MCED tests are here to stay. But with sparse mortality data, how should primary care proceed? Dr Kenny Lin offers practical guidance on how to evaluate benefits, harms, and next steps.
Hi, everyone. I’m Dr Kenny Lin. I am a family physician and associate director of the Lancaster General Hospital Family Medicine Residency, and I blog atIn the past decade or so that I have been giving lectures on cancer screening at family medicine review courses, not much has changed.
We screen for breast, cervical, andin large numbers of people. We screen for lung cancer in current or past smokers over 50 years of age with at least a 20 pack-year history. We discuss the potential benefits and harms of screening forwith older males. But these five cancer types represent a distinct minority of cancers. A 2022 study estimated that onlycases in the United States are caught by any of these screening tests, and 57% of cancers have no recommended screening tests, meaning that they are usually not detected until advanced stages.that aims to fill the early detection gap by detecting cell-free DNA signals associated with cancer. At $949 per test, the Galleri test is advertised as being able to detect more than 50 cancer types in adults aged 50 years or older. Other companies are developing. If they haven’t already, family physicians will soon be asked to order multicancer early detection tests for patients or act on their results. So, what do we know about their benefits and harms? And what remains uncertain? A systematic review published in May 2025 by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found that the evidence for MCED tests consists mostly offor early-stage cancers. There is little data on harms such as false alarms, incidental findings, and unnecessary diagnostic procedures and treatments; in one study,associated with a positive MCED result was small and returned to baseline by 12 months, regardless of whether cancer was confirmed. To be effective, MCED tests must accurately detect cancer in asymptomatic people at stages early enough to decrease harm or increase benefits . Already under-resourced primary care practices would need to develop new workflows to work up patients with positive tests and determine when to refer them to oncologists. Special Communication, screening experts argued that since MCED screening “would entail tremendous costs and potentially substantial harms", it should not be implemented until a randomized trial reports it reduces all-cause mortality.that a trial showing fewer cancer-related deaths, such as one being planned by the National Cancer Institute, would be sufficient. An ongoing trial of Galleri in more than 140,000 UK National Health Service patients expects to report effects on cancer stage-shift as early as next year, though it appears to have. Important points include communicating uncertainty about benefits and harms, emphasizing that patients with negative results should continue to have all screenings recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force, and first evaluating patients with positive results for cancer at the predicted tissue of origin , then ordering total body PET-CT scans if the tissue of origin is unknown or the initial workup is unrevealing. Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our
Malignant Breast Neoplasm Breast Carcinoma Cancer Malignant Neoplasia Carcinoma Malignant Neoplasm Colorectal Cancer Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Lung Cancer Lung Carcinoma Cancer Of The Lung Prostate Carcinoma Malignant Prostate Neoplasm Prostate Cancer Cancer Of The Prostate Primary Care Fellowship Fellows Preventive Screening Screening UK National Health Service
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Cancer Survivors Are Skipping the Primary Care DoctorYounger survivors are less likely to see a primary care clinician, raising concern about worsening trends of cancer diagnoses among younger adults.
Read more »
Primary Care Doctor Pay Hits $330,000 As Workload MountsPrimary care physician compensation hit $300,000 last year as today’s doctors see heavier workloads due to a shortage of medical care providers.
Read more »
Could Simple EMR Advisories Be Enough to Boost Hypertension Detection in Primary Care?Discover why customizable blood pressure alerts in EMRs, combined with team-based workflows, may be key to catching more untreated hypertension cases.
Read more »
Colorado Medicaid to pay for collaborative work to bring mental health into primary careThe model involves a mental health professional working in primary care clinics, with a psychiatrist available to consult about patients’ needs, possibly via telehealth.
Read more »
Should Primary Care Physicians Offer Cosmetic Procedures?Dr Charles Runels offers this advice to PCPs: If you practice primary care, cosmetic injections can help you finance your bad habit of taking care of sick people.
Read more »
Identifying, Referring Cataracts in Primary CareCataracts can happen at any age, but risk is heightened in older adults and people with diabetes.
Read more »