{
  "completed": true,
  "status": "completed_original_source_reconciliation",
  "provider_mode": "Consensus Pro signed-in browser; observed output and citation link mappings",
  "queries": [
    "https://consensus.app/search/multicancer-blood-screening-efficacy/ZzzZhHUFRWyztsWRokrbig/"
  ],
  "query_record_note": "Exact provider question/response retained privately in its retrieval receipt.",
  "primary_comparison_count": 9,
  "primary_comparisons": [
    {
      "pmid": "42776074",
      "doi": "10.1056/NEJMoa2505723",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "NHS_Galleri_NCT05611632",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "Current NHS randomized trial, endpoint hierarchy and age denominator",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus correctly reports a failed primary stageIII/IV endpoint and a favorable secondary stageIV contrast, but uses142924 enrolled participants aged50–79. The original primary report actually randomized142250 aged50–77. It gives primary IRR1.03,95%CI0.92–1.14,P=.63 and secondary stageIV IRR0.86,CI0.74–1.00. Neither endpoint is mortality. The publisher confirms online publication22September2026; the official trial site says cancer-death analyses continue. Provider 'No' is interpreted as benefit unestablished, not a completed death trial proving no effect. Additional provider event counts not verified at original abstract depth are not adopted.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42776074/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-0-9-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    },
    {
      "pmid": "42773209",
      "doi": "10.1038/s41591-026-04652-8",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "NHS_Galleri_NCT05611632",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "NHS diagnostic performance is descriptive and round specific",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus's general high-specificity and tissue-origin discussion is supported, but original metrics are reported by round rather than as one universal percentage. PPV58.0%,50.4%,45.8% and all-cancer episode sensitivity26.7–37.2% accompany specificity99.5–99.6%;937 detected primary cancers are from the same NHS parent. These descriptive analyses had no hypothesis testing. A high NPV does not establish absence of every cancer or saved lives.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42773209/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-0-9-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    },
    {
      "pmid": "37805216",
      "doi": "10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01700-2",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "PATHFINDER_NCT04241796",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "PATHFINDER predictive value, workup and false-positive denominators",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus accurately identifies6621 evaluable participants,92signals,35 confirmed cancers,57 false positives and median162-day false-positive diagnostic resolution. The original abstract reports procedures in17 of57 false positives.62% is the proportion among positive signals, not among all screened people. The provider's86 negative-screen cancers/sensitivity29.5% were not verified from the available original abstract or body at this access depth and are not used as load-bearing source facts. Public XML returned500; the receipt remains abstract/status.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37805216/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-9-18-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    },
    {
      "pmid": "41173830",
      "doi": "10.1038/s41467-025-64094-7",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "PMID41173830",
      "access_depth": "full_text_partial",
      "consensus_aspect": "Real-world denominator and ascertainment repair",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus groups prospective/ambulatory PPVs into ranges without resolving this series' incomplete outcome ascertainment. Actual original Methods/Results show111080 test results,1011 positives,459 voluntary outcome reports and411 completed workups. Among completed asymptomatic workups,128 of259 had invasive cancer, ePPV49.4%; symptomatic and known-active-cancer orders are different populations. Negative outcomes were not collected systematically. Neither the overall test count nor selected reported outcomes establish complete screening sensitivity or mortality benefit.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41173830/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-9-18-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\41173830-s1-p5-6-12-13.json",
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\41173830-s3-p1-2-3-4.json"
      ]
    },
    {
      "pmid": "34176681",
      "doi": "10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.806",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "CCGA3_NCT02889978",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "CCGA stage sensitivity and transportability",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus's approximately17% stageI versus90% stageIV sensitivities match the original CCGA validation abstract:16.8% and90.1%. The study included4077 validation participants with2823 known cancers and1254 controls. That case-control spectrum and prevalence differ from prospective population screening, so these values do not replace NHS screening episode sensitivity or directly validate a mortality model.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34176681/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-0-9-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    },
    {
      "pmid": "33991479",
      "doi": "10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00731-5",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "UKCTOCS_NCT00058032",
      "access_depth": "full_text_partial",
      "consensus_aspect": "Original counterexample to universal stage-to-mortality translation",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus discusses screening biases but does not resolve this decisive original mortality comparator. Selected original UKCTOCS Methods/Results verify randomized intention-to-screen analysis, masked outcome review and16.3-year median follow-up. Multimodal screening yielded47.2% more stageI and24.5% fewer stageIV ovarian/tubal cancers, while deaths did not fall (primaryP=.58). This directly challenges a universal stage-surrogate bridge without deciding the eventual Galleri death endpoint.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33991479/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-45-52-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\33991479-s1-p0-4-8-11.json",
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\33991479-s2-p3-11-16.json"
      ]
    },
    {
      "pmid": "32345712",
      "doi": "10.1126/science.abb9601",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "PMID32345712",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "DETECT-A omitted clinical pathway distinction",
      "result_comparison": "The prompt requested DETECT-A, but the observed provider answer does not adjudicate its original details. The original prospective report found26 cancers by blood testing,24 via usual screening and46 by neither in10006 women, with a different blood-test/PETCT package. Nine of15 who underwent PETCT had surgical excision, and0.22% of all participants had a futile invasive procedure. Curative-intent treatment is preserved but is not proven cure or a randomized death benefit.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32345712/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-9-18-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    },
    {
      "pmid": "32860149",
      "doi": "10.1007/s10654-020-00679-4",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "SHIP_and_SHIPTrend_MRI",
      "access_depth": "full_text_partial",
      "consensus_aspect": "Whole-body MRI burdens require MRI originals",
      "result_comparison": "The provider table cites a blood-screening study for generic whole-body MRI claims. Actual SHIP original Methods/Results show optional MRI participation plus laboratory disclosures, biopsy-rate increase from6.9 to9.9 per100 observation-years and predominately nonmalignant results, with regional biopsy coverage limits. This supplies MRI-specific cascade evidence, while selection/concurrent disclosure prevents a claim that every additional biopsy was caused by MRI or that net clinical harm is established.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32860149/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-36-45-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\32860149-s1-p3-4-10-23.json",
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\body-presentation-receipts\\32860149-s2-p1-7-14.json"
      ]
    },
    {
      "pmid": "29565420",
      "doi": "10.1038/gim.2018.38",
      "source_type": "primary study report",
      "study_group": "PMID29565420",
      "access_depth": "abstract_metadata",
      "consensus_aspect": "DTC raw-data confirmation is not a universal error rate",
      "result_comparison": "Consensus describes DTC genomic actionability/anxiety broadly without an exact original quantitative comparison. The original49-sample referred confirmation series found40% of reported variants false positive, and some increased-risk labels benign. Referral enrichment and the variant denominator are central: this is not40% of all customers or regulated consumer test results. It also does not establish that DTC risk genotyping has the same purpose or clinical effect as MCED screening.",
      "original_source": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29565420/",
      "source_examination_receipts": [
        "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\examinations\\original-45-52-10000.json"
      ],
      "body_receipts": []
    }
  ],
  "grade_changed": false,
  "grade_change_note": "Source-based adjudication; no independent blinded regrade claimed.",
  "raw_receipts": [
    {
      "path": "deliverables\\hsef_v53_traffic_ranks_16_20_2026-10-13\\mced-cancer-mortality\\consensus-browser-2026-10-13.json",
      "sha256": "c10548cbca5d059c138064783869036ada03b647daf2b2e55ddd2ab6436e7256"
    }
  ],
  "independent_blinded_audit": false,
  "cutoff": "2026-10-13",
  "completed_utc": "2026-10-13T17:35:23.602153+00:00",
  "conclusion": "Endpoint hierarchy, experimental scope and original-source limits determine the evidence cards; provider wording does not override them."
}