Can liquid biopsy tests replace routine screenings?

"Multiple cancer early detection tests" (MCED), or commonly known as "liquid biopsy", one of the most talked about technological breakthroughs in the medical world in recent years, has brought great hope but also serious clinical discussions. It is questioned whether these tests, which are based on detecting microscopic DNA fragments released into the bloodstream by growing tumors, can replace vital screenings such as routine mammography and colonoscopy.

ZERO CASES IN 500 FIREFIGHTERS: "NEGATIVE" RESULTS CREATE A FAKE SENSE OF SECURITY

Dr., who runs a cancer screening program on firefighters exposed to toxins in Arizona. Vershalee Shukla explained that they were able to detect less than a dozen cases in nearly 10 thousand liquid biopsy tests they performed in the last 5 years.

Although the results of all 500 firefighters whose blood samples were taken in a week were "negative", this led to a dangerous situation. Trusting the test results, firefighters gave up routine colonoscopies and lung scans. Dr. With the two-year effort of Shukla and his team, 15 active cancer cases were detected in the same group, which was persuaded to undergo routine screening again. Experts emphasize that a negative test does not mean that the body is completely clean.

OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM THE MANUFACTURER: IT IS NOT AN ALTERNATIVE TO ROUTINE SCANNINGS

Officials of the company that produces the liquid biopsy test Galleri also made a statement on the subject: "It is clearly stated in our test materials that Galleri is not an alternative to routine screenings and should be used 'in addition' to standard tests."

Oncologists warn that not every tumor found in the early stages is lethal, and that some slow-growing tissues can lead to unnecessary surgery, biopsies and psychological devastation (the "care cascade").

IT DOES NOT REPLACE COLONOSCOPY AND MAMMOGRAPHY

Neurosurgeons who tried the blood test on themselves and whose results were negative; It reports that these $1,000 tests do not yet have long-term clinical evidence that they "save lives."

Experts; It declares that traditional screening methods (colonoscopy and mammography) applied in areas such as breast, cervix, colorectal, lung and prostate have been proven to save lives, while liquid biopsy technologies have not yet reached this level of clinical evidence.