Message 167 of 169 (827316)
01-22-2018 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by NoNukes
01-21-2018 11:16 PM
One more response (to answer NoNukes) on the medical discovery of the century
How close to 100%? The population of folks over 40 is huge. Is a large number of false positives going to swamp the health care system even if the false negative error is less than 1%?
I still need to read all the articles but this one has some info.
The newly developed blood-based cancer DNA test is exquisitely sensitive, accurately detecting one mutated fragment of DNA among 10,000 normal DNA fragments, literally “finding the needle in the haystack”.
We used CancerSEEK in just over 1,000 people with different types of early stage cancers. It was shown to accurately detect cancer, including in 70% or more of pancreas, ovary, liver, stomach and esophageal cancers. For each of these tumour types there are currently no screening tests available – blood based or otherwise.
Along with cancer detection, the blood test accurately predicted what type of cancer it was in 83% of cases.
Published in the journal Science, the research was led by a team from John Hopkins University, with collaboration from Australian scientists at the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute.
Why it’s important
Steady progress continues to be made in the treatment of advanced cancers, including major gains in life expectancy. But this can come at significant physical and financial cost. Early diagnosis remains the key to avoiding the potentially devastating impact of many cancer treatments and to reducing cancer deaths.
However, where there are proven screening tests that lead to earlier diagnosis and better outcomes, such as colonoscopy screening for bowel cancer, these are typically unpleasant. They also have associated risks, only screen for one cancer at a time and population uptake is often poor. And for many major tumour types there are currently no effective screening tests.
There are characteristic patterns of mutations and altered proteins that differ among cancer types. So CancerSEEK can not only detect that there is a cancer somewhere in the body but can also suggest where to start looking.
For example, if the pattern suggests a bowel cancer, then a colonoscopy is a logical next step. When blood samples were taken from over 800 apparently healthy controls, less than 1% scored a positive test. This means the test is rarely positive for people who don’t have cancer, thereby reducing the problem of overdiagnosis.
I will try to contain myself from any more pasting.
Ovarian 98% 14,195 deaths per year
Liver 90% (more than 90%) 28,920 deaths (included bile duct cancer)
Pancreatic 70% (or more) 43,090 deaths
Esophageal 70% (or more) 16,000 deaths
Stomach 70% (or more) 11,000 deaths
Lung over 60% 155,870 deaths (included Bronchus)
Colon & rectal 60% (?) 50,260 deaths
Breast 33% 41,070 deaths
So of the 318,000 (359,000 with breast cancer, but I will leave that out for reasons I stated earlier) deaths from the top 7, it appears that there is an accuracy rate which indicates at least 66% will get a correct cancer diagnosis.
That would suggest over 200,000 will get the early diagnosis of cancer.
212,000 to 221,000.
(I wonder if those who get a test result "negative" when they should be positive would be more likely to get the "positive" reading with additional tests beyond 1 per year)
This news page mentioned a test per year (just like I have been)
Scientists one step closer to a 'Holy Grail' blood test which can diagnose cancer
By Mirror | Published Mon, January 22nd 2018 at 10:37, Updated January 22nd 2018 at 10:39 GMT +3
A blood test to detect cancer is one step closer after scientists developed one that can spot eight types of the disease.
Described as the “Holy Grail”, the newly developed test could revolutionise screening programmes far many deadly cancers.
Although currently still being trialled, hopes are it could eventually see GP’s able to offer patients blood tests to detect the disease even when no symptoms have developed, saving lives through early diagnosis.
Dr Gert Attard, team leader in the Centre for Evolution and Cancer at the Institute of Cancer Research, London, and consultant medical oncologist at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, told the BBC: “This is of massive potential.
“I’m enormously excited.
“This is the Holy Grail - a blood test to diagnose cancer without all the other procedures like scans or colonoscopy.”
Scientists at Johns Hopkins University in the US have developed a test that screens for eight common forms of cancer and helps identify the location of the disease.
The test, called CancerSEEK, looks for mutations in 16 genes and evaluates the levels of eight proteins usually released by cancer sufferers.
It was evaluated on 1,005 patients with cancers of the ovary, liver, stomach, pancreas, esophagus, colorectum, lung or breast.
Researchers said its ability to find cancers was successful 70% of the time - and ranged from a high of 98% for ovarian cancer to a low of 33% for breast cancer.
Dr Cristian Tomasetti, from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, told the BBC: “This field of early detection is critical, and the results are very exciting.
“I think this can have an enormous impact on cancer mortality.”
He added: “We envision a blood test we could use once a year.”
Professor of oncology Bert Vogelstein said that although the test does not spot every cancer, it identifies many cancers that would likely otherwise go undetected.
However, Dr Richard Marais, Director of the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, cautioned that it is still not known how effective the test will be at detecting the disease in people who have no symptoms.
He said: “Detecting cancer early, before the disease has spread is one of the most powerful ways to improve cancer survival and this interesting research is a step towards being able to do this earlier than is currently possible.
“This study only looked at people who were already diagnosed with cancer, so we don’t yet know how effective it would be at picking up the disease in people who don’t have symptoms.
“We now need clinical trials to test its accuracy further as well as more research to work out why the test failed in 30% of patients and whether these tests can be extended to other cancers.
“Hopefully in the future we can develop a blood test such as this that can be used routinely in patients, perhaps once a year, to allow them to know earlier if they have cancer and to get them treated much sooner.”
The next ongoing step is to trial CancerSEEK on people who have not been diagnosed with cancer.
The findings have been published in the journal Science.
The once a year idea was mentioned in the Standard Media site.
The low rate of false positives was mentioned as a major plus in the Bio Tech In Asia site.
Again, it said:
"For example, if the pattern suggests a bowel cancer, then a colonoscopy is a logical next step. When blood samples were taken from over 800 apparently healthy controls, less than 1% scored a positive test. This means the test is rarely positive for people who don’t have cancer, thereby reducing the problem of overdiagnosis."
Dr Cristian Tomasetti, from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine said:
“This field of early detection is critical, and the results are very exciting."
“I think this can have an enormous impact on cancer mortality.”
“We envision a blood test we could use once a year.”
|This message is a reply to:|
| ||Message 160 by NoNukes, posted 01-21-2018 11:16 PM|| ||NoNukes has not yet responded|