Back

The Impact of Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests on Cancer Mortality: A 10-Year Microsimulation Model

Xiao, J.; ElHabr, A. K.; Tyson, C.; Cao, X.; Fendrick, A. M.; Ozbay, A. B.; Limburg, P.; Beer, T. M.; Deshmukh, A. A.; Chhatwal, J.

2026-05-06 oncology
10.64898/2026.05.05.26351205 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeEarly detection of cancer can improve survival following diagnosis. However, routine screening is limited to a few cancer types. Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests could substantially expand cancer screening by simultaneously detecting multiple cancer types. This modeling study evaluates the potential impact of an MCED test on cancer outcomes in the US general population. MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model of 14 solid tumor cancer types which account for nearly 80% of cancer incidence and mortality. The model was calibrated to reproduce annual incidence rates reported in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer diagnosis could arise from standard-of-care (SoC) procedures or annual MCED testing. MCED sensitivities were derived from a case-control clinical validation study. We simulated the 10-year life course of 5 million US adults aged 50-84 years. The primary outcome was cancer mortality reduction due to MCED testing. ResultsIn the best case with perfect uptake and adherence, MCED testing added to the SoC led to a 23% decrease in 10-year cancer mortality relative to the SoC alone, translating to 668,600 cancer deaths averted over 10 years. The largest mortality reductions, in absolute terms, were observed for lung (160; 802 versus 962 per 100,000), colorectal (118; 168 versus 284), and pancreatic (50; 238 versus 288) cancer. The largest relative reductions were in cervical (52%), colorectal (41%), and breast (34%) cancer. The population-level life-year gain was 7,158 years per 100,000. ConclusionMCED testing has the potential to substantially reduce cancer-related deaths, improve outcomes across multiple cancer types.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.0%
2
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
9.8%
3
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
4
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 35%
4.7%
6
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
7
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.8%
8
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.8%
50% of probability mass above
9
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.8%
10
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 23%
3.8%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.5%
12
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.5%
14
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.6%
15
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
17
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
18
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.3%
19
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.2%
20
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
21
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
22
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
23
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
25
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
26
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Annals of Epidemiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
29
Breast Cancer Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
30
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%