An innovative blood test is offering promise in the early detection of multiple cancer types.

In California, a team of researchers has been exploring a novel multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test named Galleri. This test claims the capability to identify over 50 different kinds of cancer.

The study involved an analysis of approximately 23,161 individuals aged 50 and above from both the US and Canada, none of whom exhibited any cancer symptoms.

Participants followed the usual screening protocols recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force for specific cancers, such as breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers.

Alongside these standard screenings, they also underwent the Galleri blood test, developed by GRAIL, Inc., a biotechnology firm located in Menlo Park, California.

The researchers compared the standard screenings alone to the standard screenings plus the blood test. 

Out of the more than 23,000 people sampled, the Galleri test detected a cancer signal in 216 of them, 133 of whom were confirmed to have the disease.

This means there was a 61.6% chance that someone with a positive Galleri test actually had cancer. The false positive rate was “very low” at about 0.4%, according to the researchers.

More than half (53.5%) of Galleri-detected cancers were Stage 1 or 2, while 69.3% were Stage 1 to 3.

The results showed that about three-quarters of the cancers identified in the trial group do not currently have standard screening options in the US

The study also found that cancer detection increased more than seven times when the Galleri blood test was combined with standard screening.

Study investigator Nima Nabavizadeh, M.D., associate professor of radiation medicine at Oregon Health & Science University, stated in an interview with Fox News Digital how he was “incredibly encouraged” by these findings and what they may mean for filling unmet screening needs and detecting cancer early.

The results suggest a positive test should be “taken seriously,” the researcher reiterated. The experimental blood test was able to accurately pinpoint which organ the cancer was coming from 92% of the time, he added.

Josh Ofman, M.D., president of the drugmaker GRAIL, commented in a press release that adding Galleri to standard screening can help target new cancers in early stages, as most deadly cancers are found “too late.”

“Galleri’s ability to accurately predict where in the body the cancer signal comes from also helps to guide a more efficient diagnostic workup,” he said. “Galleri is the only MCED (multi-cancer early detection) test available that has been validated in an interventional trial in the screening population and could transform how we deliver cancer screening at a population level.”

Promising, but not a replacement

Fox News medical contributor Dr. Nicole Saphier, an associate attending of radiology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and director of breast imaging in Monmouth, New Jersey, reacted to these findings in an interview with Fox News Digital.

Saphier, who was not involved in the study, emphasized how early detection saves lives while lowering the overall cost of cancer care by finding the disease when it’s most treatable.

“[This] allows patients to live longer, healthier and more productive lives,” she said.

Saphier commented that the multi-cancer blood test adds a “promising new layer to existing tools for breast, cervical, colorectal and lung cancer screening, potentially catching cancers that standard tests may miss.”

While it shows promise, however, this new test is meant to complement, not replace, the currently available screenings, the expert added.

“Thoughtful, evidence-based integration will be key to ensuring that it improves outcomes without adding unnecessary cost or confusion,” she said. 

“As cancers rise among younger people, the question now is whether we should broaden screening ages and if this blood test could play a role in that shift.”

The study also does not directly compare the Galleri test to a control group that did not receive the test in the same setting and conditions, which makes it difficult to determine the full benefit of the test.

The press release states: “Test performance metrics do not represent results of a head-to-head comparative study.”

As this trial was an initial analysis with a short one-year follow-up, study lead Nabavizadeh suggested that a more complete analysis of the study’s full 35,000 participants will take place in the future.

“Also, we are anxiously awaiting the results of the randomized NHS-Galleri test to provide additional clinical utility data as compared to standard of care screening alone,” he shared.