Cancer: Blood test for 50 types to be trialled by NHS
27/11/2020 | news | health | 147
More than 165,000 people in England will be offered the tests from next year.
1
27/11/2020 10:29:49 35 3
bbc
If proven effective this test could be of huge benefit to patients and health care organisations worldwide. Well done the scientists once again.
2
27/11/2020 10:30:33 30 1
bbc
This could be great news. A friend of mine in his late 50s is now in his last weeks, full of morphine, with a bile duct cancer which presented no significant symptoms until it was too advanced to treat.
3
27/11/2020 10:30:43 18 2
bbc
How do you sign up for the trial

Sounds another magnificent leap forward
69
27/11/2020 11:42:02 1 0
bbc
It mentions offering to 165,000 people so presumably this will be done as part of the current screening/testing processes. If we know that people are susceptable or have cancer already diagnosed presumably the test could confirm that and by dint of this prove its own worth.
4
dan
27/11/2020 10:31:13 15 3
bbc
HOW DOES ONE APPLY FOR THE TEST TRIAL?
9
27/11/2020 10:33:55 8 1
bbc
I'd like to know that too.
27
27/11/2020 10:42:19 3 1
bbc
I'd like to know too. I would happily volunteer to take part.
5
27/11/2020 10:32:54 43 3
bbc
The parent company that owns Grail are the one of the biggest genetic biotech companies in the world. They have been part of the human genome project, mapped out and gave out free the genome of covid and have always had partnerships with many medical research charities over the years.
This new development will end up saving not only lives but money for the NHS.
Yet are probably the target of many conspiracy theories from Brexiteer/Antivaxxer/climate change denier types. Removed
118
27/11/2020 13:19:30 0 1
bbc
It won’t save money. Screening is expensive and funds will have to be diverted from other areas of medicine and other treatments. Screening is also very inaccurate. GPS will tell you privately that the best way to manage conditions is to be vigilant and see your GP soonest.
6
27/11/2020 10:33:12 23 1
bbc
Routine screening for cancers could save a lot of anguish and could save the NHS a lot of money n the long run, but it needs to be used judiciously

Scientists now think cancer cells crop up regularly in all of us but are killed by our immune systems before they cause problems

Someone with a raised PSA (Prostate cancer test) may never develop cancer. Monitoring is often the best course of action
61
27/11/2020 11:30:11 6 0
bbc
You are correct, cancer is an inevitable side effect of mitosis, but the test will allow doctors to target monitoring.
119
27/11/2020 13:21:23 0 4
bbc
What about if your test is positive and you have all the anguish of thinking you have cancer and you don’t? With some screening methods already used, the false positives are very high and the harm of that and its consequences outweighs the benefits.
7
27/11/2020 10:33:38 20 4
bbc
How long before someone claims this is a new method for the deep state/illuminati/Bill Gates to control us??
26
Bob
27/11/2020 10:59:41 5 2
bbc
Best check if David I**e and his crew have picked up on it yet
8
27/11/2020 10:33:48 3 6
bbc
The dynamics of this are very different to those of an infectious disease.

Testing for cancer can result in a lot of stress, particularly given the inevitable false positives. This is why many medics can be reluctant to support mass screening programs.
4
dan
27/11/2020 10:31:13 15 3
bbc
HOW DOES ONE APPLY FOR THE TEST TRIAL?
9
27/11/2020 10:33:55 8 1
bbc
I'd like to know that too.
10
27/11/2020 10:34:15 7 1
bbc
I volunteer as tribute!
5
27/11/2020 10:32:54 43 3
bbc
The parent company that owns Grail are the one of the biggest genetic biotech companies in the world. They have been part of the human genome project, mapped out and gave out free the genome of covid and have always had partnerships with many medical research charities over the years.
This new development will end up saving not only lives but money for the NHS.
Yet are probably the target of many conspiracy theories from Brexiteer/Antivaxxer/climate change denier types. Removed
17
27/11/2020 10:46:42 7 4
bbc
Antivaxers might well want to justify their existence with conspiracy theories against these companies. But Brexiteers and climate change deniers wouldn’t have an axe to grind with this.
35
27/11/2020 11:05:44 8 2
bbc
From what I can see on this comment thread, you are the only conspiracy theorist here.
63
27/11/2020 11:31:05 2 1
bbc
Antivaxers probably, the other 2 not sure how that would have any relevance except I guess there is an element over over population involved in climate change
12
27/11/2020 10:39:48 8 7
bbc
What needs to happen is demonstrable evidence of how early detection gives better outcomes.

One example: Prostate cancer. Detect is early, and surgery is much more likely to succeed.

Detect it later, and you can be kept alive, by chemical castration. Many so-called "advances" in prostate cancer treatment merely suppress testosterone more effectively. The side effects are deeply problematic.
15
27/11/2020 10:44:30 3 10
bbc
Thank you for your doom ridden analysis Dr Webman
62
27/11/2020 11:30:46 1 0
bbc
Not for me. A bloodtest every year or two to remove the fear of a range of unseen cancers possibly growing inside me far outweighs the risk of an unlikely chemical castration (which I'd take if there was no alternative).
13
27/11/2020 10:40:00 8 20
bbc
"More than 165,000 people in England will be offered the tests from next year"

I really hope this is true, but given the combination of C19 & Tory handling of it, plus their budget slashing to fund projects like HS2, I don't see this becoming a reality
21
ca
27/11/2020 10:52:19 14 3
bbc
It's being paid for by the drug company as a large scale pilot (stated in the article!)
29
27/11/2020 11:01:32 1 4
bbc
oooh nice Tory dig

Did you not read the article, or ingnore bit its drug company lead so you could get your dig in anyway?
68
27/11/2020 11:11:53 0 0
bbc
Non sense ! The NHS has more money than eva under Boris and his GLORIOS leader ship ! And theyres more nurses than eva AND they have an extra £350 billions a week now were out of the failed ue supper state ! But you and the so called bbc cant accept that becuase it doesnt suite your agender ! Lern to reed !
14
lwj
27/11/2020 10:43:18 16 1
bbc
There are already tests for ovarian cancer CA 125, breast cancer CA 15.3 and pancreatic cancer CA 19.9. These are available in routine blood tests now.

Presumably these new tests will be very similar but more wide ranging.

Sounds good.
78
27/11/2020 11:57:38 0 0
bbc
Could run the new tests alongside the older ones for a while to see how it works?

If already taking blood a little more at the same time is easy.
114
VBB
27/11/2020 12:43:48 0 0
bbc
Before my mother died at 54 of ovarian cancer in 2003, those tests were only used to see the level after each round of chemo. They’re not accurate enough to diagnose.
120
27/11/2020 13:22:17 0 1
bbc
It might be good, it might not. It could give lots of false positives and sap lots of NHS resources.
12
27/11/2020 10:39:48 8 7
bbc
What needs to happen is demonstrable evidence of how early detection gives better outcomes.

One example: Prostate cancer. Detect is early, and surgery is much more likely to succeed.

Detect it later, and you can be kept alive, by chemical castration. Many so-called "advances" in prostate cancer treatment merely suppress testosterone more effectively. The side effects are deeply problematic.
15
27/11/2020 10:44:30 3 10
bbc
Thank you for your doom ridden analysis Dr Webman
51
27/11/2020 11:19:55 1 1
bbc
You don't like facts?
135
27/11/2020 18:13:02 0 0
bbc
It needs telling as it is. I've seen the effect of the drugs that keeps my Dad alive. A virtually static tumour - at the cost of loss of muscle weakness, energy. Testosterone is vital to male health.

I've seen many new prostate cancer drugs come out - almost all are androgen suppressors.

If I get it, I will push the surgeon to operate. To hell with being kept alive at the cost of my vitality.
16
27/11/2020 10:44:45 13 8
bbc
Cancer Research UK said large research studies of tests were "essential for determining if they're effective, and a vital step in getting them to patients, if proven to work"

The article should have ended there but no, the BBC just has to wheel out a scientist (any scientist) that has an opposing view. They just can't help themselves.
22
27/11/2020 10:54:56 8 2
bbc
Totally agree. If you want 'unbias' and straight to the point news, I recommend reuters. Well done those in the science community and volunteers.
28
27/11/2020 11:00:09 8 1
bbc
Because when they don't they get accused of bias by anti-vaxxer types.
34
27/11/2020 11:05:26 4 1
bbc
They literally can't help themselves, they have to provide dissenting voices by law.
Yet are probably the target of many conspiracy theories from Brexiteer/Antivaxxer/climate change denier types. Removed
17
27/11/2020 10:46:42 7 4
bbc
Antivaxers might well want to justify their existence with conspiracy theories against these companies. But Brexiteers and climate change deniers wouldn’t have an axe to grind with this.
18
27/11/2020 10:47:46 77 5
bbc
INCREDIBLE. Thank you to all the scientists who have been developing this amazing test. ??????
49
27/11/2020 11:17:34 40 3
bbc
Why are there people who are downvoting such a positive and celebratory comment?
What is wrong with people.
19
27/11/2020 10:49:39 45 2
bbc
This is impressive, and demonstrates (if the pandemic and environmental concerns haven't), why we need to be investing heavily in scientific research, and doing more to support the training and retention of scientists here in the UK (once world leading, but at risk of losing it).
Brexit will finish it off - so many of the people in science are 'foreigners' aren't they! Removed
57
27/11/2020 10:56:27 4 0
bbc
Nice idea but as the article says: 'This test, developed by the Californian firm Grail.' So, what bother developing a product that another company has already got and is years ahead?
124
27/11/2020 13:47:57 1 0
bbc
There are also scientists trying to develop urine tests for various types of cancer. Screening will not only save lives, but will also save the NHS a fortune by enabling treatment at an early stage.
20
27/11/2020 10:32:13 3 12
bbc
All this and you can't evern see a Docter.
13
27/11/2020 10:40:00 8 20
bbc
"More than 165,000 people in England will be offered the tests from next year"

I really hope this is true, but given the combination of C19 & Tory handling of it, plus their budget slashing to fund projects like HS2, I don't see this becoming a reality
21
ca
27/11/2020 10:52:19 14 3
bbc
It's being paid for by the drug company as a large scale pilot (stated in the article!)
40
27/11/2020 11:08:15 3 3
bbc
I did read the article, that's how I formed an opinion

However I find it unlikely people will be able to use NHS facilities - as evidenced by our current situation if you read other articles about people being unable to receive treatments/have tests.

And there are demonstrably fewer facilities than there were pre-Tory. It doesn't matter how much £ drug companies put in if people can't get tested
16
27/11/2020 10:44:45 13 8
bbc
Cancer Research UK said large research studies of tests were "essential for determining if they're effective, and a vital step in getting them to patients, if proven to work"

The article should have ended there but no, the BBC just has to wheel out a scientist (any scientist) that has an opposing view. They just can't help themselves.
22
27/11/2020 10:54:56 8 2
bbc
Totally agree. If you want 'unbias' and straight to the point news, I recommend reuters. Well done those in the science community and volunteers.
23
27/11/2020 10:56:13 4 15
bbc
Best to keep this one on the shelf until we have the health infrastructure in place to handle the results.

In the mean time take action to help yourself.

Give up alcohol and all other recreational drugs. Avoid salt, sugar, saturated fats and red meat. Get plenty of exercise.

So endeth todays sermon :)
25
27/11/2020 10:59:28 12 2
bbc
Our current infastructure would be better off if people presented with early cancer rather than waiting until its spread everywhere.
30
27/11/2020 11:01:38 2 3
bbc
You might not live longer but it will certainly feel like it... :)
38
27/11/2020 11:06:21 2 2
bbc
Yes, you'll generally live longer if you do that - although alchohol in moderation is assoociated with lower mortality.

But, as the saying goes "the trouble is that they add the extra years at the end"
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
32
27/11/2020 11:05:04 2 3
bbc
Increasingly, cancers are not classified by where they occur in the body, but by what type of mutation caused them. I suspect the "50 cancers" means "50 types of activated oncogenes"
36
27/11/2020 11:05:54 4 1
bbc
There are over 200 types of cancer
Would a list either way really help you?
37
27/11/2020 11:06:10 5 1
bbc
There's over 250 defined types of cancer. And that counts "breast cancer" as one disease when its many different ones. Name a tissue type and you can get cancer of it. I could probably name 10 different types of cancer of the blood if I tried.
43
27/11/2020 11:13:09 2 0
bbc
Your ignorance of the subject betrays you sadly. CANCER is NOT a one size fits all problem but can vary in form and type from patient to patient.
65
27/11/2020 11:32:27 1 0
bbc
Even with excellent news there will be those who find a negative slant to it.
23
27/11/2020 10:56:13 4 15
bbc
Best to keep this one on the shelf until we have the health infrastructure in place to handle the results.

In the mean time take action to help yourself.

Give up alcohol and all other recreational drugs. Avoid salt, sugar, saturated fats and red meat. Get plenty of exercise.

So endeth todays sermon :)
25
27/11/2020 10:59:28 12 2
bbc
Our current infastructure would be better off if people presented with early cancer rather than waiting until its spread everywhere.
33
27/11/2020 11:05:19 3 1
bbc
Yep.

Spend now for future benefits.

Not something we do very well unfortunately.
7
27/11/2020 10:33:38 20 4
bbc
How long before someone claims this is a new method for the deep state/illuminati/Bill Gates to control us??
26
Bob
27/11/2020 10:59:41 5 2
bbc
Best check if David I**e and his crew have picked up on it yet
4
dan
27/11/2020 10:31:13 15 3
bbc
HOW DOES ONE APPLY FOR THE TEST TRIAL?
27
27/11/2020 10:42:19 3 1
bbc
I'd like to know too. I would happily volunteer to take part.
16
27/11/2020 10:44:45 13 8
bbc
Cancer Research UK said large research studies of tests were "essential for determining if they're effective, and a vital step in getting them to patients, if proven to work"

The article should have ended there but no, the BBC just has to wheel out a scientist (any scientist) that has an opposing view. They just can't help themselves.
28
27/11/2020 11:00:09 8 1
bbc
Because when they don't they get accused of bias by anti-vaxxer types.
13
27/11/2020 10:40:00 8 20
bbc
"More than 165,000 people in England will be offered the tests from next year"

I really hope this is true, but given the combination of C19 & Tory handling of it, plus their budget slashing to fund projects like HS2, I don't see this becoming a reality
29
27/11/2020 11:01:32 1 4
bbc
oooh nice Tory dig

Did you not read the article, or ingnore bit its drug company lead so you could get your dig in anyway?
23
27/11/2020 10:56:13 4 15
bbc
Best to keep this one on the shelf until we have the health infrastructure in place to handle the results.

In the mean time take action to help yourself.

Give up alcohol and all other recreational drugs. Avoid salt, sugar, saturated fats and red meat. Get plenty of exercise.

So endeth todays sermon :)
30
27/11/2020 11:01:38 2 3
bbc
You might not live longer but it will certainly feel like it... :)
31
27/11/2020 11:01:46 9 1
bbc
Amazing news - this could save so many lives!
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
32
27/11/2020 11:05:04 2 3
bbc
Increasingly, cancers are not classified by where they occur in the body, but by what type of mutation caused them. I suspect the "50 cancers" means "50 types of activated oncogenes"
25
27/11/2020 10:59:28 12 2
bbc
Our current infastructure would be better off if people presented with early cancer rather than waiting until its spread everywhere.
33
27/11/2020 11:05:19 3 1
bbc
Yep.

Spend now for future benefits.

Not something we do very well unfortunately.
39
27/11/2020 11:07:22 5 1
bbc
Sadly true. Cheaper to remove 100 harmless moles than deal with one stage 4 melanoma. I speak as someone who had a harmless mole cut off and who makes treatments for stage 4 melanoma.....
16
27/11/2020 10:44:45 13 8
bbc
Cancer Research UK said large research studies of tests were "essential for determining if they're effective, and a vital step in getting them to patients, if proven to work"

The article should have ended there but no, the BBC just has to wheel out a scientist (any scientist) that has an opposing view. They just can't help themselves.
34
27/11/2020 11:05:26 4 1
bbc
They literally can't help themselves, they have to provide dissenting voices by law.
Yet are probably the target of many conspiracy theories from Brexiteer/Antivaxxer/climate change denier types. Removed
35
27/11/2020 11:05:44 8 2
bbc
From what I can see on this comment thread, you are the only conspiracy theorist here.
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
36
27/11/2020 11:05:54 4 1
bbc
There are over 200 types of cancer
Would a list either way really help you?
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
37
27/11/2020 11:06:10 5 1
bbc
There's over 250 defined types of cancer. And that counts "breast cancer" as one disease when its many different ones. Name a tissue type and you can get cancer of it. I could probably name 10 different types of cancer of the blood if I tried.
23
27/11/2020 10:56:13 4 15
bbc
Best to keep this one on the shelf until we have the health infrastructure in place to handle the results.

In the mean time take action to help yourself.

Give up alcohol and all other recreational drugs. Avoid salt, sugar, saturated fats and red meat. Get plenty of exercise.

So endeth todays sermon :)
38
27/11/2020 11:06:21 2 2
bbc
Yes, you'll generally live longer if you do that - although alchohol in moderation is assoociated with lower mortality.

But, as the saying goes "the trouble is that they add the extra years at the end"
33
27/11/2020 11:05:19 3 1
bbc
Yep.

Spend now for future benefits.

Not something we do very well unfortunately.
39
27/11/2020 11:07:22 5 1
bbc
Sadly true. Cheaper to remove 100 harmless moles than deal with one stage 4 melanoma. I speak as someone who had a harmless mole cut off and who makes treatments for stage 4 melanoma.....
45
27/11/2020 11:14:29 3 0
bbc
I wonder who the downvoter is who thinks its best to NOT remove funny looking moles and instead wait until advanced skin cancer develops is? Probably some anti-vaxxer nut job
21
ca
27/11/2020 10:52:19 14 3
bbc
It's being paid for by the drug company as a large scale pilot (stated in the article!)
40
27/11/2020 11:08:15 3 3
bbc
I did read the article, that's how I formed an opinion

However I find it unlikely people will be able to use NHS facilities - as evidenced by our current situation if you read other articles about people being unable to receive treatments/have tests.

And there are demonstrably fewer facilities than there were pre-Tory. It doesn't matter how much £ drug companies put in if people can't get tested
41
27/11/2020 11:09:55 8 0
bbc
Great news, another step forward in trying to solve this mammoth puzzle. Great effort
42
27/11/2020 11:13:02 4 0
bbc
If this became a routine test this would mean that all treatable cancers were no longer a threat. If it is only offered to those with symptoms it wont be as effective because many who die from cancer presented too late to recover. Good to see medical research getting press notice although the press recognises cancer and ignores other major problems which get less funding.
50
27/11/2020 11:18:47 5 0
bbc
Regrettably your conclusion is not correct.
It doesn't say the cancers that are tested for are all treatable, let alone curable.
However, this will indeed give everyone a better chance of surviving or living with a cancer but unfortunately even with this test it is and will remain one of the biggest threats to our lives
73
27/11/2020 11:50:57 0 0
bbc
Not quite right, the test applies to up to 50% of types of cancer.
96
27/11/2020 12:23:40 0 0
bbc
IT'S A NO BRAINER PRU, LET'S GO FOR IT
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
43
27/11/2020 11:13:09 2 0
bbc
Your ignorance of the subject betrays you sadly. CANCER is NOT a one size fits all problem but can vary in form and type from patient to patient.
44
27/11/2020 11:13:30 7 0
bbc
Fascinating news.

Massive potential if successful.

More great science!
39
27/11/2020 11:07:22 5 1
bbc
Sadly true. Cheaper to remove 100 harmless moles than deal with one stage 4 melanoma. I speak as someone who had a harmless mole cut off and who makes treatments for stage 4 melanoma.....
45
27/11/2020 11:14:29 3 0
bbc
I wonder who the downvoter is who thinks its best to NOT remove funny looking moles and instead wait until advanced skin cancer develops is? Probably some anti-vaxxer nut job
46
27/11/2020 11:14:57 16 0
bbc
My life has definitely been extended by having a PSA test done.
It indicated that I had an issue with my prostate (no symptoms at all) which did indeed turn out to be cancer and having detected it earlier I was able to have it removed.

If this test can do the same for others with other cancers then it should be welcomed and embraced as soon as possible.

Thanks and well done to all concerned
113
cis
27/11/2020 12:42:29 2 0
bbc
Clarification: not everyone needs (or should have) surgery or indeed treatment even after prostate cancer has been confirmed.
47
27/11/2020 11:16:37 20 1
bbc
Brilliant news - Covid seems to be stealing all the headlines at the moment, but the fight against Cancer is a much greater challenge.
Well done to all the scientists involved in this.
130
27/11/2020 14:08:36 3 0
bbc
Cancer took my mother and grandma nearly 30 years apart. Their treatment was identical, chemo & prayers

Governments should prioritise cancer as they did with covid vaccine

Millions are donated to CRUK because of endless TV adverts. Those millions fund yet more TV adverts. Many of their claims are misleading. NHS provide treatment & most progress is due to normal advancement in medical science
19
27/11/2020 10:49:39 45 2
bbc
This is impressive, and demonstrates (if the pandemic and environmental concerns haven't), why we need to be investing heavily in scientific research, and doing more to support the training and retention of scientists here in the UK (once world leading, but at risk of losing it).
Brexit will finish it off - so many of the people in science are 'foreigners' aren't they! Removed
52
27/11/2020 11:20:18 3 2
bbc
No!
64
27/11/2020 11:31:24 4 2
bbc
Get a life
18
27/11/2020 10:47:46 77 5
bbc
INCREDIBLE. Thank you to all the scientists who have been developing this amazing test. ??????
49
27/11/2020 11:17:34 40 3
bbc
Why are there people who are downvoting such a positive and celebratory comment?
What is wrong with people.
60
27/11/2020 11:29:07 9 2
bbc
Unfortunately a lot of Have your sayer's are just here to moan regardless
116
27/11/2020 13:17:17 1 0
bbc
Medical screening looks like a massive benefit but there are problems. It’s called over-diagnosis. Take breast cancer screening: for every 1 woman whose life is saved by screening, 10 more have unecessary treatments and surgeries for cancers that would not have caused them harm in their lifetime. This mega screening suffers from the same flaw.
117
27/11/2020 13:17:46 1 1
bbc
Worms have infested their empty skulls.
42
27/11/2020 11:13:02 4 0
bbc
If this became a routine test this would mean that all treatable cancers were no longer a threat. If it is only offered to those with symptoms it wont be as effective because many who die from cancer presented too late to recover. Good to see medical research getting press notice although the press recognises cancer and ignores other major problems which get less funding.
50
27/11/2020 11:18:47 5 0
bbc
Regrettably your conclusion is not correct.
It doesn't say the cancers that are tested for are all treatable, let alone curable.
However, this will indeed give everyone a better chance of surviving or living with a cancer but unfortunately even with this test it is and will remain one of the biggest threats to our lives
15
27/11/2020 10:44:30 3 10
bbc
Thank you for your doom ridden analysis Dr Webman
51
27/11/2020 11:19:55 1 1
bbc
You don't like facts?
Brexit will finish it off - so many of the people in science are 'foreigners' aren't they! Removed
52
27/11/2020 11:20:18 3 2
bbc
No!
56
27/11/2020 11:24:31 10 7
bbc
No! ??? Do you think scientists are all Brits then? Or that Brexit won't affect UK science when £1 in £8 spent on Science here is EU grants? Or that UK science won't suffer when we're ejected from all the European research programmes? Its already affecting UK science because the weak pound is making chemicals only produced in the EU more expensive to import.
53
27/11/2020 11:22:58 18 3
bbc
According to Radio 4s Today prog, we have Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates to thank for this being tested here. It's great news and shows that not all multinational owning billionaires are selfish Brexitears. Thank you.
111
cis
27/11/2020 12:41:18 0 8
bbc
Thank Bill Gates? You must be joking!
54
27/11/2020 11:24:13 10 1
bbc
a simple blood test and that could detect a cancer is a huge step forward in anyones eyes,its always to little to late for some as cancer develops without the person knowing the extent,having a way of finding this is magic and people have always had to wait until blood is actually seen coming from the cancerous tumours,great to know early detection will save many lives and heartaches
55
27/11/2020 11:24:29 8 0
bbc
This is the kind of news we really want to hear - this will have a lasting benefit for everyone and is uplifting too. Thumbs up !
52
27/11/2020 11:20:18 3 2
bbc
No!
56
27/11/2020 11:24:31 10 7
bbc
No! ??? Do you think scientists are all Brits then? Or that Brexit won't affect UK science when £1 in £8 spent on Science here is EU grants? Or that UK science won't suffer when we're ejected from all the European research programmes? Its already affecting UK science because the weak pound is making chemicals only produced in the EU more expensive to import.
19
27/11/2020 10:49:39 45 2
bbc
This is impressive, and demonstrates (if the pandemic and environmental concerns haven't), why we need to be investing heavily in scientific research, and doing more to support the training and retention of scientists here in the UK (once world leading, but at risk of losing it).
57
27/11/2020 10:56:27 4 0
bbc
Nice idea but as the article says: 'This test, developed by the Californian firm Grail.' So, what bother developing a product that another company has already got and is years ahead?
66
27/11/2020 11:32:51 4 1
bbc
This test detects 50 cancers. As I've pointed out there's over 250 different types of cancer. "Maybe" there's a point developing tests for the other 200??? "Maybe" we could improve on the tests for the 50 and make them more sensitive and more reliable? We didn't stop developing antibiotics when penicillin was synthesised did we?
58
Deb
27/11/2020 10:56:27 1 0
bbc
That is great. I would love to know more as I had breast cancer.
59
27/11/2020 11:07:31 0 1
bbc
Another first for a US company. Like the BRCA tests: NHS takes the sample then sent for analysis in California.
92
27/11/2020 12:14:42 1 1
bbc
Why would they waste time, money and risk sample degradation doing that? There is plenty of sequencing capacity here in UK.
49
27/11/2020 11:17:34 40 3
bbc
Why are there people who are downvoting such a positive and celebratory comment?
What is wrong with people.
60
27/11/2020 11:29:07 9 2
bbc
Unfortunately a lot of Have your sayer's are just here to moan regardless
6
27/11/2020 10:33:12 23 1
bbc
Routine screening for cancers could save a lot of anguish and could save the NHS a lot of money n the long run, but it needs to be used judiciously

Scientists now think cancer cells crop up regularly in all of us but are killed by our immune systems before they cause problems

Someone with a raised PSA (Prostate cancer test) may never develop cancer. Monitoring is often the best course of action
61
27/11/2020 11:30:11 6 0
bbc
You are correct, cancer is an inevitable side effect of mitosis, but the test will allow doctors to target monitoring.
12
27/11/2020 10:39:48 8 7
bbc
What needs to happen is demonstrable evidence of how early detection gives better outcomes.

One example: Prostate cancer. Detect is early, and surgery is much more likely to succeed.

Detect it later, and you can be kept alive, by chemical castration. Many so-called "advances" in prostate cancer treatment merely suppress testosterone more effectively. The side effects are deeply problematic.
62
27/11/2020 11:30:46 1 0
bbc
Not for me. A bloodtest every year or two to remove the fear of a range of unseen cancers possibly growing inside me far outweighs the risk of an unlikely chemical castration (which I'd take if there was no alternative).
137
27/11/2020 18:15:54 0 0
bbc
I'm not disagreeing with you - I'm pointing out that if it's caught early, the surgical alternative will be much more viable.

Believe me, you need your testosterone. It's not just about virility - it's about being able to keep muscle mass, staying active fit and healthy in your old age.

The quality of life cost of the androgen blockers is swept under the carpet
Yet are probably the target of many conspiracy theories from Brexiteer/Antivaxxer/climate change denier types. Removed
63
27/11/2020 11:31:05 2 1
bbc
Antivaxers probably, the other 2 not sure how that would have any relevance except I guess there is an element over over population involved in climate change
Brexit will finish it off - so many of the people in science are 'foreigners' aren't they! Removed
64
27/11/2020 11:31:24 4 2
bbc
Get a life
24
27/11/2020 10:58:01 0 20
bbc
A list of the 50 cancers, would've been helpful. 50 - sounds like an approximation - I can't think of 20 but then I'm not really a doctor as such. Perhaps a list of the cancers the test won't detect, be easier for the article author? For example if that was 9, headline would be "Cancer: Blood test that won't detect 9 types to be trialled by NHS" - writing game ain't as easy as some people think.
65
27/11/2020 11:32:27 1 0
bbc
Even with excellent news there will be those who find a negative slant to it.
134
27/11/2020 18:09:11 0 0
bbc
I find myself baffled as to why 3 people down voted my response, yet nobody saw fit to politely correct me (which would have been educational if they had a good scientific reason to do so).

There's some serious negativity on this board.
57
27/11/2020 10:56:27 4 0
bbc
Nice idea but as the article says: 'This test, developed by the Californian firm Grail.' So, what bother developing a product that another company has already got and is years ahead?
66
27/11/2020 11:32:51 4 1
bbc
This test detects 50 cancers. As I've pointed out there's over 250 different types of cancer. "Maybe" there's a point developing tests for the other 200??? "Maybe" we could improve on the tests for the 50 and make them more sensitive and more reliable? We didn't stop developing antibiotics when penicillin was synthesised did we?
93
27/11/2020 12:16:36 1 1
bbc
Gee you don't want much do you. Hope you're one of those wonderful people working hard on these sorts of things instead of sitting on your lazy a*se typing a list of very very difficult requirements and moaning if they aren't available . Oh wait................
67
27/11/2020 11:08:37 2 2
bbc
I would be useful if there was a link to the source of this, so we can help by volunteering
88
27/11/2020 12:09:58 2 0
bbc
Have you heard of google? It's this really clever internet search engine which helps you to find things by yourself instead of having it handed on a plate. That way, people can still use skills they are born with instead of atrophying into people who need "a link" to find out more information on something they are interested in. Mind you,then we wouldn't know how wonderful you are for volunteering
13
27/11/2020 10:40:00 8 20
bbc
"More than 165,000 people in England will be offered the tests from next year"

I really hope this is true, but given the combination of C19 & Tory handling of it, plus their budget slashing to fund projects like HS2, I don't see this becoming a reality
68
27/11/2020 11:11:53 0 0
bbc
Non sense ! The NHS has more money than eva under Boris and his GLORIOS leader ship ! And theyres more nurses than eva AND they have an extra £350 billions a week now were out of the failed ue supper state ! But you and the so called bbc cant accept that becuase it doesnt suite your agender ! Lern to reed !
3
27/11/2020 10:30:43 18 2
bbc
How do you sign up for the trial

Sounds another magnificent leap forward
69
27/11/2020 11:42:02 1 0
bbc
It mentions offering to 165,000 people so presumably this will be done as part of the current screening/testing processes. If we know that people are susceptable or have cancer already diagnosed presumably the test could confirm that and by dint of this prove its own worth.
70
27/11/2020 11:44:23 10 0
bbc
It would be nice if we had the names of the people who helped create this so they could be rightfully credited. Its like when dolly parton was getting praised for her donation, she specifically named the doctor behind that vaccine saying she approved of the research and work they were doing. Like dolly, we need to recognise these amazing doctors and researchers more.
71
27/11/2020 11:49:04 3 0
bbc
"While some welcomed the pilot, others cautioned the test was still untried and untested."

Yes, that's why the NHS is trialling it to a small group before deciding to roll it out nation-wide...
72
27/11/2020 11:50:45 3 1
bbc
How about this gets fast tracked (and all other cancer treatments as well) in the same way as the covid trials have. The process is there now - lets continue!! Great news as well obviously.
112
27/11/2020 12:41:53 0 1
bbc
There are only a limited number of scientists that can work on a limited number of projects at the same time. Something has to be prioritised.
42
27/11/2020 11:13:02 4 0
bbc
If this became a routine test this would mean that all treatable cancers were no longer a threat. If it is only offered to those with symptoms it wont be as effective because many who die from cancer presented too late to recover. Good to see medical research getting press notice although the press recognises cancer and ignores other major problems which get less funding.
73
27/11/2020 11:50:57 0 0
bbc
Not quite right, the test applies to up to 50% of types of cancer.
74
27/11/2020 11:53:59 3 0
bbc
For those asking about “how to volunteer for blood trials” go to the NHS website and search for trials
75
27/11/2020 11:54:35 2 2
bbc
We are talking about rolling out millions of Covid tests in a matter of months and vaccinating billions of people worldwide next year.
Why is the aim to reach a million tests by 2024 to go from 50% to 75% as programme delivered by 2028 - this is poorly thought out.

If it is an early detector of 50 cancers it’s surely a diagnostic tool to eliminate cancer and speed diagnosis for other conditions
76
27/11/2020 11:56:22 5 0
bbc
I have to go for a blood test every year due to a medical condition, and when I do I'm usually automatically tested for other things like diabetes and cholesterol levels.

If it proves to be successful, could this test be included with this?

I don't have medical knowledge so don't know how practical this would be, but just an idea.
77
cis
27/11/2020 11:57:38 3 3
bbc
The targed should NOT be detect cancers at the early stages (yes, those allow a lot of treatment and for someone to make a lot of money). *** The aim should be to PREVENT "pre-cancer" to turn into cancer in the first place! ***

How many pesticides and chemicals bathe our body all day long?
Ask those in the know how much funding is spent on prevention
14
lwj
27/11/2020 10:43:18 16 1
bbc
There are already tests for ovarian cancer CA 125, breast cancer CA 15.3 and pancreatic cancer CA 19.9. These are available in routine blood tests now.

Presumably these new tests will be very similar but more wide ranging.

Sounds good.
78
27/11/2020 11:57:38 0 0
bbc
Could run the new tests alongside the older ones for a while to see how it works?

If already taking blood a little more at the same time is easy.
79
27/11/2020 11:59:50 6 0
bbc
This is great news but the insurance industry needs to clarify how it will treat this info for life, medical or travel cover. They are experts at not paying out claims for "pre-existing conditions".
80
SAM
27/11/2020 12:02:24 5 0
bbc
To those who say present early to with cancer, think on this. Cancer is a silent killer; developing and growing, often without symptoms or pain. I believe, by the time cancer is painful, it is often too late. This is a major breakthrough. Congratulations not only to those who developed it but those whose research has gone before; all of which made this possible.
97
27/11/2020 12:24:22 2 0
bbc
Its a major breakthrough if it doesn't generate too many false positives.
109
27/11/2020 12:39:47 1 0
bbc
It looks interesting but it isn’t a done deal yet.
81
27/11/2020 12:02:44 4 1
bbc
We read that dogs have an ability to detect cancers by smell and, more recently, to detect Covid infections. Where is the research to understand and identify how this works?
108
27/11/2020 12:39:11 1 1
bbc
There is lots of research going in with detection dogs. It has been going in for some time now.
82
27/11/2020 12:00:01 5 3
bbc
They can test all they like, but the NHS struggles with cancer care. People will get the test on NHS and pay for private care, so they don't die on a waiting list. And that was before we shot NHS in the head with the covid response.
91
27/11/2020 12:12:59 1 0
bbc
Cancers found early on are much easier to cue at lower cost and less manpower.
83
27/11/2020 12:05:05 5 1
bbc
This is great - early diagnosis leads to cure. Look at how the cost of UK cancer drugs are rising fast, this is unsustainable so need to focus on early detection!!!!!!!

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359644620304773
115
27/11/2020 12:46:37 3 0
bbc
wow this study shows loads of new treatments for cancer but so much more ££££ - may be unsustainable!

Need to focus on early diagnosis and this test is a MASSIVE step forward................especially for something like pancreas cancer which doesn't respond to any treatment in the advanced disease!
84
27/11/2020 12:05:05 6 9
bbc
If cancer is a human tragedy. Why are cancer patients being sacrificed because GPS are scared of a glorified cough.
Sorry for sounding flippant. But the attitude of the NHS in these days is a utter disgrace.
90
27/11/2020 12:12:15 7 1
bbc
It is not a glorified cough. It has killed 50,000 in the UK and without lock down it would have killed 500,000.
85
27/11/2020 12:05:11 5 3
bbc
For all the headlines there are today, this is far and away the biggest news of the day for the people of this country and will have a long lasting impact on peoples lives. For all those people who have had to deal with cancer in their families this is progress. I also fully support everyone having their DNA checked for health issues.
105
27/11/2020 12:37:04 0 0
bbc
That depends what they are going to do with the results. If they are going to be released to insurance companies then No.
86
27/11/2020 12:06:25 6 0
bbc
Twenty years ago it seemed that mass spectrometry of blood plasma would be a very successful technique for detecting some cancers. The issue is around false positives. It succeeded it detecting say 8 out of the 10 cancers in 500 tested but generated 100 false positives that needed further investigation. Any mass test has to avoid that to be useful.
146
28/11/2020 18:06:27 0 0
bbc
This test is said to have exceptionally low false positive rates. Like most made screening tests false negatives are pretty high but it's much better than say a mammogram.
87
27/11/2020 11:54:27 2 2
bbc
While I agree this is a very good step forward however the insurance companies will be running their hands in glee at the thought of all the extra revenue and get out of policy clauses to come. I have chronic lymphocytic leukemia which has no effect on me and possibly won't ever but I have been denied life insurance. I was able to get single trip cover for a visit to New Zealand at £350.
95
27/11/2020 12:21:17 0 0
bbc
Have you tried 'InsuranceWith', they seem to have a logical attitude to cancer.
67
27/11/2020 11:08:37 2 2
bbc
I would be useful if there was a link to the source of this, so we can help by volunteering
88
27/11/2020 12:09:58 2 0
bbc
Have you heard of google? It's this really clever internet search engine which helps you to find things by yourself instead of having it handed on a plate. That way, people can still use skills they are born with instead of atrophying into people who need "a link" to find out more information on something they are interested in. Mind you,then we wouldn't know how wonderful you are for volunteering
89
27/11/2020 12:10:50 3 1
bbc
Let's hope it works in real world use, no faslse positives blighting lives and putting burden on the nhs double checking.
104
27/11/2020 12:35:46 1 0
bbc
That is an impossible ask. There isn’t a test on the planet that doesn’t produce some false negative or false positive results.
84
27/11/2020 12:05:05 6 9
bbc
If cancer is a human tragedy. Why are cancer patients being sacrificed because GPS are scared of a glorified cough.
Sorry for sounding flippant. But the attitude of the NHS in these days is a utter disgrace.
90
27/11/2020 12:12:15 7 1
bbc
It is not a glorified cough. It has killed 50,000 in the UK and without lock down it would have killed 500,000.
106
27/11/2020 12:37:49 1 1
bbc
COULD have, not WOULD have.
82
27/11/2020 12:00:01 5 3
bbc
They can test all they like, but the NHS struggles with cancer care. People will get the test on NHS and pay for private care, so they don't die on a waiting list. And that was before we shot NHS in the head with the covid response.
91
27/11/2020 12:12:59 1 0
bbc
Cancers found early on are much easier to cue at lower cost and less manpower.
107
27/11/2020 12:38:34 0 0
bbc
They are but the NHS still struggles to provide treatment or Earl cancers or pre cancers.
59
27/11/2020 11:07:31 0 1
bbc
Another first for a US company. Like the BRCA tests: NHS takes the sample then sent for analysis in California.
92
27/11/2020 12:14:42 1 1
bbc
Why would they waste time, money and risk sample degradation doing that? There is plenty of sequencing capacity here in UK.
66
27/11/2020 11:32:51 4 1
bbc
This test detects 50 cancers. As I've pointed out there's over 250 different types of cancer. "Maybe" there's a point developing tests for the other 200??? "Maybe" we could improve on the tests for the 50 and make them more sensitive and more reliable? We didn't stop developing antibiotics when penicillin was synthesised did we?
93
27/11/2020 12:16:36 1 1
bbc
Gee you don't want much do you. Hope you're one of those wonderful people working hard on these sorts of things instead of sitting on your lazy a*se typing a list of very very difficult requirements and moaning if they aren't available . Oh wait................
94
27/11/2020 12:17:24 5 0
bbc
This is in effect a large scale clinical trial. If change is detected then other current diagnostics will be used to confirm positive result of the test. If some negatives turn out to be positives then sadly that can happen especially if no symptoms of cancer are present. You simply can’t catch everything but this may indeed offer hope of early detection for many. Go for it!
87
27/11/2020 11:54:27 2 2
bbc
While I agree this is a very good step forward however the insurance companies will be running their hands in glee at the thought of all the extra revenue and get out of policy clauses to come. I have chronic lymphocytic leukemia which has no effect on me and possibly won't ever but I have been denied life insurance. I was able to get single trip cover for a visit to New Zealand at £350.
95
27/11/2020 12:21:17 0 0
bbc
Have you tried 'InsuranceWith', they seem to have a logical attitude to cancer.
42
27/11/2020 11:13:02 4 0
bbc
If this became a routine test this would mean that all treatable cancers were no longer a threat. If it is only offered to those with symptoms it wont be as effective because many who die from cancer presented too late to recover. Good to see medical research getting press notice although the press recognises cancer and ignores other major problems which get less funding.
96
27/11/2020 12:23:40 0 0
bbc
IT'S A NO BRAINER PRU, LET'S GO FOR IT
80
SAM
27/11/2020 12:02:24 5 0
bbc
To those who say present early to with cancer, think on this. Cancer is a silent killer; developing and growing, often without symptoms or pain. I believe, by the time cancer is painful, it is often too late. This is a major breakthrough. Congratulations not only to those who developed it but those whose research has gone before; all of which made this possible.
97
27/11/2020 12:24:22 2 0
bbc
Its a major breakthrough if it doesn't generate too many false positives.
129
27/11/2020 14:05:50 2 0
bbc
Better 10 false positives than 1 false negative.
98
27/11/2020 12:26:09 1 1
bbc
I hope it does produce good results. I have a form of cancer and none of my blood tests in 18 years have ever shown it. Diagnosed after an internal bleed and only further endoscopies and scans have shown recurrences. Anything less invasive would suit me!
99
27/11/2020 12:27:46 2 4
bbc
What's the proportion of false positives?

And false negatives?

We've stopped believing in science infallibility because scientists didn't admit it was infallible (maybe even to themselves) and we know now that was reckless.

This is useful - let's not pretend it's a miracle.
101
27/11/2020 12:34:56 1 1
bbc
The trial should provide answers to those questions. That is what a trail is for.
100
27/11/2020 12:27:13 2 1
bbc
While some welcomed the pilot, others cautioned the test was still untried and untested.

Why caution it? It's only a sample of blood. So much data to 'play' with. I would happily donate even though I hate needles. (I used to be terrified, but outgrew that).