Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30050094›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2018

Clinical potential of circulating tumour DNA in patients receiving anticancer immunotherapy.

Luc Cabel, Charlotte Proudhon, Emanuela Romano, Nicolas Girard, Olivier Lantz, Marc-Henri Stern, Jean-Yves Pierga, François-Clément Bidard

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

125 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. [Pseudoprogression after start of immunotherapy].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Luc CabelDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
Charlotte ProudhonCirculating Tumor Biomarkers Laboratory, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
Emanuela RomanoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
Nicolas GirardDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
Olivier LantzINSERM U932, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3161-7719
Marc-Henri SternINSERM U830, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
Jean-Yves PiergaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France.
François-Clément BidardDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris, France. fcbidard@curie.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5932-8949

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considerable interest surrounds the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with solid tumours following the demonstration of the impressive clinical efficacy of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and anti-programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 antibodies in several tumour types. However, the emergence of unexpected tumour response patterns, such as pseudoprogression or hyperprogression, might complicate the management of patients receiving these agents. Analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has been shown to have prognostic value by enabling the detection of residual proliferating disease in the adjuvant setting and estimation of tumour burden in the metastatic setting, which are key stratification biomarkers for use of immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI). Furthermore, examinations of ctDNA for genetic predictors of responsiveness to immunotherapy, such as mutations, tumour mutational load, and microsatellite instability provide a noninvasive surrogate for tumour biopsy sampling. Proof-of-concept reports have also demonstrated that quantitative changes in ctDNA levels early in the course of disease are a promising tool for the assessment of responsiveness to ICI that might complement standard imaging approaches. Other applications of this technology are also currently under investigation, such as early detection of resistance to immunotherapy and characterization of mechanisms of resistance. The aim of this Review is to summarize available data on the application of ctDNA in patients receiving immunotherapy and to discuss the most promising future directions.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAHumansMutationNeoplasmsB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCD274 protein, humanCirculating Tumor DNA

Identifiers

PMID30050094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.