Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39549302›Full record

SynthesisCarcinogenesis2025

Prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in different cancer types detected by ultra-low-pass whole-genome sequencing: a systematic review and patient-level survival data meta-analysis.

Miguel Sogbe, Daniel Aliseda, Paloma Sangro, Manuel de la Torre-Aláez, Bruno Sangro, Josepmaria Argemi

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Carcinogenesis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. ctDNA in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Critical Appraisal.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Miguel SogbeLiver Unit and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Av Pio XII 36, 31008, Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2846-7812
Daniel AlisedaHPB and Liver Transplant Unit, Department of General Surgery and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Av Pio XII 36, 31008, Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5025-6069
Paloma SangroLiver Unit and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Calle Marquesado de Santa Marta 1, 28027, Madrid, Spain.
Manuel de la Torre-AláezLiver Unit and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Calle Marquesado de Santa Marta 1, 28027, Madrid, Spain.
Bruno SangroLiver Unit and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Av Pio XII 36, 31008, Pamplona, Spain.
Josepmaria ArgemiLiver Unit and HPB Oncology Area, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Av Pio XII 36, 31008, Pamplona, Spain.

Funding

Agencia Estatal de Salud PI20-01663Asociación Española Contra el Cancer PRYCO234831REIGFundacion Echebano
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ultra-low-pass whole-genome sequencing (ULP-WGS) (≤0.5 × coverage) of plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has emerged as a low-cost, promising tool to assess the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) fraction. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the current findings and comprehensively investigate the prognostic value of baseline ctDNA detected by ULP-WGS in solid tumors. A systematic review was carried out by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases to identify eligible studies conducted between January 2014 and January 2024. Inclusion criteria comprised studies with reported overall survival and progression-free survival outcomes across therapy-naïve patients with different solid tumors. All patients underwent baseline ULP-WGS of plasma cfDNA and were categorized as ctDNA positive (tumor fraction ≥10%) or negative (tumor fraction <10%). A one-stage meta-analysis was performed using patient-level survival data reconstructed from published articles. A Cox proportional hazards model with shared frailty was used to assess the difference in survival between arms. A total of six studies, comprising 620 patients (367 negative ctDNA and 253 positive ctDNA), were included in the overall survival analysis, while five studies, involving 349 patients (212 negative ctDNA and 137 positive ctDNA), were included in the progression-free survival analysis. The meta-analysis showed that patients with baseline positive ctDNA had a significantly higher risk of death (HR = 2.60, 95% CI: 2.01-3.36) and disease progression (HR = 2.28, 95% CI: 1.71-3.05) compared to those with negative ctDNA. The presence of a positive ctDNA at baseline is associated with increased risk of death and progression in patients with same-stage cancer.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNANeoplasmsWhole Genome SequencingHumansPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAcirculating tumor DNAoverall survivalpatient-level meta-analysisprogression-free survivalwhole-genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID39549302
PMCPMC11886806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.