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-

Abstract 783: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy and applicability of blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) in the general population

Abstract 784: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of tumor origin detection in blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) in the general population

Abstract LB100: Performance of a multi-analyte, multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood test in a prospectively-collected cohort

Abstract 1266: Development and performance of a multi-cancer early detection test utilizing plasma cfDNA fragmentomics: A large-scale, prospective, multicenter study

Abstract 1269: Large-scale validaton studies of a blood-based effective and affordable test for multicancer early detection

Abstract P057: Application of multi-cancer early detection to lung and breast cancer screening populations

Abstract 2141: Development of a highly-sensitive targeted cell-free DNA epigenomic assay for early-stage multi-cancer screening

Abstract 4784: PATHFINDER 2: A prospective study to evaluate safety and performance of a multi-cancer early detection test in a population setting

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

Blood-based tests for multicancer early detection (PATHFINDER): a prospective cohort study

Abstract 3895: Prognostic significance of blood-based multi-cancer detection in cell-free DNA: 4-year outcomes analysis

Abstract 3891: Early real-world experience with repeat multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing

Abstract 631: Validation of a panel of methylated DNA and protein markers for multi-cancer detection in plasma

The detection of multiple cancer types with an extended set of methylation and protein markers.

Multi-cancer early detection: searching for evidence

Cancer screening with multicancer detection tests: A translational science review

Abstract 7314: Technological and economic values of an AI-based pre-screening multi-cancer early detection (MCED) liquid-biopsy test as a companion system for a cancer screening solution

Abstract 1264: A targeted methylation-based multi-cancer early detection blood test preferentially detects high-grade prostate cancer and minimizes overdiagnosis

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

Abstract 2610: A High Performance Blood Test for Multiple Cancer Early Screening

Abstract 6093: Evaluation of preanalytical and physiological variables affecting cfDNA-based multi-cancer early detection test