When it comes to cancer treatment, one of the biggest factors involved is how far along the cancer is. If the doctors can catch it early, they often have a host of different options, including medications, surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and more. When they don’t find it until it is well-developed or has spread to different parts of the body, the options are more limited, and the outlook is not nearly as optimistic.

So, when a new study from researchers at Johns Hopkins University found that a simple blood test can detect cancer up to three years before it is visible on other types of scans, there is reason for excitement.

The study, which was published in the journal Cancer Discovery, says that the researchers were able to detect genetic material in the bloodstream far earlier than previously thought possible. The material, which is shed from the cancer tumors, may provide a simple, inexpensive, and effective way to screen for cancers long before any symptoms appear.

The lead author of the study and a Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine professor of oncology, Yuxuan Wang, said in a statement:

“Three years earlier provides time for intervention. The tumors are likely to be much less advanced and more likely to be curable.”

The study looked at the plasma samples of 26 participants with cancer who had the samples collected previously as part of a look at risk factors of cardiovascular diseases. They then compared those samples to 26 others who did not have cancer. The finding showed that with eight of the participants, the multicancer early detection (MCED) lab test identified the early signs of cancer. In four of the eight, they found additional signs of tumor-derived mutations.

Bert Vogelstein is a senior author of the study and Ludwig Center at Johns Hopkins professor of oncology, and in the statement, he said:

“This study shows the promise of MCED tests in detecting cancers very early, and sets the benchmark sensitivities required for their success.”

The study is admittedly a relatively small sample size, but the fact that it was able to detect cancer accurately in eight of these patients shows a lot of progress. If the study can be replicated and the methods improved, it may become the standard to run this type of test on a regular basis to detect cancers as early as possible.

One potential challenge associated with these findings, however, is what doctors can do with a positive test this early. Modern cancer treatments are centered around much later diagnosis, where surgery and targeted treatments are possible. Another senior author and Ludwig Center professor of oncology, Nickolas Papadopolos said in the statement:

“Of course, we need to determine the appropriate clinical follow-up after a positive test for such cancers.”

This, however, is a good challenge to have. Everyone would agree that detecting cancers up to three years earlier would allow doctors to have more options available.

Even if the test is not able to pinpoint what type of cancer it is or where the tumor may be, a positive test could prompt more frequent scanning and other testing to determine what the next best steps would be in a given patient.

If you thought that was interesting, you might like to read about why we should be worried about the leak in the bottom of the ocean.