Hacker News Reader

Even if you detect cancer you will still need a biopsy to figure out which bits are the cancer and which bits are just 'lumps'.

Yes, it is a game changer, but it is not the kind of game changer that this is being made out to be here and mass screening using this method is not going to lead to improved outcomes.

As an extra tool in the toolbox of the diagnostician it is very useful.

View on HN

It’s pretty easy. If blood test says “liver cancer positive. Colon cancer negative.” you check the liver for cancer. No need to check the colon for cancer. No need to scan the entire body for lumps.

Not that easy. “Check the liver for cancer” has lots of risks: surgery and the resulting tissue injury.

I’m generally inclined towards the position of more testing....but there are very real tradeoffs to any of the interventions that a blood test could prompt.

Also, you might have identified liver cancer that came from the patient's kidney. Or a colorectal cancer that came from the patient's liver.

What happens when it turns out that most of the people having surgery don't have cancer? Because that's the reality of tests with a .5% false positive rate if less than 1% of the population is positive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com