Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35280315›Full record

ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2022

Circulating tumor DNA predicts neoadjuvant immunotherapy efficacy and recurrence-free survival in surgical non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Dongsheng Yue, Weiran Liu, Chen Chen, Tao Zhang, Yuchen Ma, Longgang Cui, Yajun Gu, Ting Bei, Xiaochen Zhao, Bei Zhang and 6 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Towards liquid biopsy-based analysis of antitumour immunity.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Dongsheng Yue *Department of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Weiran Liu *Department of Anesthesiology, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Chen Chen *Department of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Tao Zhang *Department of Oncology, the First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yuchen MaDepartment of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Longgang CuiThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Yajun GuThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Ting BeiThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Xiaochen ZhaoThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Bei ZhangThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Yuezong BaiThe Medical Department, 3D Medicines Inc., Shanghai, China.
Atocha RomeroMedical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Meng Xu-WelliverDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Changli WangDepartment of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Zhenfa ZhangDepartment of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Bin ZhangDepartment of Lung Cancer, Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CNFirst Hospital of Lanzhou University · CNHospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda · ESThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is currently a lack of effective biomarkers to evaluate efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been investigated as a non-invasive tool for the assessment of tumor burden and minimal residual disease (MRD). The utility of ctDNA profiling in reflecting NAT efficacy, however, has not been confirmed. This study explored the association of ctDNA change with treatment response to NAT and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after surgery. Methods: Eligible patients with stage IB-IIIA NSCLC were retrospectively included if they had received neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (IO+Chemo), dual immunotherapy (IO+IO), or chemotherapy alone (Chemo). We conducted ctDNA profiling before and after NAT, after surgery, and during follow-ups using an ultra-deep lung cancer-specific MRD (LC-MRD) sequencing panel. Results: A total of 22 patients who received NAT followed by surgery between August 2018 and July 2019 were included in this study. The major pathological response (MPR) rates were 58.33% (7/12) in the IO+Chemo group, 25.00% (1/4) in the IO+IO group, and 16.67% (1/6) in the Chemo group. The ctDNA dynamics during NAT were highly concordant with pathologic response, demonstrating 100% sensitivity and 83.33% specificity, for an overall accuracy of 91.67%. Pre-surgery detectable ctDNA (after NAT) trended to correlate with inferior RFS [hazard ratio (HR), 7.41; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-60.22, log-rank P=0.03]. At 3-8 days after surgery, ctDNA was detectable in 31.8% of patients and was an independent risk factor for recurrence (HR, 5.37; 95% CI: 1.27-22.67; log-rank P=0.01). The presence of ctDNA at 3 months after surgery showed 83% sensitivity and 90% specificity for predicting relapse (C-index, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.62-0.95). During disease monitoring after surgery, molecular recurrence by means of ctDNA preceded radiographic relapse, with a median time of 6.83 months. Conclusions: This study investigated the potential of ctDNA in evaluating NAT efficacy in NSCLC, implying the high concordance between ctDNA and pathological response. We also set out the prognostic value of perioperative ctDNA in predicting recurrence.

Indexed as

circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)recurrence

Identifiers

PMID35280315
PMCPMC8902085
OpenAlexW4214512176

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.