FDA panel endorses first-of-a-kind cancer blood test from Grail designed to spot signs of various cancers in apparently healthy people

Associated Press ^ | 09/23/2026 | MATTHEW PERRONE and LAURAN NEERGAARD

[SeekAndFind]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal health advisers on Wednesday endorsed a blood test designed to spot signs of various cancers in apparently healthy people while warning that it’s far from clear how well the technology works.

Grail Inc.’s Galleri test doesn’t diagnose cancer but instead, with a single blood draw, looks for a signal that someone may have one of a long list of tumors. Those who receive a positive result need additional care to tell if they’re really sick.

The Food and Drug Administration’s advisory panel voted 7-2, with one abstention, that the DNA-based test offers more potential benefits than risks, such as causing false assurances or raising false alarms. The positive vote came even as the panel raised many questions about the technology that need more study.

“Perhaps my yes is a hopeful rather than an accurate one,” said Dr. Victor van Berkel of UofL Physicians in Louisville, Kentucky, describing how more research is needed even if the test is rolled out. “If we can find more early-stage cancers in the population that we can’t screen for currently, that will end up having benefit.”

The vote followed two earlier votes in which the experts affirmed that the test appears safe and effective for use by people age 50 and older.

Lots of companies are studying such blood tests and Wednesday’s vote marks the first time a federal advisory group has backed the experimental approach. The FDA isn’t bound by the advice but if it agrees, it could pave the way for widespread U.S. adoption of a long-sought way to find more cancers earlier. A final decision is expected in a few months.

---

TOPICS: Health/Medicine; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: cancer; detection; fda; grail; medicareadvantage

[catnipman]

this kind of cancer test has been around for quite a while before FDA approval ... basically, it can tell if you have a cancer, but not what kind, not where it is, and not how far advanced it is ... almost completely useless except for destroying people’s “ignorance is bliss” ...

[desertsolitaire]

If you could be told the exact date and manner of your eventual death, would you want to know or not? Why?

[Getready]

It doesn’t inform anyone whether the cancer will grow. Everyone has tumor cells but we can fight them with intact immune systems,..the general course might be to monitor the area where that type of cancer cell is from to look for growth, or monitor if the number of the specific tumor cell DNA increases.....better than nothing but the company admits that false positives and false negatives do occur. So can get false reassurances, or get treatment based on false positive result.

[House Atreides]

I’ve taken this blood test. If the test finds a “cancer signal” in the blood, the results also can predict the tissue type/organ associated with the cancer signal found. The results aren’t definitive but should help your doctors determine their next steps to confirm the existence of cancer.

This is merely a screening test and not a substitute for other tests.

[EnderWiggin1970]

This reminds me of a reporter some years ago who volunteered for a full-body MRI in fine detail to find all sorts of possible problems. If you look hard enough you will things that might or might not become a serious issue down the line. But is the warning about possible future issues worth the loss of peace of mind?

I've heard almost everyone has a couple cancers in their body; most are benign or just never develop enough to become an issue for whatever reason. Would people sleep better with a heads-up on tumors they have in their body, or if they remained ignorant of them, knowing they probably won't be killed by any of them?

Around 10 years ago I was diagnosed with a nevus in my eye; worst case it can become cancerous and lead to blindness or death. As of yesterday it's done nothing, so I'm glad I am able to put it out of mind for years at a time and don't let it bother me.

[TTFX]

If treatments aren’t good, a diagnosis isn’t very helpful.

[TTFX]

If treatments aren’t good, a diagnosis isn’t very helpful.

[trebb]

Until it can be “refined”, it’s just another avenue for generating more funds by conducting more “tests”...how many people do you think will have a truly clean screen as the body works to fight off invaders of all types.

The majority of the medical community prefers traditional screenings for now because of the lack of actual utility of the new tests and the potential added costs involved.