Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37280413›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2023

Personalised circulating tumour DNA assay with large-scale mutation coverage for sensitive minimal residual disease detection in colorectal cancer.

Seung-Bum Ryoo, Sunghoon Heo, Yoojoo Lim, Wookjae Lee, Su Han Cho, Jongseong Ahn, Jun-Kyu Kang, Su Yeon Kim, Hwang-Phill Kim, Duhee Bang and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

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

19 authors.

Seung-Bum Ryoo *Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6407-0444
Sunghoon Heo *IMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Yoojoo Lim *IMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Wookjae LeeIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Su Han ChoIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5220-0352
Jongseong AhnIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Jun-Kyu KangIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Su Yeon KimIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Hwang-Phill KimIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.
Duhee BangDepartment of Chemistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Sung-Bum KangDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
Chang Sik YuDepartment of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Seong Taek OhDepartment of Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, Uijeongbu, Korea.
Ji Won ParkDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-8175
Seung-Yong JeongDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Young-Joon KimDepartment of Biochemistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Kyu Joo ParkDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Sae-Won HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea. saewon1@snu.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3275-431X
Tae-You KimIMBdx, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPostoperative minimal residual disease (MRD) detection using circulating-tumour DNA (ctDNA) requires a highly sensitive analysis platform. We have developed a tumour-informed, hybrid-capture ctDNA sequencing MRD assay.

methodsPersonalised target-capture panels for ctDNA detection were designed using individual variants identified in tumour whole-exome sequencing of each patient. MRD status was determined using ultra-high-depth sequencing data of plasma cell-free DNA. The MRD positivity and its association with clinical outcome were analysed in Stage II or III colorectal cancer (CRC).

resultsIn 98 CRC patients, personalised panels for ctDNA sequencing were built from tumour data, including a median of 185 variants per patient. In silico simulation showed that increasing the number of target variants increases MRD detection sensitivity in low fractions (<0.01%). At postoperative 3-week, 21.4% of patients were positive for MRD by ctDNA. Postoperative positive MRD was strongly associated with poor disease-free survival (DFS) (adjusted hazard ratio 8.40, 95% confidence interval 3.49-20.2). Patients with a negative conversion of MRD after adjuvant therapy showed significantly better DFS (P < 0.001).

conclusionTumour-informed, hybrid-capture-based ctDNA assay monitoring a large number of patient-specific mutations is a sensitive strategy for MRD detection to predict recurrence in CRC.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAColorectal NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorDisease-Free SurvivalHumansMutationNeoplasm, ResidualBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNA

Identifiers

PMID37280413
PMCPMC10338477

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.