Universal cancer screening: revolutionary, rational, and realizable
Open accessAbstract
Cancer remains the second leading cause of mortality worldwide, and overall cancer-related deaths are increasing. Despite the survival benefit from early detection, screening has to date targeted only those few organs that harbor tumors of sufficient prevalence to show cost-effectiveness at population levels, leaving most cancer types unscreened. In this perspective overview, a case is made for universal cancer screening as a logical and more inclusive approach with potentially high impact. The centrally important conceptual drivers to universal screening are biological and epidemiological. The shared biology of tumor marker release into a common distant medium, like blood, can be exploited for multi-cancer detection from a single test. And, by aggregating prevalence rates, universal screening allows all cancers (including less common ones) to be included as targets, increases screening efficiency and integration across tumor types, and potentially improves cost-effectiveness over single-organ approaches. The identification of new tumor marker classes with both broad expression across tumor types and site-prediction, remarkable advances in assay technologies, and compelling early clinical data increase the likelihood of actualizing this new paradigm. Multi-organ screening could be achieved by targeting markers within or stemming from the circulation (including blood, urine, saliva, and expired breath) or those exfoliated into common excretory pathways (including the gastrointestinal and female reproductive tracts). Rigorous clinical studies in intended use populations and collaborations between academia, industry, professional societies, and government will be required to bring this lofty vision to a population application.
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
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.
Cites
Detection and localization of surgically resectable cancers with a multi-analyte blood test
Cohen, J. D., Li, L., Wang, Y., Thoburn, C., Afsari, B., Danilova, L., Douville, C., Javed, A. A., Wong, F., Mattox, A., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aar3247 · Cited by 2,783 · see citing works
Hoadley, K. A., Yau, C., Hinoue, T., Wolf, D. M., Lazar, A. J., Drill, E., Shen, R., Taylor, A. M., Cherniack, A. D., Thorsson, V., et al. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.022 · Cited by 2,546 · see citing works
An ultrasensitive method for quantitating circulating tumor DNA with broad patient coverage
Newman, A. M., Bratman, S. V., To, J., Wynne, J. F., Eclov, N. C. W., Modlin, L. A., Liu, C. L., Neal, J. W., Wakelee, H. A., Merritt, R. E., et al. (2014) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm.3519 · Cited by 2,220 · see citing works
Multitarget Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal-Cancer Screening
Imperiale, T. F., Ransohoff, D. F., Itzkowitz, S. H., Levin, T. R., Lavin, P., Lidgard, G. P., Ahlquist, D. A., & Berger, B. M. (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1311194 · Cited by 1,900 · see citing works
Self-citationDetection of endometrial cancer via molecular analysis of DNA collected with vaginal tampons.
Bakkum-Gamez, J. N., Wentzensen, N., Maurer, M. J., Hawthorne, K. M., Voss, J. S., Kroneman, T. N., Famuyide, A. O., Clayton, A. C., Halling, K. C., Kerr, S. E., et al. (2015) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.552 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Artificial Intelligence and Early Detection of Pancreatic Cancer: 2020 Summative Review
Kenner, B., Chari, S. T., Kelsen, D., Klimstra, D. S., Pandol, S. J., Rosenthal, M., Rustgi, A. K., Taylor, J. A., Yala, A., Abul-Husn, N., et al. (2021) · Pancreas · doi:10.1097/mpa.0000000000001762 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ahlquist, D. A.
- Affiliations
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ahlquist, David A.
- ORCID
- Ahlquist, David A.
- Venue
- npj Precision Oncology
- Published
- 2018-10-29
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-23
- ISSN
- 2397-768X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6206005
- OpenAlex
- W2894042407
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8
- FWCI
- 0.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- npj Precision Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- multi-cancer early detection, tumor markers, liquid biopsy, blood-based biomarkers, cost-effectiveness, rare tumor, breath biomarkers, cancer mortality
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