Development and validation of a multidimensional cfDNA assay for cancer detection and tissue-of-origin prediction.

H Hua Bao X Xiaoxi Chen (School of Optoelectronic Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China 1 , Chengdu 610054,) H Haimeng Tang (Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China) S Shanshan Yang (State Key Laboratory for Crop Stress Resistance and High-Efficiency Production, College of Life Sciences, Northwest A&F University) D Dongqin Zhu (Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China) S Shuang Chang (Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China) R Rui Liu P Peng He (Department of Pathology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.) X Xiuxiu Xu (Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China) J Jinpeng Zhang (School of Materials and Energy) Y Yi Shen (College of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, and State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection) S Shuyu Wu Y Ya Jiang (Department of Chemistry, and Academy for Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies) S Sisi Liu X Xian Zhang (State Key Laboratory of Analytical Chemistry for Life Science, School of Chemistry) X Xue Wu Y Yang Shao (China-United States (Henan) Hormel Cancer Institute)

Abstract

10531 Background: Early detection remains a major unmet need in oncology, and multi-cancer early detection assays that analyze circulating cell-free DNA features have shown promise for detecting multiple cancers with high specificity and tissue-of-origin prediction. Here, we leverage whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to extract multiple cfDNA features (genomic, fragmentomic, and estimated methylation) from a single assay to enable multi-cancer early detection and tissue-of-origin (TOO) localization. Methods: Plasma samples were collected in a multicenter, prospective case-control study. From 5× low-pass WGS data, multiple cfDNA feature sets were extracted, including fragmentomic, genomic, and inferred epigenetic features. Machine learning models were trained for cancer detection (healthy vs. cancer) and tissue-of-origin (TOO) classification. The training set included 3,577 healthy and 3,578 cancer participants, and the independent validation set included 2,384 healthy and 2,386 cancer participants. Cancer cases spanned 56 cancer types, grouped into 21 cancer classes. Results: Age and sex are evenly distributed across healthy and cancer samples in both the training and validation datasets (Table 1). At 99% specificity, cancer detection sensitivity increased with stage and was consistent between training and validation cohorts: Stage I: 70.66% vs 70.89%, Stage II: 80.41% vs 80.27%, Stage III: 89.89% vs 88.58%, and Stage IV: 92.23% vs 91.76%. Across tumor types, sensitivity at 99% specificity varied substantially, ranging from 57.43% (Thyroid tumor) and 63.87% (Kidney cancer) to 95.96% (Lymphoma) and 99.07% (Liver/Biliary cancer). Tissue-of-origin prediction achieved high accuracy in machine-learning predicted cancer-positive samples (Top-1/Top-2: 0.75/0.89 in training; 0.75/0.88 in validation). Conclusions: We developed a cost-efficient blood test (CanScan Pro) using multidimensional cfDNA features from low-pass WGS and machine learning that detects cancers at 99% specificity, with sensitivity increasing by stage and similar performance in training and validation cohorts. The model predicts tissue of origin with high accuracy, which may help guide downstream diagnostic evaluation following a positive result and thereby enhance real-world clinical utility. Patient characteristics. Train Valid Healthy Cancer Healthy Cancer (N=3577) (N=3578) (N=2384) (N=2386) Age Mean (SD) 57.8 (6.46) 57.7 (14.74) 58.1 (6.63) 57.2 (15.00) Median [Min, Max] 57.0 [45.0 ,76.0] 60.0 [11.0 ,91.0] 57.0 [45.0 ,76.0] 59.0 [11.0 ,92.0] Sex F 2018 (56.4%) 1655 (46.3%) 1355 (56.8%) 1101 (46.1%) M 1559 (43.6%) 1923 (53.7%) 1029 (43.2%) 1285 (53.9%) Stage TNM - 3577 (100%) 0 (0%) 2384 (100%) 0 (0%) I 0 (0%) 1060 (29.6%) 0 (0%) 718 (30.1%) II 0 (0%) 883 (24.7%) 0 (0%) 588 (24.6%) III 0 (0%) 811 (22.7%) 0 (0%) 534 (22.4%) IV 0 (0%) 824 (23.0%) 0 (0%) 546 (22.9%)

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
Pages 10531-10531
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (17)

H

Hua Bao

X

Xiaoxi Chen

School of Optoelectronic Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China 1 , Chengdu 610054,

H

Haimeng Tang

Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China

S

Shanshan Yang

State Key Laboratory for Crop Stress Resistance and High-Efficiency Production, College of Life Sciences, Northwest A&F University

D

Dongqin Zhu

Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China

S

Shuang Chang

Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China

R

Rui Liu

P

Peng He

Department of Pathology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

X

Xiuxiu Xu

Geneseeq Research Institute, Nanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China

J

Jinpeng Zhang

School of Materials and Energy

Y

Yi Shen

College of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, and State Key Laboratory of Radiation Medicine and Protection

S

Shuyu Wu

Y

Ya Jiang

Department of Chemistry, and Academy for Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies

S

Sisi Liu

X

Xian Zhang

State Key Laboratory of Analytical Chemistry for Life Science, School of Chemistry

X

Xue Wu

Y

Yang Shao

China-United States (Henan) Hormel Cancer Institute