Abstract:According to the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide and is responsible for more than 10 million deaths each year [1]. Most deaths are due to lung cancer (about 18.0 % of all cancer deaths), followed by colorectal cancer (9.2 %), liver cancer (8.3 %) and stomach cancer (7.7 %). Two other important aspects of cancer biology are that almost half of all cancer deaths are potentially preventable [2], and that therapeutic opportunities are greater and survival better when cancer is detected at an early stage [3]. These straightforward concepts lead to the obvious conclusion that cost-effective screening is the best strategy in humanity's ongoing battle against cancer. There are already a number of examples of established population screening programs that have been implemented, such as mammography (for breast cancer), cytology and HPV (for cervical cancer), fecal occult blood testing (for colorectal cancer), while others have been implemented in different countries with varying degrees of success (e.g., PSA for prostate cancer, HCV for liver cancer). The so-called multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test has been recently proposed as an innovative and potentially ground-breaking strategy for screening a wide range of cancers. GRAIL, one of the diagnostics companies that has invested more in this direction, is now marketing a test (called Galleri) that is designed to "detect cancer signals and predict where in the body the cancer signal is located" [4]. As can be read on the company's website, it also states: "The Galleri test has not been cleared or approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration". According to the company, the current version of the test can detect a signal of over 50 (51 to be precise) cancers, by evaluating DNA fragments (especially circulating cell-free DNA [cfDNA]) in the bloodstream and complementing these measurements with a machine learning algorithm designed to distinguishing between healthy or cancer cell origin. The first results of the practical application of MCED by Galleri were recently published in the Lancet [5]. In this prospective cohort study, 6,662 participants were initially recruited, of whom 6,621 were eventually included in the statistical analysis. The cumulative detection rate of cancer was 1.38 % (92/6,662), while no cancer signal was detected in the remaining part of the population. The cumulative performance of the assay, as summarized in Table 1, was derived from the data reported in the article, i.e., 35 true positive cases, 57 false positive cases, 6,235 true negative cases, 86 false negative cases (208 cases did not reach the end of the study). Despite remarkably high accuracy (up to 97.8 %) and specificity (99.1 %), this test has low sensitivity (28.9 %) and a corresponding negative likelihood ratio LR − of 0.72. This means that this test is neither theoretically able to absolutely rule out the presence of cancer, since then the LR − should be less than 0.1, nor is it able to always detect cancer (signals) early due to the low sensitivity (28.9 %) [6]. Clinical performance of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) for early detection of over 50 types of cancer in asymptomatic subjects as calculated from reference [5]. A recent opinion paper published in the journal by Chatanaka and colleagues [7], expresses a series of practical, clinical and economical considerations about the test and the first available results. These comments, which are not necessarily shared by the members of the Editorial Board of the journal, criticize unsatisfactory clinical performance, emphasize the interim review of the British National Health Service (NHS)-Galleri trial which led to postponement of the planned large-scale pilot program in NHS clinical practice until final results of the trial become available, and calculate the balance between cost and effectiveness, concluding that implementation of this test for the entire lifetime of US residents would generate a cost that "is approx. eight times higher than the budget of the US Government". A paper published in the British Medical Journal reported serious concerns raised by some scientists, including Mike Richards, the chair of the independent UK National Screening Committee, who highlighted the current lack of evidence "on whether the benefits of testing outweigh any potential harms and at reasonable cost." [8] In addition, another paper published in New England Journal of Medicine reported other concerns on the introduction of this test in clinical practice "without evidence that such tests can reduce cancer-related mortality – preferably evidence derived from trials in which commercial entities don't influence final decisions regarding design or conduct and aren't involved in data management or analysis" [9]. While there is certainly an unmet medical need for a comprehensive MCED test, only further -Abstract Truncated-

Modelled mortality benefits of multi-cancer early detection screening in England

Effect of multi-cancer early detection screening on late-stage cancers: A modeling study.

Clinical performance and utility: A microsimulation model to inform the design of screening trials for a multi-cancer early detection test

Estimating the population health impact of a multi-cancer early detection genomic blood test to complement existing screening in the US and UK

A general two-stage progressive model of cancer natural history to project downstaging due to multi-cancer screening tests

Intention to have blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) screening: a cross-sectional population-based survey in England

An Exploratory Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of a Multi-cancer Early Detection Blood Test Compared with Standard of Care Screening in Ontario, Canada

Integrating Multi-Cancer Early Detection (MCED) Tests with Standard Cancer Screening: System Dynamics Model Development and Feasibility Testing

Shifting the Cancer Screening Paradigm: Developing a Multi-Biomarker Class Approach to Multi-Cancer Early Detection Testing

Contributions of early detection and cancer prevention to colorectal cancer mortality reduction by screening colonoscopy: a validated modelling study

Modeling the population health impact of incorporating a multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test to existing cancer screening among immunocompromised individuals

The modeling of multicancer early detection (MCED) tests’ residual risk and the challenges of MCED evaluation and implementation

Projecting the impact of multi-cancer early detection on late-stage incidence using multi-state disease modeling

Multi-year clinical outcomes of cancers diagnosed following detection by a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test

Randomized trials of multicancer screening tests: augmenting their ability to identify a genuine mortality benefit

Attitudes to multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests for population-based screening: A qualitative study in Great Britain

Long-term clinical outcomes of cancers diagnosed following detection by a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test.

Economic Analysis of Combined Multi-Cancer Detection Blood Test and Usual Care.

Multi-cancer early detection: searching for evidence

High-sensitive Multi-Cancers Early Detection for 8 Cancer Types by Cell-Free DNA Targeted Methylation Sequencing: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Pre-malignant conditions diagnosed following a positive cancer signal from a multi-cancer early detection test