Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36717891›Full record

ArticleJournal of translational medicine2023

Development and validation of postoperative circulating tumor DNA combined with clinicopathological risk factors for recurrence prediction in patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer.

Zhaoya Gao, Dandan Huang, Hui Chen, Yong Yang, Ke An, Changmin Ding, Zheping Yuan, Zhichao Zhai, Pengfei Niu, Qingkun Gao and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Liquid Biopsy and Colorectal Cancer.South Asian journal of cancer · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

22 authors.

Zhaoya Gao *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Dandan Huang *Department of Oncology, Peking University Shougang Hospital, Beijing, China.
Hui Chen *Medical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Yong YangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Ke AnDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Changmin DingDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Zheping YuanMedical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Zhichao ZhaiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Pengfei NiuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Qingkun GaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Jinping CaiMedical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Qingmin ZengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Yanzhao WangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Yuming HongDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Wanshui RongDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Wensheng HuangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Fuming LeiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China.
Xiaodong WangDepartment of Oncology, Peking University Shougang Hospital, Beijing, China.
Shiqing ChenMedical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Xiaochen ZhaoMedical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Yuezong BaiMedical Affairs, 3D Medicines, Inc., Shanghai, China.
Jin GuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shougang Hospital, No.9 Jinyuanzhuang Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, China. zlguj@bjmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-9650-1963

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCirculating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection following curative-intent surgery could directly reflect the presence of minimal residual disease, the ultimate cause of clinical recurrence. However, ctDNA is not postoperatively detected in ≥ 50% of patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC) who ultimately recur. Herein we sought to improve recurrence risk prediction by combining ctDNA with clinicopathological risk factors in stage I-III CRC.

methodsTwo independent cohorts, both consisting of early-stage CRC patients who underwent curative surgery, were included: (i) the discovery cohort (N = 124) with tumor tissues and postoperative plasmas for ctDNA determination; and (ii) the external validation cohort (N = 125) with available ctDNA results. In the discovery cohort, somatic variations in tumor tissues and plasmas were determined via a 733-gene and 127-gene next-generation sequencing panel, respectively.

resultsIn the discovery cohort, 17 of 108 (15.7%) patients had detectable ctDNA. ctDNA-positive patients had a significantly high recurrence rate (76.5% vs. 16.5%, P < 0.001) and short recurrence-free survival (RFS; P < 0.001) versus ctDNA-negative patients. In addition to ctDNA status, the univariate Cox model identified pathologic stage, lymphovascular invasion, nerve invasion, and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level associated with RFS. We combined the ctDNA and clinicopathological risk factors (CTCP) to construct a model for recurrence prediction. A significantly higher recurrence rate (64.7% vs. 8.1%, P < 0.001) and worse RFS (P < 0.001) were seen in the high-risk patients classified by the CTCP model versus those in the low-risk patients. Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that the CTCP model outperformed ctDNA alone at recurrence prediction, which increased the sensitivity of 2 year RFS from 49.6% by ctDNA alone to 87.5%. Harrell's concordance index, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis also suggested that the CTCP model had good discrimination, consistency, and clinical utility. These results were reproduced in the validation cohort.

conclusionCombining postoperative ctDNA and clinical risk may better predict recurrence than ctDNA alone for developing a personalized postoperative management strategy for CRC.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAColorectal NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRisk FactorsROC CurveBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNACirculating tumor DNAClinicopathological risk factorsColorectal cancerRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID36717891
PMCPMC9887832

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.