Tumor localization strategies of multi-cancer early detection tests: a quantitative assessment

Author:

Tyson Christopher,Li Kevin H.,Cao Xiting,O’Brien James M.,Fishman Elliot K.,O’Donnell Elizabeth K.,Duran Carlos,Parthasarathy Vijay,Rego Seema P.,Choudhry Omair A.,Beer Tomasz M.

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionBlood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests may expand the number of “screenable” cancers. Defining an optimal approach to diagnostic resolution for individuals with positive MCED test results is critical. Two prospective trials employed distinct diagnostic resolution approaches; one employed a molecular signal to predict tissue of origin (TOO) and the other used an imaging-based diagnostic strategy. Using mathematical modeling, we compared the diagnostic burden of each approach and characterized the risk of excess cancer incidence that may be attributable to radiation exposure associated with a false positive (FP) MCED test result and an imaging-based diagnostic strategy.MethodsA mathematical expression for diagnostic burden was derived using MCED test positive predictive value (PPV), molecular TOO localization accuracy, and the expected number of imaging procedures associated with each diagnostic outcome. Imaging and molecular TOO strategies were compared by estimating diagnostic burden across a wide range of MCED PPVs and TOO accuracies. Organ-specific radiation dose for diagnostic imaging was extracted from the literature and used as input to National Cancer Institute RADRat tool for estimating excess lifetime cancer risk due to radiation exposure.ResultsFor the molecular TOO diagnostic approach, an average of 2.1 procedures are required to reach diagnostic resolution for correctly-localized TPs, 4.4 procedures for incorrectly-localized TPs, and 4 procedures for FPs, vs. an average of 2.75 procedures for TPs and 2.4 for FPs with an imaging-based diagnostic strategy. Across the entire range of possible PPV and localization performance, a molecular TOO strategy resulted in a higher mean diagnostic burden: 3.6 procedures (SD 0.445) vs. 2.6 procedures (SD 0.1) for the imaging strategy. Predicted diagnostic burden was higher for molecular TOO in 95.5% of all possible PPV and TOO accuracy combinations; 79% or higher PPV would be required for a 90% accurate molecular TOO strategy to be less burdensome than imaging. The maximum rate of excess cancer incidence from radiation exposure for FP results from MCED screening between the ages of 50-84 was estimated at 64.6 per 100,000 (annual testing, 99% specificity), 48.5 per 100,000 (biennial testing, 98.5% specificity), and 64.6 per 100,000 (biennial testing, 98% specificity).ConclusionsThis analysis demonstrates that an imaging-based diagnostic strategy is more efficient than a molecular TOO-informed approach across 95.5% of all possible MCED PPV and TOO accuracy combinations. The use of an imaging-based approach for cancer localization can be efficient and low risk compared to a molecular-based approach.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3