Diagnostics roadmap: stains → gene panels → blood tests that decide treatment
Cancer diagnosis moved from what a tumour looks like under a microscope to what is driving it, and now to reading it from a blood sample. The next step is tests that tell the doctor what to do, not only what is there.
Overview
Histopathology and immunohistochemistry remain the foundation of every cancer diagnosis, and the first companion diagnostic (HER2 testing paired with trastuzumab in 1998) set the pattern that every targeted drug since has followed: no test, no drug. Single-gene tests gave way to comprehensive genomic profiling of hundreds of genes, tumour-agnostic biomarkers (mismatch repair deficiency, tumour mutational burden, NTRK fusions), and gene-expression signatures that let most women with early hormone-positive breast cancer skip chemotherapy.
The current shift is from tissue to blood and from description to decision. Circulating tumour DNA now genotypes lung cancer without a biopsy, detects molecular residual disease after surgery months before a scan would, and has changed treatment in randomised trials: DYNAMIC halved adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer, SERENA-6 switched endocrine therapy on an ESR1 mutation found in blood, and IMvigor011 produced the first ctDNA-guided drug approval in 2026. Digital pathology is following the same path, with the first AI tests that predict treatment benefit from a routine slide cleared in 2025 and 2026.
What decides the pace is validation rather than invention: prospective evidence that acting on a test improves outcomes, standardisation across laboratories, reimbursement for tests that avoid treatment rather than add it, and data that flows between the sequencer, the slide scanner, the record and the registry.
- 1940s-1990shistoric
Morphology, stains and the first companion test
Haematoxylin and eosin, then immunohistochemistry and FISH, defined cancer by appearance and a handful of proteins. HER2 testing approved alongside trastuzumab in 1998 created the companion diagnostic: a test whose result is the gate to a drug. Every targeted therapy since has been launched with one.
- 2000s-2010shistoric
Single-gene tests and gene-expression signatures
PCR kits for EGFR, KRAS and BRAF matched the first kinase inhibitors to the right patients; the cobas EGFR test became the first blood-based companion diagnostic. Gene-expression signatures did the opposite job, identifying who could safely skip treatment: TAILORx (2018) and RxPONDER showed that most women with early hormone-positive breast cancer and a low Oncotype DX score gain nothing from chemotherapy.
- 2017-2022current
Comprehensive profiling and tumour-agnostic biomarkers
Sequencing hundreds of genes at once (FoundationOne CDx, TruSight Oncology, Tempus xT) replaced serial single-gene tests, and the biomarker began to matter more than the organ: pembrolizumab for any mismatch-repair-deficient tumour and larotrectinib for any NTRK fusion made the test the indication. Guardant360 CDx did the same from blood. Variant knowledgebases and molecular tumour boards turned raw variants into decisions.
Comprehensive genomic profilingFoundationOne CDx / Liquid CDxTruSight Oncology ComprehensiveTempus xT CDxGuardant360 CDxMSI and mismatch-repair testingTumour mutational burden testingHRD & BRCA testingCancer variant knowledgebases and molecular tumour boardsMultidisciplinary tumour boardsTumour-agnostic (tissue-agnostic) approval - 2022-2026current
Blood tests that change treatment in randomised trials
Molecular residual disease testing crossed from prognosis to action. DYNAMIC (2022) halved adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer with no loss of recurrence-free survival; CIRCULATE-Japan runs the same question at national scale; SERENA-6 switched endocrine therapy when an ESR1 mutation appeared in blood before a scan showed progression; and IMvigor011 delivered the first ctDNA-guided approval, in bladder cancer, in 2026. Tumour-informed (Signatera, RaDaR) and tumour-naive (Guardant Reveal) assays now compete on sensitivity and turnaround.
- 2024-2028emerging
Slides become data
Whole-slide scanning made the microscope image computable, and foundation models trained on millions of slides now predict biomarkers, recurrence risk and treatment benefit from a routine stain. ArteraAI Prostate (2025) was the first AI test cleared to predict benefit from a therapy; ArteraAI Breast followed in 2026. MASAI showed in a randomised screening trial that AI reading finds more cancers with less radiologist workload. The open question is prospective proof that AI-derived biomarkers should change treatment, and a regulatory route for models that keep learning.
Digital pathology & AIPathology & radiology foundation modelsWhole-slide scanners and image managementVirchow / Virchow2 (Paige, MSK)Prov-GigaPath (Microsoft, Providence)ArteraAI ProstateArteraAI BreastMASAI (Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence)MUSK (Stanford, vision-language pathology) - 2027-2032emerging
Spatial, single-cell and protein layers guide the choice
Genotype explains which drug could work; architecture and phenotype may explain which one will. Spatial and single-cell profiling map where immune cells sit relative to tumour cells, proteomics measures the drug's actual target, long-read sequencing resolves rearrangements and methylation together, and near-continuous ctDNA sampling turns monitoring into a running signal. Each is a research tool today; the work of this era is showing that any of them changes an outcome when used to choose treatment.
- What sets the pacecurrent
Validation, standardisation and payment
Tests that decide who gets a drug are still often validated retrospectively, run differently in different laboratories, and paid for only when they add treatment rather than remove it. The fixes on the table: pre-registration of biomarker studies, a national platform every ctDNA-positive patient can join, coverage-with-evidence for residual disease tests, universal sequencing that feeds a shared learning system, and a clear regulatory status for laboratory-developed tests.
Biomarkers are not validated or standardisedDormant cells and minimal residual diseaseData silosTumour heterogeneity and clonal evolutionPre-register biomarker validation studies the way trials are registeredA national platform trial that every ctDNA-positive patient can joinPay for residual disease tests only inside a trial or registryUniversal tumour and germline sequencing at diagnosis feeding a shared learning systemFDA laboratory-developed test (LDT) ruleReference laboratories and companion-diagnostic testing
Story
topMorphology, stains and the first companion test
Haematoxylin and eosin, then immunohistochemistry and FISH, defined cancer by appearance and a handful of proteins. HER2 testing approved alongside trastuzumab in 1998 created the companion diagnostic: a test whose result is the gate to a drug. Every targeted therapy since has been launched with one.
Histopathology means looking at cancer cells under a microscope, and immunohistochemistry stains them for specific proteins. Together they are still the foundation of every diagnosis.
Looking at the leukaemia's chromosomes under a microscope, or lighting up specific gene breaks with fluorescent probes, to classify risk.
The tests that grade a breast or stomach cancer's HER2 level, from the original trastuzumab test in 1998 to the new 'HER2-low' and 'ultralow' cut-offs.
The test that decides whether a specific drug is right for you, approved together with the drug.
Taking a sliver of tissue (core) or a few cells (fine-needle aspiration) through a needle guided by ultrasound, CT or MRI, to diagnose the cancer and test its markers without surgery.
Single-gene tests and gene-expression signatures
PCR kits for EGFR, KRAS and BRAF matched the first kinase inhibitors to the right patients; the cobas EGFR test became the first blood-based companion diagnostic. Gene-expression signatures did the opposite job, identifying who could safely skip treatment: TAILORx (2018) and RxPONDER showed that most women with early hormone-positive breast cancer and a low Oncotype DX score gain nothing from chemotherapy.
The lung cancer gene test that became the first blood-based companion diagnostic the FDA ever approved.
A family of quick single-gene tests that decide who can have several bowel, lung, breast and bladder cancer drugs.
A 21-gene test that tells most women with early hormone-positive breast cancer whether they can safely skip chemotherapy.
Showed that most women with the commonest breast cancer can safely skip chemotherapy if a gene test says their risk is low or intermediate.
Postmenopausal women with a few positive lymph nodes and a low gene-test score can skip chemotherapy; premenopausal women still benefit from it.
A 70-gene test that tells whether an early breast cancer is genomically low or high risk, used to decide who can skip chemotherapy.
A 50-gene test run in local hospital laboratories that estimates the ten-year risk of a hormone-positive breast cancer coming back.
Comprehensive profiling and tumour-agnostic biomarkers
Sequencing hundreds of genes at once (FoundationOne CDx, TruSight Oncology, Tempus xT) replaced serial single-gene tests, and the biomarker began to matter more than the organ: pembrolizumab for any mismatch-repair-deficient tumour and larotrectinib for any NTRK fusion made the test the indication. Guardant360 CDx did the same from blood. Variant knowledgebases and molecular tumour boards turned raw variants into decisions.
Sequencing hundreds of cancer genes at once from a biopsy to find the mutations a drug can target.
The FDA-approved tissue (324 genes) and blood genomic tests that serve as companion diagnostics for dozens of drugs.
A large gene panel hospitals can run themselves, approved by the FDA in 2024 as a companion diagnostic for the tumour-agnostic drug larotrectinib.
Tempus's tumour-and-normal gene panel, FDA-approved in 2023 as a companion test for EGFR antibodies in bowel cancer.
A blood test that reads a tumour's mutations without a tissue biopsy and is the FDA-approved gateway to several targeted drugs.
Tests that show whether a tumour has lost its DNA spell-checker; if so, immunotherapy works unusually well and an inherited syndrome may be present.
Counting how many mutations a tumour carries per stretch of DNA; heavily mutated tumours are more likely to respond to immunotherapy.
Tests that reveal whether a tumour has a broken DNA repair system, which predicts response to PARP inhibitors and platinum.
Curated databases that say what each mutation means for treatment, and the expert meetings that use them to decide on therapy.
Regular meetings where surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists and others review each patient's case together and agree a plan; mandatory in many countries and associated with more guideline-concordant care.
A tumour-agnostic approval lets a drug be used for any cancer carrying a specific molecular feature, regardless of where it started.
Blood tests that change treatment in randomised trials
Molecular residual disease testing crossed from prognosis to action. DYNAMIC (2022) halved adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer with no loss of recurrence-free survival; CIRCULATE-Japan runs the same question at national scale; SERENA-6 switched endocrine therapy when an ESR1 mutation appeared in blood before a scan showed progression; and IMvigor011 delivered the first ctDNA-guided approval, in bladder cancer, in 2026. Tumour-informed (Signatera, RaDaR) and tumour-naive (Guardant Reveal) assays now compete on sensitivity and turnaround.
An ultra-sensitive blood test after surgery that detects leftover cancer months before a scan would.
A blood test that reads fragments of DNA shed by the tumour, so you can genotype or monitor cancer without a needle in the tumour.
Showed that a blood test can safely halve the number of colon cancer patients given chemotherapy after surgery.
Japan's national programme tests whether a blood test after surgery should decide who gets chemotherapy, and whether treating a positive test early helps.
The first trial to change treatment because of a blood test rather than a scan: switching to camizestrant when an ESR1 mutation appeared in the blood delayed progression by seven months.
The first trial to use a blood test for leftover cancer to decide who gets immunotherapy, and it worked.
The most widely used blood test for detecting leftover cancer after surgery, personalised to each patient's tumour mutations.
NeoGenomics' personalised blood test for tiny amounts of leftover cancer, tracking up to 48 mutations from the patient's own tumour.
A blood test for leftover cancer after surgery that needs no tumour sample, so results come faster than tumour-informed tests.
A blood-test-selected trial testing whether matching the drug to the specific resistance mutation beats the standard second-line drug.
Slides become data
Whole-slide scanning made the microscope image computable, and foundation models trained on millions of slides now predict biomarkers, recurrence risk and treatment benefit from a routine stain. ArteraAI Prostate (2025) was the first AI test cleared to predict benefit from a therapy; ArteraAI Breast followed in 2026. MASAI showed in a randomised screening trial that AI reading finds more cancers with less radiologist workload. The open question is prospective proof that AI-derived biomarkers should change treatment, and a regulatory route for models that keep learning.
Scanning microscope slides and letting software measure things a pathologist cannot see, including predictions of who will benefit from a treatment.
Very large AI models trained on millions of slides or scans that can be adapted to almost any diagnostic question.
The scanners that turn glass slides into gigapixel images, and the software that stores and serves them, without which pathology AI cannot run.
A pathology foundation model trained on millions of slides that can detect cancer and predict biomarkers from an ordinary H&E slide.
An open pathology model trained on 1.3 billion image tiles from a US health system, modelling whole slides at gigapixel scale.
The first AI tool cleared by the FDA to predict both prognosis and treatment benefit from a routine biopsy slide, in prostate cancer.
An FDA-cleared AI test (May 2026) that reads breast cancer slides to estimate recurrence risk in early hormone-positive disease.
The first randomised trial of AI in breast screening found more cancers and cut radiologists' reading work almost in half without more false alarms.
A model that reads slides and clinical text together to predict who will respond to immunotherapy.
Spatial, single-cell and protein layers guide the choice
Genotype explains which drug could work; architecture and phenotype may explain which one will. Spatial and single-cell profiling map where immune cells sit relative to tumour cells, proteomics measures the drug's actual target, long-read sequencing resolves rearrangements and methylation together, and near-continuous ctDNA sampling turns monitoring into a running signal. Each is a research tool today; the work of this era is showing that any of them changes an outcome when used to choose treatment.
Reading the genes of each individual cell, and mapping where each cell sits in the tumour.
Choosing treatment from a map of where each cell type sits in the tumour, not just from a list of its mutations.
Spatial biology instruments are machines that map which genes and proteins are active in each part of a tumour slice.
Measuring the proteins in a tumour, which is what drugs actually hit, rather than the genes that encode them.
Reading DNA in very long stretches, which reveals rearrangements and methylation that short-read machines miss.
Instead of testing blood every three months, sampling constantly, so a relapse is caught the week it starts.
Fragmentomics reads the sizes and positions of DNA fragments in blood, not the mutations. Cancer cells die messily and leave a recognisable fragmentation pattern.
Reading chemical tags on DNA that reveal a cell's identity, used to classify brain tumours and to detect cancer in blood.
Validation, standardisation and payment
Tests that decide who gets a drug are still often validated retrospectively, run differently in different laboratories, and paid for only when they add treatment rather than remove it. The fixes on the table: pre-registration of biomarker studies, a national platform every ctDNA-positive patient can join, coverage-with-evidence for residual disease tests, universal sequencing that feeds a shared learning system, and a clear regulatory status for laboratory-developed tests.
Tests that decide who gets a drug are often not validated prospectively and are measured differently in every lab.
After a 'successful' treatment, cells can sleep for years then relapse. We can barely detect them and cannot target them.
Records, scans, genomes and outcomes sit in separate systems that cannot talk. Every patient's experience is lost to the next.
A tumour is many tumours. Treatments that kill most cells leave the rest to grow back, changed.
Drug trials must be registered before they start so results cannot be hidden or reshaped. Studies that claim a biomarker predicts outcome should be registered too.
Blood tests can now find leftover cancer months before scans, but most patients who test positive have nothing to enrol in. One standing trial per country would fix that.
Leftover-cancer blood tests are being sold faster than evidence that acting on them helps. Paying for them only when the result is recorded would generate the missing evidence.
Sequence every cancer at diagnosis, along with the patient's inherited genes, and pool the results with treatments and outcomes so every patient teaches the system how to treat the next.
Most cancer tests in the US, including Galleri, Signatera and Oncotype DX, are 'lab-developed tests' overseen through lab standards rather than FDA approval; the FDA's 2024 attempt to change that was struck down in court in 2025.
The big labs that run most biomarker tests, and the reagent makers whose stains decide who gets a drug.
Pages like this
not linked directly; found by shared links- TermCirculating tumour DNA (ctDNA)
Shares cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2, Guardant Reveal, RaDaR, cfDNA fragmentomics.
- RoadmapAI in oncology roadmap: pattern readers → foundation models → agents in the workflow
Shares Prov-GigaPath (Microsoft, Providence), MUSK (Stanford, vision-language pathology), Virchow / Virchow2 (Paige, MSK), ArteraAI Breast.
- CompanyGuardant Health
Shares Guardant Reveal, Continuous and near-continuous ctDNA monitoring, Guardant360 CDx, Tumour heterogeneity and clonal evolution.
- Key paperIMvigor011: using a blood test for leftover cancer to decide who gets immunotherapy after bladder surgery
Shares Pay for residual disease tests only inside a trial or registry, IMvigor011, Signatera, Dormant cells and minimal residual disease.
- Key paperGALAXY: tumour DNA in blood four weeks after bowel cancer surgery predicts relapse tenfold
Shares ctDNA-guided adjuvant therapy as the default in stage II-III colon cancer, Formally qualify tumour-DNA blood tests as a surrogate endpoint for adjuvant trials, Signatera, Dormant cells and minimal residual disease.
- IdeaPush residual disease detection a hundredfold deeper with whole-genome methods
Shares cfDNA fragmentomics, DNA methylation profiling, Dormant cells and minimal residual disease, Whole-exome & whole-genome sequencing.
- CompanyAgilent Technologies (Dako)
Shares Reference laboratories and companion-diagnostic testing, PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx, HER2 IHC and ISH companion assays (HercepTest, PATHWAY 4B5, HER2 Dual ISH), Companion diagnostics.
- TermCompanion diagnostic
Shares Test the drug in biomarker-negative patients too, so the biomarker can be validated, cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2, therascreen companion diagnostic kits (KRAS, EGFR, PIK3CA, FGFR, BRAF), Guardant360 CDx.