Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

[Q]: The story makes it clear that cost of the test is currently speculative (“could cost about $500”) and goes even further to caution that: “Johns Hopkins holds the patent and has not licensed it as yet to a company that would ultimately set the price.” The story makes the two key results of the test quite clear. First, that the 1,005 people tested already had been diagnosed with one of eight common cancers, and the blood test was able to detect cancer in about 70 percent of them. Second, the test was also given to 812 people without cancer and only a false reading for cancer less than 1 percent of the time. Including the additional finding that the test was only able to detect cancer in about 40 percent of the patients with early cancer (ie. stage I) was a thoughtful way of introducing the relevant issue of falsely negative tests. The story does an excellent job of finding an independent source who explains that one of the potential risks of cancer screening tests is either identifying cancers that are not there, or are benign, and can lead to “pointless and potentially dangerous treatments.” The opposite harm is also mentioned; that is, a screening test that erroneously gives a negative result, leading providers to falsely reassure a patient that cancer is not there. Cautious language is used at many points in the story and it does three things quite well. First, it lists the most important limitation of the study: The screening test studied was unable to identify the type of cancer. Second, the implications of both falsely positive and falsely negative tests were explained succinctly and placed in a clinical context that would matter to those undergoing screening. Finally, we were very encouraged by the inclusion of this sentence: “… the researchers will still have to demonstrate that the test improves and extends the lives of cancer patients.” There is no disease mongering in this story. The two independent sources cited provide important context for understanding the strengths, limitations, and clinical context of the screening test. This was a tough call, but ultimately we felt the story would have been stronger had it mentioned the performance of current screening methods for some of the cancer types, such as Cologuard for colon cancer. That said, we were glad the story included some of the pitfalls of screening for prostate and breast cancer, as well as the long struggle to develop more blood tests for cancer. It’s mentioned the authors of the study are “hoping their idea would eventually lead to a $500 test … but they have a long way to go.” Future studies of the screening test are also discussed, so it seems clear this test is not currently available. It’s made clear that “there have been many attempts over the decades to develop blood tests to screen for cancers … but these methods don’t give reliable results.” It’s also pointed out that what makes this screening test unique is that it combines two previously used methods (screening for proteins and for DNA) into one test. This story does not appear to rely upon a news release.
[A]: Scientists Edge Closer To A Blood Test To Detect Cancers


[Q]: The Baltimore Sun reported that Catherine Pugh continues to convalesce at home and is under doctors’ supervision. She abruptly took leave April 1. “While her well-known tireless energy has been diminished by this illness, her doctors are confident she will recover her health and strength in due course,” Pugh’s personal attorney, Steven Silverman, told The Sun. “I know she is grateful for the good wishes of concern and support that she’s received.” Pugh was admitted to Johns Hopkins Hospital in late March, before she took leave and just as the scandal began to grow. The scandal involves her sales of her “Healthy Holly” children’s books to the University of Maryland Medical System, where she sat on the board. Details also emerged that she had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for her books from entities doing business with the city of Baltimore. Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan asked a state prosecutor to begin a criminal investigation. Many city and state lawmakers have called for her resignation. All but one member of the Baltimore City Council have called for Pugh to step down. U.S. Rep. Andy Harris told The Sun that Baltimore needs a new leader. “There are enough questions — legitimate questions cast about this — that I think the mayor probably can no longer be an effective leader of the city,” the Republican said. But the people closest to Pugh say her health, not the scandal, is keeping her from public view. “She’s recovering day by day,” said James Bentley, her spokesman. “She’s focused on getting healthy, and remains committed to Baltimore.” The Sun reported that Pugh, 69, has not publicly faced serious medical issues previously. Neither she nor her advisers have offered details about the nature of her pneumonia. Dr. Paul Auwaerter, clinical director of the division of infectious diseases at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, told the newspaper that recovery times can vary. After people seek treatment, and particularly if they’ve been hospitalized, they are on average “feeling better within 48 to 72 hours,” though it “might take five to seven days” to bounce back completely, he said. But he said it can take longer if complicating factors are involved, such as stress. ___ Information from: The Baltimore Sun, http://www.baltimoresun.com
[A]: Advisers: Baltimore’s mayor still recovering from pneumonia.


[Q]: Forxiga can now be used along with insulin in patients with Type-1 diabetes and a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 27 or more when insulin alone has not been able to control blood sugar levels, the company said. Type-1 diabetes is a chronic condition in which the pancreas produces little or no insulin hormone. Farxiga or Forxiga, as the drug is known outside the United States, is one of AstraZeneca’s top ten drugs by sales. It generated $1.39 billion in 2018, and is key to the company’s future as it turns itself around.
[A]:
EU approves AstraZeneca's drug for adjunct use in Type-1 diabetes.