ArticleOncology letters2020
Evaluation of circulating cell-free DNA as a molecular monitoring tool in patients with metastatic cancer.
Article in Oncology letters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond CA-125: circulating cell-free DNA as the next-generation biomarker in ovarian malignancy.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Navigating the complexities of ferroptosis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: roles, mechanisms and potential applications.Cell death discovery · 2026Review
- Review
- The Role of Circulating Tumor DNA in Ovarian Cancer.Cancers · 2024Review
- Review
- The amount of DNA combined with TP53 mutations in liquid biopsy is associated with clinical outcome of renal cancer patients treated with immunotherapy and VEGFR-TKIs.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Review
- Use of plasma ctDNA as a potential biomarker for longitudinal monitoring of a patient with metastatic high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma receiving pembrolizumab and personalized neoepitope-derived multipeptide vaccinations: a case report.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2021Article
- Can Circulating Cell-Free DNA or Circulating Tumor DNA Be a Promising Marker in Ovarian Cancer?Journal of oncology · 2021Review
- Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Risk Factors, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
- An Overview of Pancreatic Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment in China: Current Landscape and Future Prospects.Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical AssociationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical decisions made when treating patients with metastatic cancer require knowledge of the current tumor extent and response to therapy. For the majority of solid tumors, a response assessment, which is based on imaging, is used to guide these decisions. However, measuring serum protein biomarkers (i.e. tumor markers) may be of additional use. Furthermore, tumor markers exhibit variable specificity and sensitivity and cannot therefore be solely relied upon when making decisions regarding cancer treatment. Therefore, there is a clinical requirement for the identification of specific, sensitive and quantitative biomarkers. In recent years, circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and mutation-specific circulating cell-free tumor DNA (cftDNA) have been identified as novel potential biomarkers. In the current study, cfDNA and cftDNA were compared using imaging-based staging and current tumor markers in 15 patients with metastatic colorectal, pancreatic or breast cancer. These patients were treated at the Third Medical Department of Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg (Austria). The results of the current study demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between the concentration changes of cfDNA and cftDNA and response to treatment, which was assessed by imaging. A correlation was not indicated with current clinically used tumor markers, including carcinoembryonic antigen, carcinoma antigen 15-3 and carcinoma antigen 19-9. The present study also indicated a correlation between cfDNA and cftDNA and the tumor volume of metastatic lesions, which was not observed with the current clinically used tumor markers. In conclusion, cfDNA and cftDNA exhibit the potential to become novel biomarkers for the response assessment following cancer treatment, and may serve as a tool for the estimation of tumor volume. The current study further supports the increasingly important role of cfDNA and cftDNA as new monitoring tools for use during cancer therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.