Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39549683›Full record

ArticleESMO open2024

Bespoke ctDNA for longitudinal detection of molecular residual disease in high-risk melanoma patients.

S Genta, D V Araujo, K Hueniken, C Pipinikas, R Ventura, P Rojas, G Jones, M O Butler, S D Saibil, C Yu and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ESMO open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Circulating Tumor DNA as a Biomarker for Melanoma Prognosis and Therapy.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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

22 authors.

S GentaDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
D V AraujoDivision of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer Agency Abbotsford, University of British Columbia, Abbotsford, Canada.
K HuenikenDepartment of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.
C PipinikasNeoGenomics, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, UK and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
R VenturaNeoGenomics, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, UK and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
P RojasNeoGenomics, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, UK and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
G JonesNeoGenomics, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, UK and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
M O ButlerDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
S D SaibilDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
C YuDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
A EassonDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
A CovelliDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
M B SauderPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.
C FournierPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Z Saeed KamilDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto General Hospital/University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
P RogallaToronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Canada.
D P ArteagaDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
O VornicovaDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
P SpiliopoulouDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
T P MunizDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
L L SiuDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
A SpreaficoDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Electronic address: anna.spreafico@uhn.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLocally advanced melanoma has a variable prognosis. Currently, there are no reliable criteria to stratify the risk of disease relapse and identify those patients who will benefit the most from adjuvant therapies. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging biomarker measuring the presence of tumor-derived DNA in blood. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe used a bespoke, tumor-informed assay (RaDaR®, NeoGenomics, Inc.) to detect ctDNA in 276 prospectively collected plasma samples from 66 melanoma patients receiving definitive treatment. Collection time points included landmark (after completion of local treatment) and every 3-6 months for up to 2 years.

resultsctDNA was detected in at least one plasma sample in 19 patients (29%), including 6/65 (9%) at landmark (post-surgical sample). Positive ctDNA at landmark was associated with shorter overall survival (OS; median OS 22.7 months versus not reached, log-rank P value = 0.01) and a trend towards a shorter relapse-free survival (RFS; median RFS 15.7 months versus not reached, log-rank P value = 0.07). In 10 patients, ctDNA detection preceded disease relapse by a median of 128 days (range 8-406 days).

conclusionsOur data indicate that ctDNA detection after surgery can identify patients with worse prognosis, and serial ctDNA measurements may enable earlier identification of disease recurrence.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAMelanomaNeoplasm, ResidualAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisProspective StudiesSkin NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAbiomarkercirculating tumor DNAliquid biopsymelanomamolecular residual disease

Identifiers

PMID39549683
PMCPMC11615122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.