Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31711920›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology2020

Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis for Detection of Minimal Residual Disease After Chemoradiotherapy for Localized Esophageal Cancer.

Tej D Azad, Aadel A Chaudhuri, Penny Fang, Yawei Qiao, Mohammad S Esfahani, Jacob J Chabon, Emily G Hamilton, Yi D Yang, Alex Lovejoy, Aaron M Newman and 11 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 155 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
155citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT06283875 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective, Single Center Clinical Study on the Clinical Significance of Personalized ctDNA-MRD in Predicting the Efficacy and Monitoring the Risk of Recurrence of Cervical Cancer

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorGeneplus-Beijing Co. Ltd.Ran2024 to 2029Enrolled80ConditionsOvarian Cancer
NCT06476067 recruitingnot on this map

Predicting Postoperative Early Tumor Recurrence in Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

TypeobservationalSponsorCity of Hope Medical CenterRan2006 to 2028Enrolled150ConditionsEsophageal Cancer, Recurrence, DNA MethylationArmsSurgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

155 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 269 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Clinical utility and applicability of circulating tumor DNA testing in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Prognostic value of tumor markers and ctDNA in patients with resectable gastric cancer receiving perioperative treatment: results from the CRITICS trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2022
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Assessment of methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 circulating tumor DNA as a prognostic biomarker in esophagogastric adenocarcinomas.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026
    Article
  20. Review

95 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

21 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tej D AzadDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Aadel A ChaudhuriDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Penny FangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Yawei QiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Mohammad S EsfahaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Jacob J ChabonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Emily G HamiltonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Yi D YangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Alex LovejoyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Aaron M NewmanStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
David M KurtzStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Michael JinStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Joseph Schroers-MartinStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Henning StehrDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Chih Long LiuStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Angela Bik-Yu HuiStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Viren PatelDepartment of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Dipen MaruDepartment of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Steven H LinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: shlin@mdanderson.org.
Ash A AlizadehStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Electronic address: arasha@stanford.edu.
Maximilian DiehnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Electronic address: diehn@stanford.edu.
Stanford University · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Developing a genomic approach for cancer screeningDP2CA186569 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DIEHN, MAXIMILIAN · 2013 to 2013
$2.4M
Noninvasive monitoring of lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapyR01CA188298 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALIZADEH, ASH ARASH, DIEHN, MAXIMILIAN · 2015 to 2019
$1.8M
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids for Early Treatment Response Assessment of Hepatocellular CancerK08CA238711 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI CHAUDHURI, AADEL · 2019 to 2021
$647k
NCI NIH HHS DP2 CA186569NCI NIH HHS K08 CA238711NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS R01 CA188298
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsBiomarkers are needed to risk stratify after chemoradiotherapy for localized esophageal cancer. These could improve identification of patients at risk for cancer progression and selection of additional therapy.

methodsWe performed deep sequencing (CAncer Personalized Profiling by deep Sequencing, [CAPP-Seq]) analyses of plasma cell-free DNA collected from 45 patients before and after chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer, as well as DNA from leukocytes and fixed esophageal tumor biopsy samples collected during esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Patients were treated from May 2010 through October 2015; 23 patients subsequently underwent esophagectomy, and 22 did not undergo surgery. We also sequenced DNA from blood samples from 40 healthy control individuals. We analyzed 802 regions of 607 genes for single-nucleotide variants previously associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma. Patients underwent imaging analyses 6-8 weeks after chemoradiotherapy and were followed for 5 years. Our primary aim was to determine whether detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after chemoradiotherapy is associated with risk of tumor progression (growth of local, regional, or distant tumors, detected by imaging or biopsy).

resultsThe median proportion of tumor-derived DNA in total cell-free DNA before treatment was 0.07%, indicating that ultrasensitive assays are needed for quantification and analysis of ctDNA from localized esophageal tumors. Detection of ctDNA after chemoradiotherapy was associated with tumor progression (hazard ratio, 18.7; P < .0001), formation of distant metastases (hazard ratio, 32.1; P < .0001), and shorter disease-specific survival times (hazard ratio, 23.1; P < .0001). A higher proportion of patients with tumor progression had new mutations detected in plasma samples collected after chemoradiotherapy than patients without progression (P = .03). Detection of ctDNA after chemoradiotherapy preceded radiographic evidence of tumor progression by an average of 2.8 months. Among patients who received chemoradiotherapy without surgery, combined ctDNA and metabolic imaging analysis predicted progression in 100% of patients with tumor progression, compared with 71% for only ctDNA detection and 57% for only metabolic imaging analysis (P < .001 for comparison of either technique to combined analysis).

conclusionsIn an analysis of cell-free DNA in blood samples from patients who underwent chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer, detection of ctDNA was associated with tumor progression, metastasis, and disease-specific survival. Analysis of ctDNA might be used to identify patients at highest risk for tumor progression.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyAdenocarcinomaAgedBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyCarcinoma, Squamous CellCirculating Tumor DNADisease ProgressionEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagusFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealthy VolunteersHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAChemoradiotherapyGeneticsPolymorphismSNP

Identifiers

PMID31711920
PMCPMC7010551
OpenAlexW2985165646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.