Cancer treatments are often more successful when the disease is detected early. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of multicancer blood testing coupled with positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging to detect cancer in a prospective, interventional study of 10,006 women not previously known to have cancer. Positive blood tests were independently confirmed by a diagnostic PET-CT, which also localized the cancer. Twenty-six cancers were detected by blood testing. Of these, 15 underwent PET-CT imaging and nine (60%) were surgically excised. Twenty-four additional cancers were detected by standard-of-care screening and 46 by neither approach. One percent of participants underwent PET-CT imaging based on false-positive blood tests, and 0.22% underwent a futile invasive diagnostic procedure. These data demonstrate that multicancer blood testing combined with PET-CT can be safely incorporated into routine clinical care, in some cases leading to surgery with intent to cure.

Key Points Question Can population-level genomic screening identify those at risk for disease? Findings In this cross-sectional study of an unselected population cohort of 50 726 adults who underwent exome sequencing, pathogenic and likely pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants were found in a higher proportion of patients than was previously reported. Meaning Current methods to identify BRCA1/2 variant carriers may not be sufficient as a screening tool; population genomic screening for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer may better identify patients at high risk and provide an intervention opportunity to reduce mortality and morbidity.

Purpose To investigate the effect of live and recorded perioperative music therapy on anesthesia requirements, anxiety levels, recovery time, and patient satisfaction in women experiencing surgery for diagnosis or treatment of breast cancer. Patients and Methods Between 2012 and 2014, 207 female patients undergoing surgery for potential or known breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive either patient-selected live music (LM) preoperatively with therapist-selected recorded music intraoperatively (n = 69), patient-selected recorded music (RM) preoperatively with therapist-selected recorded music intraoperatively (n = 70), or usual care (UC) preoperatively with noise-blocking earmuffs intraoperatively (n = 68). Results The LM and the RM groups did not differ significantly from the UC group in the amount of propofol required to reach moderate sedation. Compared with the UC group, both the LM and the RM groups had greater reductions (P < .001) in anxiety scores preoperatively (mean changes [and standard deviation: −30.9 [36.3], −26.8 [29.3], and 0.0 [22.7]), respectively. The LM and RM groups did not differ from the UC group with respect to recovery time; however, the LM group had a shorter recovery time compared with the RM group (a difference of 12.4 minutes; 95% CI, 2.2 to 22.5; P = .018). Satisfaction scores for the LM and RM groups did not differ from those of the UC group. Conclusion Including music therapy as a complementary modality with cancer surgery may help manage preoperative anxiety in a way that is safe, effective, time-efficient, and enjoyable.