Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39052958›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2024

Circulating Tumor DNA Assay Detects Merkel Cell Carcinoma Recurrence, Disease Progression, and Minimal Residual Disease: Surveillance and Prognostic Implications.

Tomoko Akaike, Manisha Thakuria, Ann W Silk, Daniel S Hippe, Song Youn Park, Naomi A So, Nolan J Maloney, Lindsay Gunnell, Alec Eschholz, Emily Y Kim and 14 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

24 authors.

Tomoko AkaikeUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0003-4525-6408
Manisha ThakuriaBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-9024-9090
Ann W SilkDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0003-3877-3984
Daniel S HippeFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0003-2427-4404
Song Youn ParkUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0003-4366-1821
Naomi A SoStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
Nolan J MaloneyStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
Lindsay GunnellUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Alec EschholzStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
Emily Y KimBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-6427-7234
Sumi SinhaUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.ORCID 0000-0002-9705-0340
Evan Thomas HallUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0002-0305-7745
Shailender BhatiaUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0002-3816-2238
Sunil ReddyStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
Angel Augusto RodriguezNatera, Inc, Austin, TX.
Alexey AleshinNatera, Inc, Austin, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-0425-0301
Jacob S ChoiNorthwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0002-5496-6033
Kenneth Y TsaiMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL.ORCID 0000-0001-5325-212X
Sue S YomUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.ORCID 0000-0002-0779-7476
Siegrid S YuUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Jaehyuk ChoiNorthwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0003-2379-2226
Sunandana ChandraNorthwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0001-7936-5069
Paul NghiemUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0003-2784-963X
Lisa C ZabaStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.ORCID 0000-0001-9036-5465

Funding

Understand & overcome resistance to PD-1P01CA225517 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Cecilia C Yeung · 2019 to 2026
$22.7M
Pathogenetic and prognostic studies for improved therapy of Merkel cell carcinomaK24CA139052 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI NGHIEM, PAUL · 2009 to 2018
$1.8M
Humoral and cellular immunity in polyomavirus-linked Merkel cell carcinomaR01CA162522 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI NGHIEM, PAUL · 2011 to 2015
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS K24 CA139052NCI NIH HHS P01 CA225517NCI NIH HHS R01 CA162522
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMerkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive skin cancer with a 40% recurrence rate, lacking effective prognostic biomarkers and surveillance methods. This prospective, multicenter, observational study aimed to evaluate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as a biomarker for detecting MCC recurrence.

methodsPlasma samples, clinical data, and imaging results were collected from 319 patients. A tumor-informed ctDNA assay was used for analysis. Patients were divided into discovery (167 patients) and validation (152 patients) cohorts. Diagnostic performance, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), was assessed.

resultsctDNA showed high sensitivity, 95% (discovery; 95% CI, 87 to 99) and 94% (validation; 95% CI, 85 to 98), for detecting disease at enrollment, with corresponding specificities of 90% (95% CI, 82 to 95) and 86% (95% CI, 77 to 93). A positive ctDNA during surveillance indicated increased recurrence risk, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 6.8 (discovery; 95% CI, 2.9 to 16) and 20 (validation; 95% CI, 8.3 to 50). The PPV for clinical recurrence at 1 year after a positive ctDNA test was 69% (discovery; 95% CI, 32 to 91) and 94% (validation; 95% CI, 71 to 100), respectively. The NPV at 135 days after a negative ctDNA test was 94% (discovery; 95% CI, 90 to 97) and 93% (validation; 95% CI, 89 to 97), respectively. Patients positive for ctDNA within 4 months after treatment had higher rates of recurrence, with 1-year rates of 74% versus 21% (adjusted HR, 7.4 [95% CI, 2.7 to 20]).

conclusionctDNA testing exhibited high prognostic accuracy in detecting MCC recurrence, suggesting its potential to reduce frequent surveillance imaging. ctDNA also identifies high-risk patients who need more frequent imaging and may be best suited for adjuvant therapy trials.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Merkel CellCirculating Tumor DNADisease ProgressionNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm, ResidualSkin NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNA

Identifiers

PMID39052958
PMCPMC11379364

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.