Epigenetic biomarkers like GrimAge are not currently clinically useful for identifying high-risk individuals for cancer. — Whalespan
Epigenetic biomarkers like GrimAge are not currently clinically useful for identifying high-risk individuals for cancer.
⚠ High risk
We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
✕NOTSUPPORTED
⚠
High-risk intervention — consult a physician before acting.Drug-drug interactions, dose-dependence, and screening contraindications apply.
“i mean let me start out by saying i'm not sure whether this biomarker is clinically useful okay um because i'm very scared people think they can now measure their blood and i will predict you will get cancer in 10 years it's not at that level however if you have for example a study of 1 000 women and you measure that and somebody collected their blood in the 1990s you know and so for each woman you have follow-up information whether she developed breast cancer or when she developed breast cancer and if you then analyze the data you will find that biomarkers such as grim age and other biomarkers actually do predict onset to cancer in a statistical fashion you know the p value would be quite significant you know but as i said i'm i wouldn't claim that this is right now ready for prime time in a clinical setting for finding high-risk individuals because the effect sizes are too small”
Conflict Watch
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.