Liquid Gold

voraciousreader

---

http://medcitynews.com/2015/03/provista-diagnostic...

"No More Unnecessary Biopsies?"

Soon, imaging will be moot for diagnosing cancer....well....not exactly...but soon, blood tests (liquid gold) will tell us who needs imaging and perhaps biopsies. Imagine all the money that can be saved on less imaging and then the difference could be spent on finding a cure...

coraleliz

I may just be in a "glass half empty" mood tonight but I hope that when this comes to fruition it's not priced so high that insurance(and patients) won't/can't pay for it. Otherwise I love it & wish it was available for me.....back when......

voraciousreader

cora....the blessed researchers at Sloan Kettering have already identified blood markers to actually "see" when Stage IV cells begin to break through treatment BEFORE patients become symptomatic or can be seen on imaging. It is just a matter if time for most of us that cancer screening will be done via blood screening and NOT initially done via imaging. The cost should be a fraction of what imaging costs......

farmerlucy

It can't come soon enough!

Hopeful82014

I wonder how much effort it's going to take to convince MDs to use it, however? Since they say there's no point in treating until there are symptoms, how ready do you think they will be to go looking for recurrences/metastases?

I'd like to think that because this could be much less expensive they will be inclined to adopt it but then sometimes the medical field is so entrenched that I really wonder.

ShawnaB

I just wanted to add that I had this very test in March of this year (2017). I had a Birads-3 and it saved me from having a biopsy, and from the stress of the 6 month "watch and wait." Also, my insurance paid for it, and it was supposedly less expensive than a biopsy.

If this technology is reliable, it could be a game changer. Could we imagine a world where a yearly BT was the first line of screening, and women with negative tests and no symptoms did not have mammograms? Like this BT was included when you had your yearly exam?

The cynical side of me says no way...there is way too much money invested in mammogram tech...too many jobs at stake. I think the industry will resist the transition.

Lumpie

I am very optimistic about the potential of these tests. As many of us know, mammograms are not very effective at diagnosing early stage breast cancer in women with dense breasts, especially young women. To be used widely/universally, a test must be adopted by practitioners, usually through boards established by professional organizations of physicians, as "standard of care." (Translation: that essentially means the minimum standard for good care.) To be adopted it has to be proven not only to effectively do what it says it will do but also to "improve outcomes" or to achieve comparable outcomes at a meaningful savings in cost or substantially improve the patient experience. Avoiding unnecessary biopsies would save on costs and dramatically improve the "patient experience" IMHO! Issues are even murkier when it comes to metastatic cancer. Doctors have pointed out to me that, while it defies common sense, there isn't a lot of clear research showing that identifying metastasis very early results in better "outcomes." This is also what I have found in reviewing the literature on the topic. So whether for an initial Dx or metastasis, unfortunately, it can take years to document the benefits and incorporate a new tool into standards of care. The good news is that breast cancer has a very effective and persuasive advocacy community. Because of this, I am hopeful that new tools that really are useful for diagnosing BC will be implemented relatively quickly.