Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32581559›Full record

ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2020

Circulating Tumor DNA Correlates with Outcome in Metastatic Melanoma Treated by BRAF and MEK Inhibitors - Results of a Prospective Biomarker Study.

Andrea Forschner, Stephanie Weißgraeber, Dirk Hadaschik, Martin Schulze, Maria Kopp, Sabine Kelkenberg, Tobias Sinnberg, Claus Garbe, Saskia Biskup, Florian Battke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Circulating Tumor DNA as a Biomarker for Melanoma Prognosis and Therapy.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea ForschnerCenter for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6185-4945
Stephanie WeißgraeberCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.
Dirk HadaschikCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.
Martin SchulzePractice for Human Genetics, Tuebingen, Germany.
Maria KoppCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.
Sabine KelkenbergCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4040-6879
Tobias SinnbergCenter for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3922-3327
Claus GarbeCenter for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Saskia BiskupCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.
Florian BattkeCenter for Genomics and Transcriptomics (CeGaT) GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6021-5837
CeGaT (Germany) · DESTZ eyetrial · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBRAF and MEK inhibitors significantly improved the prognosis of metastatic melanoma. Nevertheless, initial treatment response may be only temporary. Liquid biopsies (LB) offer a possibility to monitor patients by measuring circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). We sought to find out whether ctDNA can be used to reliably determine progressive disease under targeted therapy. In addition, we wanted to check whether ctDNA may represent a possible prognostic marker for survival. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe included 19 melanoma patients with BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy. For each patient, a 710 gene panel was analyzed on the latest available tumor tissue before the start of therapy. Repetitive LB were collected in which BRAF V600E/K mutations were monitored using digital droplet PCR (ddPCR). We correlated radiological staging results and overall survival with ctDNA results.

resultsIn 13 patients, ctDNA was detectable when starting targeted therapy, whereas in six patients, ddPCR was always negative, which we confirmed with ultra-deep sequencing. All patients with initially detectable ctDNA had ctDNA values declining to zero during follow-up, increasing again at the time of extracerebral progression or even slightly before detection by imaging. Survival was significantly worse for patients with elevated LDH (p=0.034) or detectable ctDNA (p=0.008) at the start of targeted therapy.

conclusionTherapy monitoring by ctDNA seems to be a reliable method for detecting extracranial progression, even more sensitive and specific than LDH or S100B. However, due to the small number of cases in our study, further studies are necessary.

Indexed as

BRAF and MEK inhibitioncirculating tumor DNActDNAmetastatic melanoma

Identifiers

PMID32581559
PMCPMC7280255
OpenAlexW3033319954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.