ArticlePloS one2024
Analytical validation of a novel comprehensive genomic profiling informed circulating tumor DNA monitoring assay for solid tumors.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Werner helicase inhibitor for advanced microsatellite instability solid tumors: a phase 1 trial.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Liquid biopsy in solid tumours: expert opinion paper of the European society of pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Circulating Tumor DNA in Merkel Cell Carcinoma: A Precision Biomarker for Recurrence Detection and Therapeutic Guidance.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Early ctDNA Dynamics Predict Response to Mosperafenib in BRAF V600-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Cancer research communications · 2026Article
- What's hidden in plain sight? Impact of clonal hematopoiesis on the risk and progression of nonhematologic cancers.Haematologica · 2026Review
- Noninvasive biomarkers in thymic epithelial tumors: a systematic review of cfDNA/ctDNA detection, molecular profiling, and organoid-based monitoring.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Circulating tumor DNA dynamics predict pathological response and guide therapy personalization in the neoadjuvant setting.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Unraveling the Potential of ctDNA in Precision Medicine for Breast Cancer.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2025Review
- Molecular counting enables accurate and precise quantification of methylated ctDNA for tumor-naive cancer therapy response monitoring.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging technologies focused on the detection and quantification of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in blood show extensive potential for managing patient treatment decisions, informing risk of recurrence, and predicting response to therapy. Currently available tissue-informed approaches are often limited by the need for additional sequencing of normal tissue or peripheral mononuclear cells to identify non-tumor-derived alterations while tissue-naïve approaches are often limited in sensitivity. Here we present the analytical validation for a novel ctDNA monitoring assay, FoundationOne®Tracker. The assay utilizes somatic alterations from comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of tumor tissue. A novel algorithm identifies monitorable alterations with a high probability of being somatic and computationally filters non-tumor-derived alterations such as germline or clonal hematopoiesis variants without the need for sequencing of additional samples. Monitorable alterations identified from tissue CGP are then quantified in blood using a multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay based on the validated SignateraTM assay. The analytical specificity of the plasma workflow is shown to be 99.6% at the sample level. Analytical sensitivity is shown to be >97.3% at ≥5 mean tumor molecules per mL of plasma (MTM/mL) when tested with the most conservative configuration using only two monitorable alterations. The assay also demonstrates high analytical accuracy when compared to liquid biopsy-based CGP as well as high qualitative (measured 100% PPA) and quantitative precision (<11.2% coefficient of variation).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.