and clinical implementation on a population scale as a complement to standard screening

Multi-cancer early detection test in symptomatic patients referred for cancer investigation in England and Wales (SYMPLIFY): a large-scale, observational cohort study

BACKGROUND: Analysis of circulating tumour DNA could stratify cancer risk in symptomatic patients. We aimed to evaluate the performance of a methylation-based multicancer early detection (MCED) diagnostic test in symptomatic patients referred from primary care.METHODS: We did a multicentre, prospective, observational study at National Health Service (NHS) hospital sites in England and Wales. Participants aged 18 or older referred with non-specific symptoms or symptoms potentially due to gynaecological, lung, or upper or lower gastrointestinal cancers were included and gave a blood sample when they attended for urgent investigation. Participants were excluded if they had a history of or had received treatment for an invasive or haematological malignancy diagnosed within the preceding 3 years, were taking cytotoxic or demethylating agents that might interfere with the test, or had participated in another study of a GRAIL MCED test. Patients were followed until diagnostic resolution or up to 9 months. Cell-free DNA was isolated and the MCED test performed blinded to the clinical outcome. MCED predictions were compared with the diagnosis obtained by standard care to establish the primary outcomes of overall positive and negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity. Outcomes were assessed in participants with a valid MCED test result and diagnostic resolution. SYMPLIFY is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN10226380) and has completed follow-up at all sites.FINDINGS: 6238 participants were recruited between July 7 and Nov 30, 2021, across 44 hospital sites. 387 were excluded due to staff being unable to draw blood, sample errors, participant withdrawal, or identification of ineligibility after enrolment. Of 5851 clinically evaluable participants, 376 had no MCED test result and 14 had no information as to final diagnosis, resulting in 5461 included in the final cohort for analysis with an evaluable MCED test result and diagnostic outcome (368 [6·7%] with a cancer diagnosis and 5093 [93·3%] without a cancer diagnosis). The median age of participants was 61·9 years (IQR 53·4-73·0), 3609 (66·1%) were female and 1852 (33·9%) were male. The MCED test detected a cancer signal in 323 cases, in whom 244 cancer was diagnosed, yielding a positive predictive value of 75·5% (95% CI 70·5-80·1), negative predictive value of 97·6% (97·1-98·0), sensitivity of 66·3% (61·2-71·1), and specificity of 98·4% (98·1-98·8). Sensitivity increased with increasing age and cancer stage, from 24·2% (95% CI 16·0-34·1) in stage I to 95·3% (88·5-98·7) in stage IV. For cases in which a cancer signal was detected among patients with cancer, the MCED test's prediction of the site of origin was accurate in 85·2% (95% CI 79·8-89·3) of cases. Sensitivity 80·4% (95% CI 66·1-90·6) and negative predictive value 99·1% (98·2-99·6) were highest for patients with symptoms mandating investigation for upper gastrointestinal cancer.INTERPRETATION: This first large-scale prospective evaluation of an MCED diagnostic test in a symptomatic population demonstrates the feasibility of using an MCED test to assist clinicians with decisions regarding urgency and route of referral from primary care. Our data provide the basis for a prospective, interventional study in patients presenting to primary care with non-specific signs and symptoms.FUNDING: GRAIL Bio UK.</p

Evaluation of cell-free DNA approaches for multi-cancer early detection

In the Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas (NCT02889978) substudy 1, we evaluate several approaches for a circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test by defining clinical limit of detection (LOD) based on circulating tumor allele fraction (cTAF), enabling performance comparisons. Among 10 machine-learning classifiers trained on the same samples and independently validated, when evaluated at 98% specificity, those using whole-genome (WG) methylation, single nucleotide variants with paired white blood cell background removal, and combined scores from classifiers evaluated in this study show the highest cancer signal detection sensitivities. Compared with clinical stage and tumor type, cTAF is a more significant predictor of classifier performance and may more closely reflect tumor biology. Clinical LODs mirror relative sensitivities for all approaches. The WG methylation feature best predicts cancer signal origin. WG methylation is the most promising technology for MCED and informs development of a targeted methylation MCED test. [Display omitted] •Clinical LOD is a useful benchmark to assess cfDNA-based test performance•cTAF accounts for cfDNA cancer signal variation across cancer types and stages•cfDNA methylation was the most promising genomic feature for cancer signal detection•The results informed the development of a cfDNA-based multi-cancer early detection test Jamshidi et al. compare several approaches for circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests. A whole-genome methylation-based approach has the best performance among those evaluated. In addition, they define a metric—clinical limit of detection (LOD)—based on tumor fraction to enable future comparison of cfDNA-based tests

Sensitive and specific multi-cancer detection and localization using methylation signatures in cell-free DNA

Early cancer detection could identify tumors at a time when outcomes are superior and treatment is less morbid. This prospective case-control sub-study (from NCT02889978 and NCT03085888) assessed the performance of targeted methylation analysis of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to detect and localize multiple cancer types across all stages at high specificity.The 6689 participants [2482 cancer (>50 cancer types), 4207 non-cancer] were divided into training and validation sets. Plasma cfDNA underwent bisulfite sequencing targeting a panel of >100 000 informative methylation regions. A classifier was developed and validated for cancer detection and tissue of origin (TOO) localization.Performance was consistent in training and validation sets. In validation, specificity was 99.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 98.3% to 99.8%; 0.7% false-positive rate (FPR)]. Stage I–III sensitivity was 67.3% (CI: 60.7% to 73.3%) in a pre-specified set of 12 cancer types (anus, bladder, colon/rectum, esophagus, head and neck, liver/bile-duct, lung, lymphoma, ovary, pancreas, plasma cell neoplasm, stomach), which account for ∼63% of US cancer deaths annually, and was 43.9% (CI: 39.4% to 48.5%) in all cancer types. Detection increased with increasing stage: in the pre-specified cancer types sensitivity was 39% (CI: 27% to 52%) in stage I, 69% (CI: 56% to 80%) in stage II, 83% (CI: 75% to 90%) in stage III, and 92% (CI: 86% to 96%) in stage IV. In all cancer types sensitivity was 18% (CI: 13% to 25%) in stage I, 43% (CI: 35% to 51%) in stage II, 81% (CI: 73% to 87%) in stage III, and 93% (CI: 87% to 96%) in stage IV. TOO was predicted in 96% of samples with cancer-like signal; of those, the TOO localization was accurate in 93%.cfDNA sequencing leveraging informative methylation patterns detected more than 50 cancer types across stages. Considering the potential value of early detection in deadly malignancies, further evaluation of this test is justified in prospective population-level studies.•Targeted methylation analysis of cfDNA simultaneously detected and localized >50 cancer types, including high-mortality cancers that lack screening paradigms.•Cancers were detected across all stages (stage I–III sensitivity: 43.9%; stage I–IV sensitivity: 54.9%) at a specificity of >99% and a single false positive rate of 90% accuracy, which will be critical for directing follow-up care.•This supports the continued investigation of this test with the goal of population-scale early multi-cancer detection