A simple blood draw could one day tell doctors much more about a person’s cancer than many current blood tests can.
Researchers at Karolinska Institutet say the key may be to look at several cancer-related signals in the same blood sample instead of searching for only one.
The researchers described this developing approach in a review article published in Genome Medicine. The article brings together recent research on how blood-based cancer testing could become more detailed and useful.
Doctors traditionally learn about a tumor by removing a small piece of tissue and examining it in a laboratory. These tissue biopsies can provide valuable information, but they are invasive and may be difficult to repeat many times.
Blood tests offer another possibility. Tumors can release tiny amounts of biological material into the bloodstream, including pieces of DNA and RNA, and scientists can search for these traces using a method often called a liquid biopsy.
Liquid biopsies are attractive because collecting blood is usually easier and less invasive than removing tissue from an organ. They may also allow doctors to take repeated samples and watch how a cancer changes during treatment.
However, cancer is complicated. A test that searches for only one genetic change or one other signal may miss important information, particularly when only a tiny amount of tumor material is circulating in the blood.
The Karolinska researchers reviewed a newer strategy designed to solve this problem. They call it multifeature sequencing-based liquid biopsy, or MSLB.
The basic idea is straightforward even though the technology is complex. Instead of relying on one clue, researchers collect several kinds of information from the same blood sample and combine them to build a broader picture.
One source of information is cell-free DNA. When cells die, small pieces of their DNA can enter the bloodstream, and cancer cells can contribute some of these fragments.
Scientists can examine DNA for changes linked to tumors. They can also study the length and pattern of DNA fragments, changes involving chromosomes, and chemical marks attached to DNA.
One important chemical signal is DNA methylation. These chemical marks help control how genes behave, and cancer can create unusual methylation patterns that may provide clues about whether a tumor is present and sometimes where it began.
RNA can add another layer of information. RNA helps cells use genetic instructions, and unusual RNA patterns may reveal changes in the activity of cancer cells.
By combining several signals, researchers hope to improve the chances of finding cancer-related changes that might be too weak or unclear when examined alone. Mariano A. Molina Beitia of Karolinska Institutet said this could provide a more complete view of cancer biology.
The review describes studies that have already combined information such as DNA methylation, DNA fragment size and chromosome changes. Some have reported promising results for detecting several cancers at earlier stages.
But combining all this information creates another challenge: enormous amounts of data. Researchers are therefore using advanced computer methods and machine learning to find patterns that may distinguish cancer-related signals from normal biological variation.
Despite the excitement, the technology is not ready to become a routine cancer test. Many studies have involved relatively small or selected groups of patients, so promising results need to be tested in much larger groups that better represent people seen in everyday healthcare.
Different laboratories may also collect, store and analyze blood in different ways. Without common standards, a method that performs well at one research center may not produce exactly the same results somewhere else.
Daniel Hagey of Karolinska Institutet said standardized procedures, independent testing and evidence of real benefits for patients will be needed before the approach can be widely adopted. A technically impressive test is useful only if it helps doctors make better decisions and improves care.
The researchers believe monitoring people who already have cancer may be one of the first practical uses. Repeated blood samples could potentially show whether treatment is working, whether a tumor is changing or whether signs of disease remain after therapy.
This may be particularly valuable when repeated tissue biopsies are difficult, risky or uncomfortable. A blood sample could offer doctors a more convenient way to follow the disease over time.
The review is encouraging because it shows how several rapidly developing areas of cancer research may work together. Yet it is important to remember that this paper reviews existing evidence rather than reporting a single clinical trial proving that one universal blood test can already detect cancer reliably.
The biggest promise of the approach is its breadth. Cancer leaves many biological traces, and reading several of them together could eventually provide a richer picture than depending on one signal alone.
For now, the findings should be viewed as a roadmap for future research rather than a replacement for existing cancer screening or biopsy. Larger studies, common testing standards and proof that the approach improves patient outcomes will determine whether this vision of a powerful cancer blood test becomes part of everyday medicine.
If you care about cancer, please read studies that artificial sweeteners are linked to higher cancer risk, and how drinking milk affects risks of heart disease and cancer.
For more health information, please see recent studies about the best time to take vitamins to prevent heart disease, and results showing vitamin D supplements strongly reduces cancer death.
