Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32614932›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Evaluation of circulating tumor DNA as a biomarker in pancreatic cancer with liver metastasis.

Yasunori Uesato, Naoki Sasahira, Masato Ozaka, Takashi Sasaki, Mitsuhisa Takatsuki, Hitoshi Zembutsu

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. ctDNA in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Critical Appraisal.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025
    Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Yasunori UesatoProject of Development of Liquid Biopsy Diagnosis, Cancer Precision Medicine Center, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4659-8066
Naoki SasahiraDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Masato OzakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Takashi SasakiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Mitsuhisa TakatsukiDepartment of Digestive and General Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan.
Hitoshi ZembutsuProject of Development of Liquid Biopsy Diagnosis, Cancer Precision Medicine Center, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive, solid tumor, with a grave prognosis. Despite surgical treatment in patients with pancreatic cancer, the rate of recurrence is high. In addition, although tumor biomarkers are frequently used to confirm advanced pancreatic cancer, this is not accurate and the biomarkers currently used cannot indicate prognosis. This study sought to evaluate circulating tumor DNA as a tumor biomarker to prognosticate pancreatic cancer. Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and liver metastasis (N = 104) were included, and blood samples were collected from all patients. The mutant allele frequency was measured using amplicon-based deep sequencing on a cell-free DNA panel covering 14 genes with > 240 hot spots. In patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, 50% (N = 52) had detectable ctDNA levels, with TP53 (45%, N = 47) and KRAS (42.3%, N = 44) mutations the most common. Patients with detectable circulating tumor DNA levels also had significantly worse overall survival and progression free survival than ctDNA negative patients (8.4 vs 16 months, P<0.0001 for overall survival; 3.2 vs 7.9 months, P<0.0001 for progression-free survival). In a multivariate analysis, ctDNA status was independently associated with overall survival and progression-free survival (HR = 3.1, 95%CI = 1.9-5.0, P<0.0001; HR 2.6, 95%CI = 1.7-4.0, P<0.0001, respectively). Moreover, circulating tumor DNA significantly correlated with a higher number of liver metastases, the presence of lung and/or peritoneal metastases, tumor burden, and higher carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels. This study supports the use of circulating tumor DNA as an independent prognostic marker for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorCA-19-9 AntigenCell-Free Nucleic AcidsCirculating Tumor DNAFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPancreatic NeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorCA-19-9 AntigenCell-Free Nucleic AcidsCirculating Tumor DNAKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)TP53 protein, humanTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID32614932
PMCPMC7332050

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.