MyBloodQ · for clinicians and practices
The visit where you wish you had one more thing to offer.
Earlier changes everything.
You know the one. A patient in her forties, the dense-tissue letter in her hand, and a conversation that ends with “keep screening.” We started studying blood because of that visit.
MyBloodQ is Person Health's research program: today a research-use-only study of molecular patterns in blood, with breast cancer as the primary focus. Separately, we are doing the work it would take to make MyBloodQ Breast a clinical laboratory test. Nothing here can be ordered yet. This page is the research so far, what the method is designed to do, and where a practice like yours could fit.
Where this stands today
What exists now, what is underway, and what we are building.
Today
An approved research study
A research-use-only method and the IRB-approved study built around it. Not for use in diagnostic procedures. Not FDA cleared or approved.
Underway
Laboratory and validation work
Laboratory implementation, analytical validation (not finished), clinical reporting, and planning for the prospective studies a clinical test would need.
The goal
MyBloodQ Breast
A future clinical laboratory test, pending the validation, laboratory, regulatory and operational pieces coming together. We are targeting early Q4 2026.
The model is trained and locked. What remains is laboratory implementation, analytical validation, clinical reporting, and the prospective studies needed to establish performance in an intended-use population.
The clinical gap
Mammography is essential. It is also incomplete.
You deal with the gaps every week: dense tissue that hides things, callbacks, supplemental imaging, and patients who wait for an answer and still wonder whether something was missed. None of that is a reason to screen less. It is the reason clinicians have asked for a different kind of signal to put beside the picture.
Some cancers surface between screenings. Low disease burden is the hard case for every modality: small and non-calcified lesions are harder to resolve on imaging, particularly in dense tissue. That is the regime we care most about.
40–50%
of women ages 40 to 74 have dense breast tissue1
Which can reduce mammographic sensitivity. General context about breast density. Not a claim about MyBloodQ or MyBloodQ Breast.
Source: Susan G. Komen, Breast Tissue Density. Cited for epidemiological context; citation does not imply endorsement or affiliation.
Why earlier matters
Stage at detection is the variable that moves outcomes.
Of women whose breast cancer is found while it is still confined to the breast, more than 99% are alive five years later. When it is not found until it has reached distant organs, that figure is 32%. Nothing else about breast cancer care moves the number that far.
Five-year relative survival, invasive breast cancer, by SEER summary stage at diagnosis, localized versus distant (SEER summary stages, not AJCC stages).2 General epidemiological context. Not a claim about MyBloodQ or MyBloodQ Breast.
What finding it earlier actually changes
Survival
Near-complete five-year survival
Five-year relative survival is above 99% while breast cancer is still localized, against 32% once it has reached distant sites.2
Surgery
Less extensive surgery
Breast-conserving surgery is the most common surgical treatment at Stage I, because the tumor is small.3
Systemic therapy
Chemotherapy is often avoidable
Chemotherapy is rarely used at Stage I, and many people with early-stage hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative disease can safely forgo it when genomic testing is favorable.3
General clinical context. Not claims about MyBloodQ or MyBloodQ Breast, and not treatment guidance.
A different biological signal
Imaging looks at structure. MyBloodQ looks at biology.
A mammogram shows what tissue looks like. Blood carries molecular signals from across the body, and those signals change as disease develops.
The practical consequence for a clinician is that the two are reading different things, which is the argument for putting them side by side rather than choosing between them. Whatever MyBloodQ Breast becomes, it is not meant to replace mammography or other imaging, and we will describe its intended use only once that language is established.
What MyBloodQ measures
Infrared spectroscopy measures a broad molecular fingerprint of blood, reading signal across proteins, glycans, nucleic acids, lipids and metabolites. It reads the spectral signature of those molecules rather than sequencing any of them. Machine learning identifies patterns associated with disease. We are not looking for a single biomarker against a single threshold; we are reading a pattern across many.
How that differs from tumor-derived approaches
Blood tests built on tumor-derived genetic material depend on material a tumor sheds into circulation, and the quantity available scales with disease burden. Those approaches have the least to detect exactly when the tumor is smallest. MyBloodQ evaluates systemic molecular patterns instead.
Written deliberately without comparative performance figures. Stage 0 and Stage I are the regime we watch most closely, and the one the planned prospective work is designed to address.
The evidence
Built on a large development dataset and blinded evaluation.
Enough to keep going. Not enough to call it a test.
Case-control research findings · MyBloodQ Breast research subset
Written for clinicians and scientists who evaluate diagnostic evidence. These are case-control research findings, not the performance of a clinical test, and they are not intended as information for patients or the public. If you are here as an individual, the Learn more page is written for you.
The sequence matters as much as the numbers. The classifier was fixed before it met the evaluation data.
4,120 donors
Retrospective, multi-source development dataset: 2,263 non-cancer controls, 1,857 cancer cases, 752 of them breast cancer.
Model trained and locked
A prespecified classifier, fixed before validation.
437 participants
Two independent, blinded case-control cohorts, separate from the development set.
Evaluated as specified
No retraining. No threshold adjustment. No cohort-specific recalibration.
94.6%
Estimated pooled sensitivity
~96%
Estimated specificity
Point estimate from the pooled case-control research analysis. Final statistical verification pending.
What these findings support
Technical and computational feasibility and case-control discrimination in the evaluated research settings.
What they do not establish
Performance in an intended-use or screening population, predictive values (PPV, NPV), indeterminate rate, or clinical utility. A planned prospective study with a leading Texas health system is intended to evaluate clinical performance in a protocol-defined intended-use population.
Research use only. No clinical MyBloodQ service is currently authorized or launched. We do not share interim data from the current study before the primary analysis is locked and released by the PI.
The cohorts, the design and the limits are all open to scrutiny. We would rather they were pushed on now than later.
MyBloodQ and MyBloodQ Breast
What exists today, and what we are building.
It helps to keep two things separate, because we do. MyBloodQ is the research program and the platform. MyBloodQ Breast is the test we hope to make from it. They share a name and a purpose, not a status.
MyBloodQ · today
The research program
A research-use-only method and the IRB-approved study built around it, designed to generate research evidence under Protocol PH-MBQ-RUO-001. Not for use in diagnostic procedures. The table below is the study exactly as approved.
MyBloodQ Breast · the goal
A future clinical laboratory test
The work between here and there:
- Analytical validation, underway but not yet complete
- Laboratory, quality and clinical-reporting pathway work toward a potential future laboratory developed test
- Planned prospective studies in a protocol-defined intended-use population, where PPV, NPV and indeterminate rate still have to be established
All of it subject to the validation, laboratory, regulatory and operational requirements. Availability, timing and intended-use language get published when they are established, not before.
The current study
The study, in one table.
Everything below comes from the IRB-approved study record. If something is not in the table, it is not something we can tell you yet, and we would rather say so than fill in the blank.
| Study | MyBloodQ molecular-baseline research, Protocol PH-MBQ-RUO-001. Primary research subset: MyBloodQ Breast. |
|---|---|
| What it examines | Molecular patterns in blood, with a primary research focus on breast cancer. The platform reads a broad molecular fingerprint rather than a single marker. |
| Sponsor / research laboratory | Person Health, Inc. (St. Paul, MN) |
| Research site | LX Medical – Edina, designated Site 001 |
| IRB | WCG IRB-approved |
| Regulatory status | Research Use Only. Development-stage method. Not FDA cleared or approved. No clinical laboratory result is reported. |
| Participant experience | Two fasting blood draws (baseline and about Month 6), 2 to 5 mL each, over approximately 12 months of participation. |
| What participants receive | No individual result of any kind. No score, classification, risk statement or recommendation. |
| What the site receives | De-identified aggregate summaries only. |
| Data | Coded with a study ID; Person Health holds the key under access controls. Not genetic testing. |
| Cost | No charge to participate, and no payment for participating. |
Source: the WCG IRB-approved study record for Protocol PH-MBQ-RUO-001. Person Health is the sponsor and research laboratory; LX Medical is the designated research site; WCG is the IRB. IRB approval means the study met the board's requirements for research involving people. It is not an endorsement of MyBloodQ, of MyBloodQ Breast, or of anything we hope to build.
In practice
How MyBloodQ Breast is designed to fit your practice.
The intended workflow on availability. This is not a service that can be ordered today, and every step below is a design intent rather than an established process.
- Clinician orders MyBloodQ Breast
- A single standard blood drawOrdinary phlebotomy; no specialized equipment at the practice.
- Sample goes to the Person Health laboratory
- Laboratory analysisPreparation takes about an hour; the analysis itself takes minutes. Roughly two hours total, depending on batch and volume.
- Result returned to the ordering clinicianTargeting about one business day after laboratory receipt, depending on volume.
- The clinician interprets the result in contextAlongside history, imaging, risk factors and clinical judgment. It replaces none of them.
- Guideline-appropriate follow-up when indicatedA negative result would not be a reason to defer recommended screening or diagnostic follow-up.
Accessible is a clinical property, not a marketing one
Implementation burden and affordability decide whether a good test reaches enough people to matter.
Simple collection
A small blood draw by standard phlebotomy.
Operationally manageable
Nothing specialized required at the ordering practice.
Fast turnaround
Targeting about one business day after receipt.
Affordable by design
We are committed to making MyBloodQ Breast as broadly available as we can by controlling what it costs, rather than positioning it as a premium-only test.
Working with Person Health
Two distinct opportunities.
Neither of these needs a test to exist. Both are conversations we are having with practices and clinicians right now.
Track one
Clinical use, on availability
Ordering MyBloodQ Breast as a clinician-authorized laboratory developed test once the remaining laboratory, validation and regulatory requirements are met. We are talking with practices now about workflow, specimen handling and clinician education ahead of that.
Track two
Research collaboration
- Be a research site. Practices can take part in the current research program as a study site, subject to the protocol and IRB requirements. Anything your patients see comes through the IRB-approved recruitment pathway and is used as approved, without changes. Sites receive de-identified aggregate summaries only.
- Put the evidence through its paces. Go through the cohorts, the study design and how the platform works with people who can answer the follow-ups. If you evaluate diagnostics for a living, we want your read, especially the skeptical parts.
- Help design the pathway. Think through what a sensible clinical workflow could look like in a real practice or system, and where MyBloodQ Breast might one day fit alongside what you already run.
What a practice actually gets out of it
A fair question, and one we can answer plainly. Standing as a research site on a WCG IRB-approved study. A working relationship with Person Health before there is a clinical program to talk about. Protocol training, specimen-handling experience, and a trained study workflow in your practice. A research collaborator's view of how MyBloodQ Breast is developing. And recognition or acknowledgment where the protocol and site agreement allow it.
One thing we hold to
Research and clinical access are kept separate, on purpose. Taking part in research creates no priority, reservation or early access to MyBloodQ Breast for any practice or patient. No research result is returned to participants, clinicians, sites or medical records, and research output is not used for diagnosis or patient management. The research exists to generate evidence, and keeping that line clean is what makes the evidence worth anything.
Why we are building this
We are not trying to add a test. We are trying to move the field earlier.
Detection is the point in the whole system where outcomes still change dramatically. It is also the point where access is most unequal. The people who benefit most from finding cancer early are often the least likely to be reached by a premium-priced test. A method designed around an ordinary blood draw can go where those tests do not.
Breakthrough detection is worth very little if it only reaches the people who were already going to be fine.
“As a cancer survivor, I know how quickly disease can change a life, and how much earlier knowledge can matter.”
Ping Yeh, Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer
Some of the people who started Person Health have had cancer, including Ping. The company exists because of what it is like when disease arrives as a surprise. The people here have taken medical products from the lab to the market before. We know the difference between a promising method and a proven test, and we are not going to blur it to make a page read better.
MyBloodQ Breast is intended to be the first clinical application of a broader Person Health vision: signals from blood, breath, imaging and health data, brought together to help people and clinicians recognize meaningful change earlier, while there is still the most to do about it.
Questions we get from clinicians
The ones we hear most.
Can I order MyBloodQ or MyBloodQ Breast for a patient?
No, and not because we are being coy: there is not a test to order. MyBloodQ is a research-use-only study. MyBloodQ Breast is the name of the test we are working toward, and inside the current study it is only the name of the primary research subset. Neither is available for clinical use.
What is the difference between MyBloodQ and MyBloodQ Breast?
MyBloodQ is the platform and the research program: the method, the IRB-approved study, and the readiness work. MyBloodQ Breast is the future clinical test we are developing from it.
What does the method actually measure?
Infrared spectroscopy reads a broad molecular fingerprint of blood across proteins, glycans, nucleic acids, lipids and metabolites, and machine learning identifies patterns associated with disease. It reads the spectral signature of those molecules rather than sequencing any of them, and it is not a single biomarker against a single threshold. It also differs from blood tests built on tumor-derived genetic material, which depend on material a tumor sheds into circulation in quantities that scale with disease burden.
What do participants get?
No individual result of any kind. No score, classification, risk statement or recommendation. Sites get de-identified aggregate summaries only.
What does taking part involve for a participant?
Two fasting blood draws, at baseline and around Month 6, 2 to 5 mL each, over roughly 12 months. No charge to participate, and no payment for participating.
Is participant data anonymous?
No, and we do not call it that. Samples and data are coded with a study ID, and Person Health holds the key under access controls. It is not genetic testing. The summaries sites receive are de-identified.
Is there more data behind these figures?
The figures here are the ones cleared for publication. The cohort-level detail and the study design sit behind them, and they are better walked through with people who evaluate diagnostics for a living than posted on a page. Nothing held back changes the conclusion stated above: these are case-control research findings, and they do not establish what a clinical test would do in a screening population. We also do not share interim data from the current study before the PI locks and releases the primary analysis.
Is it FDA cleared? Is it an LDT?
Neither, today. It is a development-stage method being studied under research-use-only status, and it is not for use in diagnostic procedures. Our goal is to offer MyBloodQ Breast as a laboratory developed test performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory, and the readiness work for that is under way. When there is something established about availability or timing, we will publish it.
Can my practice be a research site?
Yes, subject to the protocol and IRB requirements. Anything your patients see comes through the WCG-approved pathway and is used as approved.
Who is who in the study?
Person Health, Inc. is the sponsor and research laboratory. LX Medical – Edina is the designated research site (Site 001). WCG is the reviewing IRB. LX Medical does not run the study, offer a test, or review results.