Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32312295›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR2020

Cross-sectional analysis of circulating tumor DNA in primary colorectal cancer at surgery and during post-surgery follow-up by liquid biopsy.

Matteo Allegretti, Giuliano Cottone, Fabio Carboni, Ettore Cotroneo, Beatrice Casini, Elena Giordani, Carla Azzurra Amoreo, Simonetta Buglioni, Maria Diodoro, Edoardo Pescarmona and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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.

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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Association of ctDNAJournal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
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

19 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Matteo AllegrettiOncogenomics and Epigenetics, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi, 53, 00144, Rome, Italy.
Giuliano CottoneOncogenomics Division, Eurofins Genoma Group, Via Castel Giubileo, 11, 00138, Rome, Italy.
Fabio CarboniDigestive Surgery, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Ettore CotroneoOncogenomics Division, Eurofins Genoma Group, Via Castel Giubileo, 11, 00138, Rome, Italy.
Beatrice CasiniPathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Elena GiordaniOncogenomics and Epigenetics, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi, 53, 00144, Rome, Italy.
Carla Azzurra AmoreoPathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Simonetta BuglioniPathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Maria DiodoroPathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Edoardo PescarmonaPathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Settimio ZazzaDigestive Surgery, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Orietta FedericiDigestive Surgery, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Massimo ZeuliMedical Oncology 1, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Laura ContiClinical Pathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni CiglianaClinical Pathology, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Francesco FiorentinoOncogenomics Division, Eurofins Genoma Group, Via Castel Giubileo, 11, 00138, Rome, Italy.
Mario ValleDigestive Surgery, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Patrizio GiacominiOncogenomics and Epigenetics, IRCSS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi, 53, 00144, Rome, Italy. patrizio.giacomini@ifo.gov.it.
Francesca SpinellaOncogenomics Division, Eurofins Genoma Group, Via Castel Giubileo, 11, 00138, Rome, Italy. spinella@laboratoriogenoma.it.
Epigenomics (Germany) · DEIstituto di Genomica Applicata · IT

Funding

Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro 19052Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro 19503H2020 Future and Emerging Technologies 633937
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiquid biopsy (LB) in early-stage, non-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) must be sensitive enough to detect extremely low circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels. This challenge has been seldom and non-systematically investigated.

methodsNext generation sequencing (NGS) and digital PCR (dPCR) were combined to test tumor DNAs (tDNAs) and paired ctDNAs collected at surgery from 39 patients, 12 of whom were also monitored during the immediate post-surgery follow up. Patients treated for metastatic disease (n = 14) were included as controls.

resultsNGS and dPCR concordantly (100% agreement) called at least one single nucleotide variant (SNV) in 34 tDNAs, estimated differences in allelic frequencies being negligible (±1.4%). However, despite dPCR testing, SNVs were only detectable in 15/34 (44.1%) ctDNAs from patients at surgery, as opposed to 14/14 (100%) metastatic patients. This was likely due to striking differences (average 10 times, up to 500) in ctDNA levels between groups. NGS revealed blood-only SNVs, suggesting spatial heterogeneity since pre-surgery disease stages, and raising the combined NGS/dPCR sensitivity to 58.8%. ctDNA levels at surgery correlated with neither tumor size, stage, grade, or nodal status, nor with variant abundance in paired tDNA. LB sensitivity reached 63.6% when ctDNA was combined with CEA. Finally, persistence and absence of ctDNA on the first conventional (month 3) post-surgery follow-up were associated with fast relapse and a disease-free status in 3 and 7 patients, respectively.

conclusionsA simple clinical NGS/dPCR/CEA combination effectively addresses the LB challenge in a fraction of non-metastatic CRC patients.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAColorectal NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLiquid BiopsyMaleCirculating Tumor DNACirculating tumor DNAColorectal carcinomaDigital PCRLiquid biopsyNext generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID32312295
PMCPMC7168847
OpenAlexW3017127141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.