NEWS
Multi-cancer blood tests set to improve outcomes
A single blood test, designed to pick up chemical signals indicative of the presence of many different types of cancer, could thwart progression to advanced disease while the malignancy is still at an early stage and amenable to treatment in up to half of cases, suggests a new study. Incorporating the test, formally known as a multi-cancer early detection test, or MCED for short, either yearly or biennially, could therefore improve outcomes for patients by intercepting disease progression, suggest the researchers in a modelling study published in the open access journal BMJ Open. Currently, only a few cancers can be
reliably screened for – those of the breast, bowel, cervix (neck of the womb), and lung for those at high risk. While effective at lowering death rates from these diseases, these screens can also result in false positive results and overdiagnosis, say the researchers.
The optimal interval at which screening will pick up the most cancers at an early stage (I and II) while at the same time avoiding unnecessary testing and treatment still isn’t clear. To inform future clinical trials, the
researchers drew on a previously published disease progression model for many different cancers. They used this to predict the impact of regular screening with an MCED test on the time of cancer diagnosis and patient death for different screening schedules among 50–79-year- olds in receipt of usual care. Cancer types included were those of the anus; bladder; breast; cervix; bowel/rectum; food pipe (oesophagus); gallbladder; head and neck; kidney; liver/ bile-duct; lung; ovary; pancreas; prostate; sarcoma (soft tissues/bone); stomach; thyroid; urothelial tract, and uterus, as well as leukaemia, lymphoma, melanoma, blood cancers (myeloid neoplasm, immune cell cancers (plasma cell neoplasm). Their analysis showed that all MCED screening intervals had more favourable early-stage diagnostic rates than usual care alone. n Rous B, Clarke CA, Hubbell E, et al. Assessment of the impact of multi- cancer early detection test screening intervals on late-stage cancer at diagnosis and mortality using a state-transition model. BMJ Open 2025;15:e086648. doi: 10.1136/ bmjopen-2024-086648
EDITOR’S COMMENT Gathering strands
Welcome to the June issue of Pathology in Practice, and with our fourth magazine of 2025 we mark the halfway point of the year – in publishing terms at least.
So far 2025 has brought with it a fair bit of upheaval and unpredictability, both in global terms and here in the UK for the NHS. Let’s hope the final part of the year brings some answers to the questions which have already been posed. While the global trade situation seems to hold some promise for solutions on the way, I’m not sure you’d find many people willing to bet everything will be sorted by the end of the year.
Closer to home though, it seems we will get to see the government’s Ten- Year Plan, hopefully along with some clarity on how exactly NHS England and its functions will be incorporated into the Department of Health and Social Care. It also seems that ICBs around the country are well into discussions about mergers and working groups as they aim to deliver the requested spending cuts. An unsettling time for many working in the nation’s health service, I can only hope that some certainly and forward progress are delivered sooner rather than later.
As we look forward to the second half of the year, the biennial IBMS Congress looms large. From this issue Pathology in Practice will be previewing
sections of the scientific programme on offer (see page 21), as well as the trade companies exhibiting at the event in our next issue – published at the start of August. Most recently I was privileged to be the guest of the BSMT at its 40th Annual Microbiology Conference held last month. My thanks to the committee and congratulations to new Chair David Westrip, who takes over the role from Dr Mark Wilks.
This issue has a strong genomics strand running through it – pun certainly intended – with pieces looking at the benefits of moving NGS in-house for faster results, the second in James Henry’s series on population health management, and a snapshot of current research in the field of metagenomics in the Literature Update feature. Incidentally, James Henry is currently looking for sponsorship or job opportunities to help fund his continued work in this area – please read his piece in this issue and his contact details are included if you are in a position to assist. We’re also pleased to bring you the latest in Stephen MacDonald’s very popular series on risk-based quality control, as well as a look at how a new partnership has boosted evaluation of novel light transmission aggregometry, and more besides. Enjoy the issue.
andymyall@pathologyinpractice.com
Roche invests $550m in US diagnostics hub
Roche has announced plans to invest up to US $550 million in its diagnostics manufacturing site in Indianapolis by 2030. Indianapolis serves as the North American headquarters for Roche Diagnostics, part of the Roche Group – the world’s largest biotech company. This latest expansion underscores Roche’s commitment to advancing science, driving innovation, and delivering cutting- edge solutions that improve patient outcomes. It follows the recent news that the company plans to invest US $50 billion into the United States of America over the next five years The Indianapolis campus houses key operations, including US research and development, laboratories, manufacturing, distribution, IT and administrative
WWW.PATHOLOGYINPRACTICE.COM JUNE 2025
functions. It currently produces approximately 5.2 billion Accu-Chek diabetes test strips annually and serves as one of two global distribution hubs focused on serving the US market and supporting distribution to 53 countries worldwide.
The site will become a
major hub for the manufacturing of Roche’s continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems. The expansion is expected to generate hundreds of highly-skilled manufacturing jobs and thousands of construction jobs, providing a significant boost to Indiana’s economy. It will also enhance domestic production capabilities and reduce dependency on imports – aligning with national efforts to strengthen local manufacturing.
7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
