Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39304963›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR2024

Role of cfDNA and ctDNA to improve the risk stratification and the disease follow-up in patients with endometrial cancer: towards the clinical application.

Carlos Casas-Arozamena, Ana Vilar, Juan Cueva, Efigenia Arias, Victoria Sampayo, Eva Diaz, Sara S Oltra, Cristian Pablo Moiola, Silvia Cabrera, Alexandra Cortegoso and 16 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETosis) in gynecologic cancers: from pathogenesis to therapeutic opportunities: a narrative review.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Updates and controversies in the management of uterine serous carcinoma and uterine carcinosarcoma.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

26 authors.

Carlos Casas-ArozamenaTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3279-2482
Ana VilarDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Juan CuevaTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Efigenia AriasDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Victoria SampayoDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Eva DiazMD Anderson Cancer Center Foundation, C/Gómez Hemans 2, Madrid, 28033, Spain.
Sara S OltraMD Anderson Cancer Center Foundation, C/Gómez Hemans 2, Madrid, 28033, Spain.
Cristian Pablo MoiolaDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Biomedical Research Group in Gynecology, Vall Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, 119-129 Pg. Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
Silvia CabreraDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Biomedical Research Group in Gynecology, Vall Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, 119-129 Pg. Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
Alexandra CortegosoTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Teresa CurielTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Alicia AbaloTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Mónica Pamies SerranoDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Biomedical Research Group in Gynecology, Vall Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, 119-129 Pg. Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
Santiago DomingoDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Pablo Padilla-IserteDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Marta Arnaez de la CruzDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Alicia HernándezDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital "La Paz", Madrid, Spain.
Virginia García-PinedaDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital "La Paz", Madrid, Spain.
Juan Ruiz-BañobreTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Rafael LópezTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Xavier Matias-GuiuCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain.
Eva ColásCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain.
Antonio Gil-MorenoCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain.
Miguel AbalTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain.
Gema Moreno-BuenoCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain. gmoreno@iib.uam.es.
Laura Muinelo-RomayTranslational Medical Oncology Group (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Trav. Choupana s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain. laura.muinelo.romay@sergas.es.

Funding

Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer CB16/12/00295Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer CB16/12/00328Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer FCAECC, GCTRA1804MATIFundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer FCAECC-postdoctoral (PI21/00990)Fundación Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela IDIS-predoctoral grantInstituto de Salud Carlos III AC21_2/00020Instituto de Salud Carlos III Juan Rodés (JR21/00019)Instituto de Salud Carlos III Miguel Servet (CP20/00119)Instituto de Salud Carlos III Miguel Servet (CP22/00147)Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI20/00969Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI20/01566Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI21/00990Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación PID2022-136854OB-I00Xunta de Galicia IN607D2021/05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been a rise in endometrial cancer (EC) incidence leading to increased mortality. To counter this trend, improving the stratification of post-surgery recurrence risk and anticipating disease relapse and treatment resistance is essential. Liquid biopsy analyses offer a promising tool for these clinical challenges, though the best strategy for applying them in EC must be defined. This study was designed to determine the value of cfDNA/ctDNA monitoring in improving the clinical management of patients with localized and recurrent disease.

methodsPlasma samples and uterine aspirates (UA) from 198 EC patients were collected at surgery and over time. The genetic landscape of UAs was characterized using targeted sequencing. Total cfDNA was analyzed for ctDNA presence based on the UA mutational profile.

resultsHigh cfDNA levels and detectable ctDNA at baseline correlated with poor prognosis for DFS (p-value < 0.0001; HR = 9.25) and DSS (p-value < 0.0001; HR = 11.20). This remained clinically significant when stratifying tumors by histopathological risk factors. Of note, cfDNA/ctDNA analyses discriminated patients with early post-surgery relapse and the ctDNA kinetics served to identify patients undergoing relapse before any clinical evidence emerged.

conclusionsThis is the most comprehensive study on cfDNA/ctDNA characterization in EC, demonstrating its value in improving risk stratification and anticipating disease relapse in patients with localized disease. CtDNA kinetics assessment complements current strategies to monitor the disease evolution and the treatment response. Therefore, implementing cfDNA/ctDNA monitoring in clinical routines offers a unique opportunity to improve EC management. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The study demonstrates that high levels of cfDNA and detectable ctDNA at baseline are strong indicators of poor prognosis. This enables more accurate risk stratification beyond traditional histopathological factors, allowing clinicians to identify high-risk patients who may benefit from more aggressive treatment and closer monitoring. Moreover, longitudinal analysis of cfDNA/ctDNA can detect disease recurrence months before clinical symptoms or imaging evidence appear. This early warning system offers a significant advantage in clinical practice, providing a window of opportunity for early intervention and potentially improving patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAEndometrial NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCell-Free Nucleic AcidsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisRisk AssessmentBiomarkers, TumorCell-Free Nucleic AcidsCirculating Tumor DNABlood biomarkersEndometrial cancerLiquid BiopsyPrognostic biomarkersTumour kinetics

Identifiers

PMID39304963
PMCPMC11414036

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.