Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40087401›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2025

Utilizing ctDNA to discover mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies in patients with metastatic NSCLC: towards more informative trials.

Sophie M Ernst, Mihaela Aldea, Jan H von der Thüsen, Adrianus J de Langen, Egbert F Smit, Marthe S Paats, Joachim G J V Aerts, Laura Mezquita, Sanjay Popat, Benjamin Besse and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Advances in the Basic Sciences in Thoracic Oncology in the Last 20 Years and Their Translational Impact.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

14 authors.

Sophie M ErnstDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2070-3614
Mihaela AldeaDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7685-051X
Jan H von der ThüsenDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9699-4860
Adrianus J de LangenDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Egbert F SmitDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marthe S PaatsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Joachim G J V AertsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6662-2951
Laura MezquitaMedical Oncology Department, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0936-7338
Sanjay PopatLung Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2087-4963
Benjamin BesseDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5090-8189
Jordi RemonDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9462-875X
Christian RolfoThe Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Hendrikus J DubbinkDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Anne-Marie C DingemansDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. a.dingemans@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6105-182X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in targeted therapies for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer have substantially improved the outcomes of those with actionable alterations in certain oncogenic driver genes. However, acquired resistance to these targeted therapies remains a major challenge. Understanding the mechanisms underlying acquired resistance will be crucial for the development of strategies that might either overcome this effect or delay the onset. Circulating tumour DNA, owing to the need for only minimally invasive sampling and a potential role as both a prognostic and predictive biomarker, is increasingly being used in both research and clinical practice. Several studies have explored the landscape of acquired resistance to targeted therapies using this approach. However, the methodologies of the published studies vary widely, and several major challenges remain in addressing the practical difficulties associated with these methods. These challenges currently limit the depth of research insight provided by the available data. In this Perspective, we review clinical reports describing the use of circulating tumour DNA to detect mechanisms of acquired resistance to targeted therapies, predominantly in patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, and highlight key unresolved questions with the aim of moving towards more-informative research studies.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCirculating Tumor DNADrug Resistance, NeoplasmLung NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNA

Identifiers

PMID40087401

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.