Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39682148›Full record

ArticleCancers2024

Circulating Tumor DNA (ctDNA) Dynamics Predict Early Response to Treatment in Metastasized Gastroesophageal Cancer (mGEC) After 2 Weeks of Systemic Treatment.

Stefan Tatalovic, Bernhard Doleschal, Alexander Kupferthaler, Stephan Grundner, Jonathan Burghofer, Gerald Webersinke, Simon Schwendinger, Emina Jukic, Johannes Zschocke, Lorenz Danhel and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Circulating tumor DNA-guided response evaluation in patients with previously treated gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

17 authors.

Stefan TatalovicDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0009-0004-4419-1723
Bernhard DoleschalDepartment of Internal Medicine I for Hematology with Stem Cell Transplantation, Hemostaseology and Medical Oncology, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0009-0004-4813-4435
Alexander KupferthalerMedical Faculty, Johannes Kepler University Linz, 4020 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3429-2203
Stephan GrundnerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Jonathan BurghoferLaboratory for Molecular Genetics Diagnostics, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6720-4671
Gerald WebersinkeLaboratory for Molecular Genetics Diagnostics, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5654-6190
Simon SchwendingerInstitute of Human Genetics, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7542-222X
Emina JukicInstitute of Human Genetics, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6909-7005
Johannes ZschockeInstitute of Human Genetics, Medical University Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Lorenz DanhelDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Antonia KirchwegerDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Lukas HavranekDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Demetre ShalamberidzeDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Daniel RezaieDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.
Matthias BieblDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3690-8614
Holger RumpoldMedical Faculty, Johannes Kepler University Linz, 4020 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4118-0111
Patrick KirchwegerDepartment of Surgery, Ordensklinikum Linz, 4010 Linz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-2806-4594

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

mGEC is associated with poor overall survival (OS) of approximately 4-10 months. CtDNA is emerging as a promising prognostic biomarker with high potential for early relapse detection. However, until now, there was little knowledge on serial ctDNA detection and its impact on early treatment evaluation and prognosis in mGEC.

methodsctDNA detection (ddPCR) was carried out serially in 37 matched tissue (NGS) patients with mGEC prior to systemic treatment initiation and every two weeks thereafter until restaging (n = 173 samples). The results have been correlated with response to treatment (restaging CT), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).

resultsThe pretherapeutic detection rate was 77.8%. Response to treatment assessment was correct in 54.2% (pretherapeutically pos./neg.) and 85.7% (dynamics at week 4). Moreover, a decline in ctDNA (MAF in %) below 57.1% of the pretherapeutic value after 2 weeks of systemic treatment was accompanied by a sensitivity of 57.1% and a specificity of 90% (AUC = 0.73) for correct restaging assessment (response evaluation by CT after 3 months) evaluating 76.5% of patients correctly after only 2 weeks. In contrast to mere pretherapeutic ctDNA positivity (

conclusionsctDNA is a promising additional biomarker allowing for early evaluation of response to treatment and saving unevaluated treatment time for patients with mGEC, and could allow for an early change in treatment with anticipated prognostic benefit in the future.

Indexed as

ctDNAesophageal cancergastric cancerliquid biopsy

Identifiers

PMID39682148
PMCPMC11639943

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.