New Blood test to screen for Breast Cancer

Charlierun

Hi, I have a Brca2 mutation and on increased surveillance, alternating between an MRI and a Mammogram every 6 months. I just read that in Calgary, Alberta , a lab ( Syntra) have developed a blood that detects breast cancer .They advertise it is 95.8% accurate in detecting early stage breast cancer. I live in Alberta and wondered if anyone has used this test and what their experiences have been? Is there a similar test in the US that people who are at high risk use alternating between MRI and mammogram screenings ? I have not been diagnosed with breast cancer but this remains a great concern as I am over 60 and alsohave dense breasts .

Beesie

Very odd... and maybe concerning. On their website, Syntra mention clinical trial results and say that their test "has gone through multiple validations" over the past decade, but the only specific reference I could find either within their text or in the footnotes, is to Clinical Trial NCT04495244, which is not yet completed and has no posted results or study report. So where do their accuracy stats come from?

https://www.syantra.com/for-healthcare-providers#Testperformance

https://www.syantra.com/clinical-studies

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04495244

If this blood test is in fact as accurate as Syntra say, that would be wonderful - and big news. But it seems to be too early at this point to know that.

To my knowledge there are other blood tests in development but nothing currently in use. A couple of examples:

Blood Test Could Spot Breast Cancer Early https://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/news/20200610/...

Simple blood test for early detection of breast cancer https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/11/1911...

Charlierun

Hi Bessie, Thanks for the reply, it has made me question the claim of the 95.8% accuracy of the blood test in detecting early stage breast cancer. There was even a Television news station reporting on the Syntra blood test and encouraging people to take the test.
If a blood teat is able to detect breast cancer it would be a game changer. I will check with my physician to see what she knows about this test and continue to do some research

Calinana4

Good morning. In the US there is Natera’s Signatera blood test.

MountainMia

Signatera could be a breakthrough, but it's only useful for identifying remnants of previously diagnosed tumors, not for diagnosing cancers with no previous evidence of disease.

"Signatera is a custom-built circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) test for treatment monitoring and molecular residual disease (MRD) assessment in patients previously diagnosed with cancer. The test is available for both clinical and research use, and has been granted three Breakthrough Device Designations by the FDA for multiple cancer types and indications. The Signatera test is personalized and tumor-informed, providing each individual with a customized blood test tailored to fit the unique signature of clonal mutations found in that individual's tumor. This maximizes accuracy for detecting the presence or absence of residual disease in a blood sample, even at levels down to a single tumor molecule in a tube of blood. Signatera is intended to detect and quantify how much cancer is left in the body, to detect recurrence earlier and to help optimize treatment decisions. Signatera test performance has been clinically validated in multiple cancer types including colorectal, non-small cell lung, breast, and bladder cancers. "

https://www.natera.com/company/news/fda-grants-two...

PamEP

"The Signatera test is personalized and tumor-informed, providing each individual with a customized blood test tailored to fit the unique signature of clonal mutations found in that individual's tumor. This maximizes accuracy for detecting the presence or absence of residual disease in a blood sample, even at levels down to a single tumor molecule in a tube of blood. Signatera is intended to detect and quantify how much cancer is left in the body, to detect recurrence earlier and to help optimize treatment decisions."

This is great if it truly informs treatment needs. So many women stop treatment due to side effects and get recurrence, and so many continue treatments who may not benefit from them and experience toxicity. The caveat would be the probability of a new primary BC.

lauri

Does anyone else think "Theranos" when hearing announcements like this?

My medical center doesn't even use tumor marker tests.

MountainMia

lauri, I DO think "Theranos" when I hear stuff like this. But this isn't making the same claims. I don't know how soon it will be available for more general use, but I hope soon. My hospital and cancer clinic is participating in this research. Here is an article from 2020.

https://www.kwqc.com/content/news/University-of-Io...

WC3

There are a few such tests but none of them have been adopted as part of the standard of care by my cancer center.

One of my sisters wants me to get this one:

Galleri Cancer Test

I believe it's not FDA approved.

I would love to know with more certainty whether or not there is still cancer in me.

If I did have one of these tests and it was positive, as was a retest, then a few questions would arise.

If head and chest MRIs and ultrasounds fail to find anything, and a nuclear bone scan and chest CT find nothing. Do we do a full body PET/CT?

If so, that would be two nuclear bone scans, three PET scans, two partial body CTs and two full body CTs in my lifetime, as well as a number of chest x-rays, and that works out to a statistically significant amount of radiation exposure, and a non negligible cancer risk from it.

What if the PET/CT is negative? Did that mean the cancer test yielded a false positive and I have irradiated myself for nothing, or is the cancer just too small to detect?

Does it detect dormant cancer?

Does having residual microscopic breast cancer somewhere, dormant or otherwise, mean it's an issue?

Some breast cancer survivors, particularly those who had ER+, have recurrences decades later. I read a case study of a woman in India who had a recurrence over 50 years post surgery at the mastectomy site. What if most survivors have residual cancer cells but they just never become an issue either because they never wake from dormancy or the immune system suppresses them or they are very low grade?

If the cancer test is positive and continues to be, but conventional testing and imaging doesn't find anything, does my treatment change? Probably not other than perhaps extending it for as long as the test yields positive.

What are the implications of a negative test result?

muska

It so happened that I just asked my MO about genetic essays and genomic tests - or is it the other way around? - when I saw her for a regular follow-up last week. I asked about circulating breast cancer DNA test in particular. The question was raised in the context of discussing whether any such test could be helpful in predicting the future and therefore helpful in deciding how much longer to stay on hormonal therapy for example. In my case. She gave me an overview of what’s out there and why they have little if any applicability in clinical practice, at least not at this time and none in my case