2024
DOI: 10.1093/haschl/qxae039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests: prioritizing equity from bench to bedside

Sarah J Miller,
Jamilia R Sly,
Christian Rolfo
et al.

Abstract: Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are blood-based tests designed to screen for signals of multiple cancers. There is growing interest and investment in examining the potential benefits and applications of MCED tests. If MCED tests are shown to have clinical utility, it is important to ensure that all people—regardless of their demographic or socioeconomic background—equitably benefit from these tests. Unfortunately, with health care innovation, such considerations are often ignored until after inequiti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 25 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another area that is rapidly improving but still in need of resolution with current practice is cost, reimbursement, and timing. The actual individual cost for most of the commercially available tools is less than aggregate-focused screening; however, the total cost impact on health systems for utilizing such tools in place of traditional methods (or in transitions) must be modeled and presented in the best interest of public health and with 100% equitable access [34]. Whether employers, insurance companies, government, or private citizens pay for the screening is highly dependent on the timing of testing and the lifetime testing needed.…”
Section: Challenges and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another area that is rapidly improving but still in need of resolution with current practice is cost, reimbursement, and timing. The actual individual cost for most of the commercially available tools is less than aggregate-focused screening; however, the total cost impact on health systems for utilizing such tools in place of traditional methods (or in transitions) must be modeled and presented in the best interest of public health and with 100% equitable access [34]. Whether employers, insurance companies, government, or private citizens pay for the screening is highly dependent on the timing of testing and the lifetime testing needed.…”
Section: Challenges and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%