One blood test, many cancers. Genuinely promising and widely oversold — this page sets out what the evidence actually supports.
Referred by a GMC-registered GP, results reviewed by the same doctor
Taken at a partner site near you
Results explained in plain English, not just a number
Your NHS records in the room, with your consent
Care led personally by Dr Khan
Attentive, unhurried care that listens properly
Five-star Google reviews from the people we have looked after
Registered with the Care Quality Commission
A single blood test that looks for signals from many different cancers at once. It is one of the more genuinely interesting developments in cancer detection — and one of the most oversold things currently marketed to well people.
We can arrange it. This page sets out plainly what it does and does not do, because the gap between how these tests are marketed and what the evidence supports is unusually wide, and a misunderstood result causes real harm in both directions.
If you read nothing else here, read this: a negative result does not mean you do not have cancer, and this test does not replace NHS bowel, breast or cervical screening.
Cancers shed fragments of DNA into the bloodstream. What distinguishes tumour DNA from ordinary DNA is usually not the genetic sequence but the methylation pattern — chemical tags attached to the DNA, which differ characteristically in cancer cells.
The test looks for those patterns. Where it finds a signal, it can usually also predict which organ or tissue the signal came from, which is what makes a positive result actionable rather than simply frightening.
One blood sample. No fasting, no preparation, no radiation.
Signals associated with a wide range of cancers — including several that have no screening programme in the UK at all: pancreatic, ovarian, oesophageal, liver, stomach and gallbladder among them.
That is the strongest argument in favour of these tests, and it is a genuine one. Those cancers are typically found late because there is nothing routinely looking for them, and late is where the outcomes are poor.
These are the points that tend not to appear in the marketing, and they matter more than anything else on this page.
This is the single most dangerous misreading of these tests. Overall sensitivity across all cancers and stages is modest — a substantial proportion of cancers present in the body at the time of the test are simply not detected.
A reassuring result changes very little. If a symptom appears next month, it needs investigating exactly as it would have done anyway.
This cuts directly against the premise. Detection rates are considerably higher for stage III and IV disease than for stage I, because more advanced tumours shed more DNA.
The cancers these tests find most reliably are, in other words, disproportionately the ones that had already progressed — which is not what "early detection" implies.
A positive leads to imaging — typically CT, often PET-CT — and frequently endoscopy or biopsy. That takes weeks, costs money, and carries its own small risks.
Sometimes it finds nothing. You are then left knowing a test detected something nobody can locate, with no clear endpoint. That is a genuinely difficult position, and anyone considering this test should decide in advance how they would handle it.
Specificity of around 99.5% sounds close to flawless. But cancer is uncommon in any given year in a screened population, and when you look for something rare, even a very accurate test produces a meaningful share of positives that turn out to be nothing. This is a property of the arithmetic, not a flaw in the laboratory.
Bowel, breast and cervical screening have demonstrated reductions in mortality across large populations over decades. Multi-cancer tests have not shown that yet.
Keep attending your NHS screening. If having this test made you less likely to return your bowel screening kit, it would have made your position worse rather than better.
The UK National Screening Committee does not recommend multi-cancer early detection tests for population screening. NHS England ran a large trial and, on reviewing the interim results, did not proceed to a wider rollout at that stage.
That is not a reason nobody should ever have one. It is a reason to be sceptical of anyone selling it as an established, evidence-backed check.
For most blood tests the conversation can reasonably happen when the results come back. For this one it has to happen first, because the decisions a result forces are ones you should have thought about before the sample is taken, not while you are waiting for a scan.
The consultation covers:
A referral is issued for the sample, and the result is reviewed with you by the GP who requested it — not emailed as a report to interpret alone. Where the result is positive we arrange the appropriate imaging or specialist referral, and where it points to a pathway your NHS GP can access faster, we write to them the same day.
We will decline to arrange this test where someone has symptoms that need investigating instead, where it is plainly being used as a substitute for screening that is already available and overdue, or where the conversation suggests an ambiguous result would do more harm than the information could justify.
Turning down a paid test is occasionally the right clinical answer, and we would rather do that than take the money.
No fasting and no preparation. A single blood sample taken at any time of day.
What does require preparation is the decision, which is why the consultation comes first — see how the referral works, above.
"No cancer signal detected" is the common outcome. It does not mean you do not have cancer. These tests detect a minority of early-stage cancers, and several common cancers are poorly detected at any stage.
"Cancer signal detected" means further investigation, usually including a predicted site of origin. It is not a diagnosis, and the investigation that follows is substantial — typically imaging, sometimes endoscopy, occasionally biopsy.
This is the part to think about hardest before testing.
A signal with no cancer found is a difficult place to be. It leads to repeated scanning and follow-up, sometimes over a long period, and there is no straightforward way to stop looking once a test has said something might be there.
Ask yourself before booking: how would I handle a positive result with nothing found? A meaningful proportion of positive signals end there.
They detect later-stage disease considerably more reliably than early-stage, and they perform better for some cancer types than others.
That matters because the whole rationale for screening is finding cancer early, when treatment works best — and early detection is where these tests are weakest.
Bowel, breast and cervical screening are the tests proven to reduce deaths, and they are free. Cervical screening prevents cancer entirely by treating changes before they become cancerous, which no blood test does.
A negative multi-cancer test is not a reason to skip any of them.
The UK National Screening Committee does not currently recommend multi-cancer early detection tests for population screening.
That is not bureaucratic caution. These tests have not yet been shown to reduce cancer deaths — which is the outcome that matters, and a considerably harder thing to demonstrate than the ability to detect a signal.
This is the harm we are most concerned about. A negative result can lead people to ignore symptoms, or to skip the NHS screening that actually works.
A new lump, unexplained weight loss, a change in bowel habit, blood anywhere, or a cough lasting more than three weeks needs assessing regardless of any test result.
Investigation of a positive signal is not always straightforward, and it is not always concluded. Some people are left in indefinite surveillance.
That is a real cost, and it falls on people who were well when they started.
Investigating a positive signal. Imaging, specialist appointments and sometimes endoscopy or biopsy — and if you route that privately, it accumulates quickly.
NHS services will investigate a positive result, but you enter the pathway at the point the evidence supports, which may not be the urgent one.
Ask before booking: what does the provider do if the result is positive, and what is included?
If any of those are outstanding, they are a better use of money and attention than this test — and they cost nothing.
A strong family history, a known genetic predisposition, or a considered decision made with full knowledge of the limitations.
What it should not be is a substitute for the free programmes, or a purchase made for reassurance — because reassurance is precisely what it is least able to provide.
No — and this is the most important thing on the page.
These tests detect a minority of early-stage cancers, and several common cancers are poorly detected at any stage.
A negative result is not an all-clear, and it is not a reason to ignore symptoms or skip NHS screening.
Not for population screening. The UK National Screening Committee does not currently recommend multi-cancer early detection tests.
They have not yet been shown to reduce cancer deaths — which is the outcome screening has to deliver, and a harder thing to prove than detecting a signal.
Investigation, not a diagnosis. The test usually predicts a likely site of origin, which guides imaging and sometimes endoscopy or biopsy.
A meaningful proportion of positive signals end with no cancer found, which is a genuinely difficult outcome — it often leads to prolonged follow-up with no clear endpoint.
Yes, absolutely — and it matters more than this test.
Bowel screening is one of the few screening tests with proven mortality benefit, it is free, and it arrives through your door. Return rates are poor, which makes it the single highest-value thing most people over 50 are not doing.
No. Cervical screening prevents cancer by treating changes before they become cancerous — no blood test does that. Breast screening is mammography.
Both are free and both do things this test cannot.
Because the caution is the clinically accurate position, and you deserve it before paying rather than after.
The technology is genuinely promising and it is not yet proven. Those two things are both true, and a page that mentioned only the first would be selling you something.
Someone with a strong family history or a known genetic predisposition, who has already done everything the free programmes offer, and who understands what a positive and a negative result each mean.
It is a considered decision, not a reassurance purchase.
See a doctor, and do not wait for a test result.
A new lump, unexplained weight loss, a change in bowel habit, bleeding anywhere, or a cough lasting more than three weeks needs assessing now — through your NHS GP, who can refer on an urgent pathway that moves faster than anything private.
Whether this test is the right thing for you at all, what each result would mean, what investigation a positive would trigger, and what free screening you may not have taken up.
For a good many people, that conversation ends with a recommendation not to have the test, and that is a legitimate outcome.
Clinically reviewed by Dr Mohammad Zubair Khan, GMC 7563469
Last reviewed
August 29, 2026
On this page
Ongoing
Time to be seen
Appointment length
Your NHS record in the room
Written treatment plan
Told when a test isn’t needed
Cost
Same day, usually
20 minutes
Yes, with your consent
Included
Yes, and told why
£40 for 20 minutes
Varies by practice
Typically 10 minutes
Yes, your full record
Not routinely
Usually
Free
Same day
Often 10 to 15 minutes
Usually not
Sometimes charged
Varies by provider
Often a subscription
Same-day access is usually available, from 6am to 10pm, seven days a week. You choose a time that suits you rather than waiting on hold at 8am.
Yes. Care is led personally by Dr Mohammad Khan, so you are not passed between clinicians. Continuity is the point of a small practice: someone who knows your history and is listening attentively rather than working through a checklist.
Yes, with your consent. We can access your Summary Care Record during the consultation, so your current medications, allergies and significant history are in the room. That means fewer questions you have already answered elsewhere, and safer prescribing.
No. We are not here to replace GPs, only to support them. Your NHS practice remains responsible for your ongoing care, and with your consent we write to them after the consultation. We are useful when you need to be seen sooner, or want more time than a standard appointment allows.
Twenty unhurried minutes and a comprehensive assessment. A written treatment plan is included, along with any prescription, sick note or referral letter arising from the consultation, at no extra charge.
£40 for 20 minutes, self-pay. Membership is optional and never required. Priced for fairness, because we are not here to charge extortionate amounts for access to a doctor.
It means the diagnosis can usually be made from your history and photographs, and that treatment can be arranged safely without examining you. Where a condition is not marked treatable online, it is because examination is the diagnosis — listening to a chest, feeling an abdomen, examining an ear or a joint — or because a procedure or device is needed.
Yes, where there is a genuine bacterial infection — cellulitis, impetigo, bacterial urine infections, confirmed strep throat. We will also frequently tell you that you do not need one. Most sore throats, coughs, colds and earaches are viral, and an antibiotic gives you the side effects with none of the benefit.
If your problem turns out to be genuinely outside what we can do remotely, the doctor will tell you straight away, point you to the right service, and refund your fee in full. We would rather do that than fill twenty minutes to justify the charge.
Call 999 or go to A&E — do not book an online appointment and do not wait for a reply to an email. For urgent problems that are not emergencies, NHS 111 is available 24 hours a day, online or by phone, and can direct you to the right service.
Patient reviews
