The insurance company HanseMerkur has been advertising a cancer blood test for a year, which the advertising gives the impression that it could save lives. Experts are increasingly criticizing the policy.
Last year, the insurance company HanseMerkur launched an advertising campaign for the Krebs-Scan insurance policy. This includes a blood test called PanTum Detect, which is intended to provide evidence of cancer. If the result is positive, the insurance will pay for further tests. The medical professor Jutta Hübner sharply criticized the offer last summer. In the Bavarian Radio she spoke of “charlatanry”.
Hübner heads the Prevention and Integrative Oncology working group at the German Cancer Society. She sees no reason to back away from her scathing criticism, on the contrary. Opposite BR and NDR she adds. HanseMerkur markets the Krebs-Scan policy without restrictions. That’s why the cancer expert continues to say: “The offer of this insurance is charlatanism.”
Always hoping for cancer blood tests
For many years, researchers have been trying to develop tests that can detect evidence of cancer in the blood. The PanTum Detect test is “innovative,” says HanseMerkur for the cancer scan policy on its website. The test often detects cancer in an early, symptom-free phase. And the following applies to cancer: “The earlier you detect it, the better the chances of recovery.”
HanseMerkur bases its optimistic assessment of the test primarily on a study with around 5,000 participants that was carried out at the University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf (UKE). A publication on the study states that the PanTum Detect blood test could contribute to a “massive reduction in cancer mortality.”
Harsh criticism of the test study
However, medical professor Hübner from the University of Jena sees major technical errors in the study. In the suspected cases, a tissue sample was not used to determine whether the patients really had cancer. The results are based on fluoroscopy using PET/CT, for example. It was also not examined whether the study participants would ultimately live longer because of an indication of cancer. The UKE study and HanseMerkur’s handling of it are “unserious,” says Hübner.
The medical professor is not the only one who sharply criticizes the PanTum Detect test and the Krebs-Scan insurance policy. After ARDAfter broadcasters reported critically about the cancer test and cancer insurance last summer, twelve medical societies published a statement. It says: “At this point in time, cancer experts are strongly warning against offers that are primarily based on a business based on fear.”
One of the specialist societies that wrote the statement is the German Society for Nuclear Medicine. Constantin Lapa is on its board; the medical professor heads the department for nuclear medicine at the Augsburg University Hospital. Lapa emphasizes that one thing was important to him: “To make a statement that this cannot be seriously advertised at the moment.”
Weighing up opportunities and risks
Hübner from the Prevention and Integrative Oncology working group of the German Cancer Society emphasizes: Early cancer detection measures are also associated with risks that patients and doctors always have to weigh up against the opportunities. In addition to the risk of false positive results, there is also the risk of false negative results.
This is what doctors talk about when patients are told they don’t have cancer, but in reality the test just didn’t detect it. According to cancer experts, false negative results can lead to those affected being lulled into a false sense of security and not paying attention to warning signs.
Big doubts about PanTum study
However, there is other criticism of the study with which HanseMerkur promotes its cancer scan insurance package. The PanTum Detect blood test is an idea that could revolutionize early detection worldwide. But the research results were not published in a well-known scientific journal, but in an online publisher with a postal address in the American gambling metropolis of Las Vegas. Virtual office addresses can be rented at the same address.
At the request of the University of Bremen, experts from the State and University Library BR looked at the publisher’s website and found a number of inconsistencies: for example, that a very quick review of scientific papers is promised, that the editorial advisory board of the magazine appears questionable, and that the American-based publisher’s English is bumpy.
The experts at the University of Bremen come to the conclusion: “The publishing practices seem dubious. We would advise our scientists against publishing with this publisher and would not cover the publication costs from our Open Access Fund.” Other scientific research services where the BR asked come to the same conclusion.
Striking ones Business ties
HanseMerkur itself is likely to have a great interest in the cancer blood test becoming established. The insurance company holds a 49.9 percent stake in Zyagnum Detect DACH Vertriebs-GmbH. 50.1 percent belong to Zyagnum AG. According to the commercial register, the aim of this GmbH is “the broad market launch and marketing” of the PanTum Detect test, not only in Germany, but also in the target markets of Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg.
Sandra Klug from the Hamburg consumer advice center says she has never seen such close economic integration. One could come to the conclusion “that the focus here is simply on one’s own profiteering and not on the well-being of consumers.”
But there are connections not only between HanseMerkur and the blood test manufacturer Zyagnum. Krebs-Scan is advertised by saying that the relevant examinations are carried out by a “selected network of doctors”.
The NDR has compared the addresses of the doctors involved with the shareholders who hold shares in the company that developed the blood test. There is a match with a doctor in Heilbronn. When asked whether her medical advice on the test can be independent if she earns indirectly from it, the doctor does not answer.
Lots of questions, no answers
The number of questions that arise about cancer scans is considerable. Last year, the insurance company HanseMerkur described the study, which plays an important role in the Krebs-Scan policy, as “independent”. However, the study was funded by Zyagnum, the manufacturer of the blood test in question.
The study authors include Zyagnum employees. In science it is considered imperative to point out such combinations as a “conflict of interest”. When the study was published, no such note was included.
A reference to a conflict of interest was only made after research by the BR subsequently added to the study. An early version of the manuscript included a paragraph on conflicts of interest, but it was removed. Why this note was deleted and by whom: The University of Hamburg does not provide an answer.
The criticism of Krebs-Scan raises even more questions. What do the authors of the study, which plays an important role in insurance policies, say about the allegations made by numerous colleagues? Why was a study that could revolutionize cancer screening worldwide published by an online publisher in Las Vegas rather than a reputable publisher? How much money did the publisher get from the University of Hamburg? How much money did the University of Hamburg receive from the manufacturer of the blood test, Zyagnum, for the study?
Silence since last summer
The University of Hamburg has not responded to questions for eight and a half months BR and NDR. She justifies her silence by saying that a so-called “internal review process” is underway to clarify possible discrepancies. The HanseMerkur insurance company now explains that it also warns against false expectations and only offers cancer scans as a supplement to the early detection examinations that statutory health insurance companies pay for. The manufacturer of the blood test, Zyagnum AG, emphasizes that the scientific basis of their test is very sound.
This behavior is met with incredulous shaking of the head by many medical professionals. Cancer specialist Hübner from the University of Jena fears considerable damage if early cancer detection as a whole is cast in a negative light. Long-established tests such as mammography for the early detection of breast cancer or colonoscopy could fall into disrepute, she warns: “That would be absolutely damaging.”
The research film “Controversial cancer test: hope or charlatanry?” see in the ARD media library.