PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Nature Medicine· 2026Q1

Performance and safety of a multi-cancer early detection test: the PATHFINDER 2 study

Nima Nabavizadeh, Charles McDonnell, Dax Kurbegov, Marc Matrana et al.

Short summary

The PATHFINDER 2 study found a multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood test achieved a 0.54% cancer detection rate and 91.3% cancer signal origin (CSO) prediction accuracy in 32,007 participants aged 50+, with 99.64% specificity and no serious study-related adverse events reported.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • MCED test detected cancer in 0.54% of 32,007 participants aged 50+.
  • Positive predictive value was 60.3%, negative predictive value was 99.2%, and specificity was 99.64%.
  • Episode sensitivity was 39.3% for all cancers and 69.8% for a prespecified 12-cancer subgroup.
  • Cancer signal origin (CSO) prediction accuracy was 91.3%.
  • 0.6% of participants underwent invasive procedures post-positive test, with 90.5% being nonsurgical; no serious adverse events were reported.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Abstract Early cancer detection improves survival; however, most cancer types do not have guideline-recommended screening. We previously reported the first PATHFINDER study that established feasibility of cancer screening with a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test that predicts cancer signal origin (CSO) to guide diagnostic workup. The prospective, interventional PATHFINDER 2 study expands clinical evidence for the MCED test by evaluating co-primary endpoints of MCED performance metrics and safety in participants aged 50 years or older without clinical suspicion of cancer. Performance measures included cancer detection rate, positive and negative predictive values, episode sensitivity, specificity and CSO prediction accuracy. Safety was evaluated in terms of number and type of invasive procedures performed and adverse events due to diagnostic testing, after 12 months of follow-up. Endpoints were analyzed descriptively; no hypothesis testing was performed. Between December 2021 and July 2024, 35,878 participants were enrolled. Among 32,007 performance-analyzable participants, cancer detection rate was 0.54% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47−0.63%), positive predictive value was 60.3% (95% CI: 54.5−65.8%), negative predictive value was 99.2% (95% CI: 99.1−99.3%) and specificity was 99.64% (95% CI: 99.57−99.70%). Episode sensitivity was 39.3% (95% CI: 34.9−44.0%; all cancers) and 69.8% (95% CI: 62.8−76.0%; prespecified 12-cancer subgroup). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 108.9 (95% CI: 87.6−135.2) and 0.61 (95% CI: 0.56−0.66), respectively, and the number needed to screen to detect one cancer was 185 (95% CI: 159−215). CSO prediction accuracy was 91.3%. Among 35,335 safety-analyzable participants, 213 (0.6%) had invasive procedure(s) after a positive MCED test; 90.5% were nonsurgical. No serious study-related adverse events were reported by the time of this analysis. These results provide insights into performance and safety of the MCED test in an intended-use population. Randomized trials and longer follow-up are needed to assess the clinical utility of MCED tests. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05155605 .

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Nature Medicine, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysIn the app
Ask the paperIn the app

The rest is in the Pofolia app

Takeaways and questions to the paper; new summaries every day for your field. Free.

Sign in on the web to open

Field: Oncology

OncologyMedicine