Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34532401›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Liquid biopsy in esophageal cancer: a case report of false-positive circulating tumor DNA detection due to clonal hematopoiesis.

Jonathan Spoor, Ben M Eyck, Peggy N Atmodimedjo, Maurice P H M Jansen, Jean C A Helmijr, John W M Martens, Berend J van der Wilk, J Jan B van Lanschot, Winand N M Dinjens

Open access · diamondAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. A Review of Circulating Tumor DNA in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Esophageal Cancer.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonathan SpoorDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ben M EyckDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Peggy N AtmodimedjoDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Maurice P H M JansenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jean C A HelmijrDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
John W M MartensDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Berend J van der WilkDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Jan B van LanschotDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Winand N M DinjensDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis is a promising non-invasive technique for active surveillance after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced resectable esophageal carcinoma. In other malignancies false-positive results in ctDNA analysis have been reported due to clonal hematopoiesis. In this case, we present a 66-year-old male who had adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction for which he received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and underwent a transhiatal esophagectomy. Postoperatively our patient received follow-up with ctDNA analysis using next generation sequencing (NGS) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). This case report illustrates a number of the current challenges in ctDNA diagnostics in esophageal carcinoma. Firstly, the TP53 c.524G>A; p.R175H mutation that was found in preoperative tumor biopsies became detectable in ctDNA only after distant metastases had already been confirmed by clinical symptoms and standard imaging- and biopsy techniques. Secondly our patient repeatedly had false-positive outcomes of ctDNA analysis. Genomic analysis of white blood cells revealed that the origin of these discordant mutations lies in clonal hematopoiesis. Failure to detect TP53 c.524G>A; p.R175H in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is most likely due to the amount of ctDNA in the cfDNA fraction being below the limit of detection for NGS and ddPCR analyses. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility of finding mutations originating from clonal hematopoiesis when using ctDNA analysis during active surveillance for esophageal carcinoma. We recommend correlation of mutations in cfDNA with mutations in tumor biopsies.

Indexed as

active surveillancecase reportcirculating tumor DNA (ctDNA)clonal hematopoiesisEsophageal cancer

Identifiers

PMID34532401
PMCPMC8421960
OpenAlexW3188871288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.