The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Blood-based tests for multicancer early detection (PATHFINDER): a prospective cohort study
Open accessAbstract
Background: Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests can detect a cancer signal from circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA). PATHFINDER was a prospective cohort study evaluating the feasibility of MCED testing for cancer screening. Methods: Between December 2019 and December 2020, a convenience sample of 6662 adults ≥50 years without signs or symptoms of cancer consented to MCED testing. Blood was collected, cfDNA analyzed, and results returned to participants’ physicians. If a cancer signal was detected, predicted cancer signal origins (CSOs) informed diagnostic evaluation. The primary outcome was time to, and extent of, diagnostic testing required to confirm the presence or absence of cancer. Findings: Cancer signal was detected in 92 (1.4%) of 6621 participants with analyzable results. There were 35/92 true positive (TP) and 57/92 false positive (FP) results. Excluding two participants whose diagnostic evaluations began before MCED test results were reported, median time to diagnostic resolution was 79 days (IQR 37–219): 57 (33–143) in TP and 162 (44–248) in FP participants. Most had both laboratory tests (26/33, 79% TP; 50/57, 88% FP) and imaging (30/33, 91% TP; 53/57, 93% FP). Fewer procedures were performed in FP (17/57, 30%) than TP (27/33, 82%) and few had surgery (one in FP; three in TP). Interpretation: This study supports the feasibility of MCED screening for cancer and underscores the need for further research evaluating its clinical utility. Funding: GRAIL, LLC, Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., Wagle, N. S., & Jemal, A. (2023) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21763 · Cited by 16,303
Hallmarks of Cancer: New Dimensions
Hanahan, D. (2022) · Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-21-1059 · Cited by 9,887
Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
US Preventive Services Task Force, Krist, A. H., Davidson, K. W., Mangione, C. M., Barry, M. J., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Doubeni, C. A., et al. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1117 · Cited by 1,816
Liu, M. C., Oxnard, G. R., Klein, E. A., Swanton, C., Seiden, M. V., Liu, M. C., Oxnard, G. R., Klein, E. A., Smith, D., Richards, D., et al. (2020) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2020.02.011 · Cited by 1,495
Self-citationGenome-wide cell-free DNA fragmentation in patients with cancer
Cristiano, S., Leal, A., Phallen, J., Fiksel, J., Adleff, V., Bruhm, D. C., Jensen, S. Ø., Medina, J. E., Hruban, C., White, J. R., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1272-6 · Cited by 1,476
Results of Initial Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening for Lung Cancer
The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1209120 · Cited by 1,088
Klein, E. A., Richards, D., Cohn, A., Tummala, M., Lapham, R., Cosgrove, D., Chung, G., Clement, J., Gao, J., Hunkapiller, N., et al. (2021) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.806 · Cited by 995
Self-citationMenon, U., Gentry-Maharaj, A., Hallett, R., Ryan, A., Burnell, M., Sharma, A., Lewis, S., Davies, S., Philpott, S., Lopes, A., et al. (2009) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(09)70026-9 · Cited by 829
Lehman, C. D., Arao, R. F., Sprague, B. L., Lee, J. M., Buist, D. S. M., Kerlikowske, K., Henderson, L. M., Onega, T., Tosteson, A. N. A., Rauscher, G. H., et al. (2017) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2016161174 · Cited by 665
Feasibility of blood testing combined with PET-CT to screen for cancer and guide intervention
Lennon, A. M., Buchanan, A. H., Kinde, I., Warren, A., Honushefsky, A., Cohain, A. T., Ledbetter, D. H., Sanfilippo, F., Sheridan, K., Rosica, D., et al. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb9601 · Cited by 657
Cited by
Minimal residual disease as a target for liquid biopsy in patients with solid tumours
Pantel, K., & Alix-Panabières, C. (2025) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-024-00967-y · Cited by 146
Metadata
- Authors
- Schrag, D., Beer, T. M., McDonnell, C. H., Nadauld, L., Dilaveri, C. A., Reid, R., Marinac, C. R., Chung, K. C., Lopatin, M., Fung, E. T., & Klein, E. A.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-10
- Volume
- 402
- Issue
- 10409
- Pages
- 1251-1260
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W4387381160
- Cited by
- 396
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 38.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Blood-based tests for multicancer early detection (PATHFINDER): a prospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)01700-2
- The paper
- Schrag, D., Beer, T. M., McDonnell, C. H., Nadauld, L., Dilaveri, C. A., Reid, R., Marinac, C. R., Chung, K. C., Lopatin, M., Fung, E. T., & Klein, E. A. (2023). Blood-based tests for multicancer early detection (PATHFINDER): a prospective cohort study. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)01700-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
