Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40016451›Full record

ArticleNature medicine2025

Cerebrospinal fluid circulating tumor DNA profiling for risk stratification and matched treatment of central nervous system metastases.

Mei-Mei Zheng, Qing Zhou, Hua-Jun Chen, Ben-Yuan Jiang, Li-Bo Tang, Guang-Ling Jie, Hai-Yan Tu, Kai Yin, Hao Sun, Si-Yang Liu and 20 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Targeting ClassicalCancers · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. The evolving landscape of leptomeningeal metastases from NSCLC: an international, contemporary, multicenter cohort study.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

30 authors.

Mei-Mei Zheng *Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3493-7139
Qing Zhou *Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0478-176X
Hua-Jun Chen *Guangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Ben-Yuan JiangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Li-Bo TangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4870-4408
Guang-Ling JieGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hai-Yan TuGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Kai YinGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hao SunGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Si-Yang LiuGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5105-6421
Jia-Tao ZhangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4302-9332
Fa-Man XiaoGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jin-Ji YangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Xu-Chao ZhangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4138-8115
Wen-Zhao ZhongGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Yi PanGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4945-5631
Bin-Chao WangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hong-Hong YanGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Wei-Bang GuoGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhi-Hong ChenGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhen WangGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Chong-Rui XuGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Su-Yun LiDepartment of Radiology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Si-Yang Maggie LiuGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Lu ZengGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Shang-Li CaiBurning Rock Biotech, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5063-5712
Guo-Qiang WangBurning Rock Biotech, Guangzhou, China.
Dong-Qin ZhuNanjing Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China.
Yang-Si LiGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. liyangsi69@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-1372-4418
Yi-Long WuGuangdong Lung Cancer Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. syylwu@live.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3611-0258

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic profiling of central nervous system (CNS) metastases has the potential to guide treatments. In the present study, we included 584 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and CNS metastases and performed a comprehensive analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with clinicopathological annotation. CSF ctDNA-positive detection was independently associated with shorter survival than negative detection (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.56-2.39; P < 0.0001). Matched tumor-CSF analysis characterized the CSF private molecular features causing poor survival (HR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.15-2.32, P = 0.006). A multimetric CSF ctDNA prognostic model integrating CSF ctDNA features and clinical factors was developed for risk-stratifying CNS metastases and validated in an independent cohort. Among patients with treatment histories available, those positive for a driver alteration by CSF ctDNA showed a survival benefit from CSF-matched therapy (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.65-0.92, P = 0.003). Longitudinal monitoring by CSF identified CNS-specific resistant mechanisms and a second matched targeted therapy indicating improved survival (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.35-0.91, P = 0.018). These findings support the clinical value of CSF ctDNA for risk-stratifying CNS metastases and guiding therapy.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsCirculating Tumor DNALung NeoplasmsAdultAgedBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRisk AssessmentBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNA

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.