ArticleCancer medicine2025
Combination of Hotspot Mutations With Methylation and Fragmentomic Profiles to Enhance Multi-Cancer Early Detection.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Prognostic value of PRAME gene promoter methylation and expression in hepatocellular carcinoma.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Article
- Exploration of multi-omics liquid biopsy approaches for multi-cancer early detection: The PROMISE study.Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) · 2026Article
- Multimodal data fusion: integrating PET/MRI and liquid biopsy for a holistic view of cancer biology.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- The Double-Edged Sword of Genomic DNA Methylation: Orchestrating Gastric Carcinogenesis and Shaping Precision Oncology.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Review
- Cost-effective shallow genome-wide sequencing for profiling plasma cfDNA signatures to enhance lung cancer detection.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMulti-cancer early detection (MCED) through a single blood test significantly advances cancer diagnosis. However, most MCED tests rely on a single type of biomarkers, leading to limited sensitivity, particularly for early-stage cancers. We previously developed SPOT-MAS, a multimodal ctDNA-based assay analyzing methylation and fragmentomic profiles to detect five common cancers. Despite its potential, SPOT-MAS exhibited moderate sensitivities for early-stage cancers. This study investigated whether integrating hotspot mutations into SPOT-MAS could enhance its detection rates.
methodA targeted amplicon sequencing approach was developed to profile 700 hotspot mutations in cell-free DNA and integrated into the SPOT-MAS assay, creating a single-blood draw workflow. This workflow, namely SPOT-MAS Plus was retrospectively validated in a cohort of 255 non-metastatic cancer patients (breast, colorectal, gastric, liver, and lung) and 304 healthy individuals.
resultsHotspot mutations were detected in 131 of 255 (51.4%) cancer patients, with the highest rates in liver cancer (96.5%), followed by colorectal (59.3%) and lung cancer (53.7%). Lower detection rates were found for cancers with low tumor mutational burden, such as breast (31.3%) and gastric (41.9%) cancers. In contrast, SPOT-MAS demonstrated higher sensitivities for these cancers (51.6% for breast and 62.9% for gastric). The combination of hotspot mutations with SPOT-MAS predictions improved early-stage cancer detection, achieving an overall sensitivity of 78.5% at a specificity of 97.7%. Enhanced sensitivities were observed for colorectal (81.36%) and lung cancer (82.9%).
conclusionThe integration of genetic and epigenetic alterations into a multimodal assay significantly enhances the early detection of various cancers. Further validation in larger cohorts is necessary to support broader clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.