ArticleMolecular oncology2025
Detection rate for ESR1 mutations is higher in circulating-tumor-cell-derived genomic DNA than in paired plasma cell-free DNA samples as revealed by ddPCR.
Article in Molecular oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- ESR1 methylation and ESR1 mutations in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and paired plasma-cfDNA of advanced breast cancer patients: A feasibility proof-of-concept study.Molecular oncology · 2026Article
- Analytical and clinical validation of a novel CE-IVD kit forThe journal of liquid biopsy · 2026Article
- Isolation and typing techniques for circulating tumor cells.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Review
- The Combined Assessment of CTC andInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis to track estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations is highly beneficial for the identification of tumor molecular dynamics and the improvement of personalized treatments for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Plasma-cfDNA is, up to now, the most frequent liquid biopsy analyte used to evaluate ESR1 mutational status. Circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration and molecular characterization analysis provides important clinical information in patients with MBC. In this study, we investigated whether analysis of CTCs and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) provide similar or complementary information for the analysis of ESR1 mutations. We analyzed both plasma-cfDNA (n = 90) and paired CTC-derived genomic DNA (gDNA; n = 42) from 90 MBC patients for seven ESR1 mutations. Eight out of 90 (8.9%) plasma-cfDNA samples tested using the ddPLEX Mutation Detection Assay (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA), were found positive for one ESR1 mutation, whereas 11/42 (26.2%) CTC-derived gDNA samples were found positive for at least one ESR1 mutation. Direct comparison of paired samples (n = 42) revealed that the ESR1 mutation rate was higher in CTC-derived gDNA (11/42, 26.2%) than in plasma-cfDNA (6/42, 14.3%) samples. Our results, using this highly sensitive ddPLEX assay, reveal a higher percentage of mutations in CTC-derived gDNAs than in paired ctDNA in patients with MBC. CTC-derived gDNA analysis should be further evaluated as an important and complementary tool to ctDNA for identifying patients with ESR1 mutations and for guiding individualized therapy.
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.