Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40001235›Full record

ArticleClinical epigenetics2025

Imaging and outcome correlates of ctDNA methylation markers in prostate cancer: a comparative, cross-sectional [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT study.

Kilian Kluge, Vincent Lotz, Holger Einspieler, David Haberl, Clemens Spielvogel, Dominik Amereller, Gero Kramer, Bernhard Grubmüller, Shahrokh Shariat, Alexander Haug and 3 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epigenetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. MBsBMC cancer · 2025
    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

13 authors.

Kilian KlugeDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4224-7314
Vincent LotzDepartment of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Holger EinspielerDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
David HaberlDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Clemens SpielvogelDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Dominik AmerellerDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Gero KramerDepartment of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Bernhard GrubmüllerDepartment of Urology and Andrology, University Hospital Krems, Krems, Austria.
Shahrokh ShariatDepartment of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Alexander HaugDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Marcus HackerDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Lukas KennerChristian Doppler Laboratory for Applied Metabolomics (CDLAM), Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Gerda EggerDepartment of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. gerda.egger@meduniwien.ac.at.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund P32771Christian Doppler Forschungsgesellschaft CD10277102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo validate the clinical utility of a previously identified circulating tumor DNA methylation marker (meth-ctDNA) panel for disease detection and survival outcomes, meth-ctDNA markers were compared to PSA levels and PSMA PET/CT findings in men with different stages of prostate cancer (PCa).

methods122 PCa patients who underwent [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and plasma sampling (03/2019-08/2021) were analyzed. cfDNA was extracted, and a panel of 8 individual meth-ctDNA markers was queried. PET scans were qualitatively and quantitatively assessed. PSA and meth-ctDNA markers were compared to PET findings, and their relative prognostic value was evaluated.

resultsPSA discriminated best between negative and tumor-indicative PET scans in all (AUC 0.77) and hormone-sensitive (hsPC) patients (0.737). In castration-resistant PCa (CRPC), the meth-ctDNA marker KLF8 performed best (AUC 0.824). CHST11 differentiated best between non- and metastatic scans (AUC 0.705) overall, KLF8 best in hsPC and CRPC (AUC 0.662, 0.85). Several meth-ctDNA markers correlated low to moderate with the tumor volume in all (5/8) and CRPC patients (6/8), while PSA levels correlated moderately to strongly with the tumor volume in all groups (all p < 0.001). CRPC overall survival was independently associated with LDAH and PSA (p = 0.0168, p < 0.001).

conclusionThe studied meth-ctDNA markers are promising for the minimally-invasive detection and prognostication of CRPC but do not allow for clinical characterization of hsPC. Prospective studies are warranted for their use in therapy response and outcome prediction in CRPC and potential incremental value for PCa monitoring in PSA-low settings.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNADNA MethylationPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesGallium IsotopesGallium RadioisotopesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProstate-Specific AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAgallium 68 PSMA-11Gallium IsotopesGallium RadioisotopesProstate-Specific AntigenPSMA-11cfDNADNA methylationEpigeneticsPET/CTProstate cancerPSMA

Identifiers

PMID40001235
PMCPMC11863674

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.