Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41559726›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR2026

Circulating tumor DNA and Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors: ctDNA-RECIST proof-of-concept in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Alessandra Fabi, Elena Giordani, Elena Ricciardi, Grazia Arpino, Matteo Allegretti, Gianluigi Ferretti, Claudia Omarini, Alberto Zambelli, Chiara Mandoj, Andrea Botticelli and 8 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05735392 (Liquid Biopsy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT05735392 nacompletednot on this map

Liquid Biopsy: Intercepting Mutational Trajectories of HER2 Breast Cancer Inpatients Under T-DM1 Treatment

TypeinterventionalSponsorConsorzio OncotechRan2018 to 2022Enrolled48ConditionsMetastatic Breast CancerArmsBoth blood and tissues collection for patients with metastatic breast cancer HER2+ pretreated with no more than one line of anti-HER2 therapy for advanced breast cancer.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

18 authors.

Alessandra Fabi *Precision Medicine Unit in Senology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 8, Rome, 00168, Italy.
Elena Giordani *Translational Oncology Research, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Elena RicciardiTranslational Oncology Research, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Grazia ArpinoOncology Division, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Matteo AllegrettiTranslational Oncology Research, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Gianluigi FerrettiDivision of Medical Oncology 1, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Claudia OmariniDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Alberto ZambelliOncology Unit, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
Chiara MandojClinical Pathology Unit and Cancer Biobank, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Andrea BotticelliDepartment of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Science, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Emilio BriaUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Stefania GoriMedical Oncology, IRCCS-Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Luisa CarbogninPrecision Medicine Unit in Senology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 8, Rome, 00168, Italy.
Ida ParisGynaecological Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ScambiaGynaecologic Oncology Unit, Department of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Francesco CognettiOspedale Isola Tiberina - Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.
Diana GiannarelliFacility of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Patrizio GiacominiPrecision Medicine Unit in Senology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 8, Rome, 00168, Italy. patrizio.giacomini@guest.policlinicogemelli.it.

Funding

Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro AIRC, IG No. IG20583Ministero della Salute Ricerca Corrente 2022Ministero della Salute Ricerca Corrente 2024-2025Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore UCSC-project D1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResponse Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) recapitulate and anticipate response to treatment, respectively. However, ctDNA-RECIST (cRECIST) and ctDNA-guided End of Treatment (cEoT) are not applied routinely.

methodsTo provide proof-of-concept for RECIST1.1/cRECIST integration, HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients (n = 50) were enrolled in the multi-center prospective GIM21 study to receive Trastuzumab-emtansine (T-DM1). CT scans (113 tumor lesions) were longitudinally assessed for classical Objective Responses (ORs: progressive disease/stable disease/partial response/complete response; PD/SD/PR/CR) applying default RECIST 1.1 cut-offs (SD/PD ≥ 20%; SD/PR ≤ 30%). Likewise, bespoke NGS/dPCR (78 genomic alterations; 466 time points) were converted into ctDNA-Objective Responses (cORs: cPD/cSD/cPR/cCR) exploring wide cPD/cSD/cCR cut-off ranges, both default (RECIST 1.1-like) and alternative.

resultsWhichever the cut-off, cORs were much deeper than ORs, leading to RECIST 1.1/cRECIST divergence in 27 cPD-positive patients. Moreover, due to complex ctDNA trajectories (multiple successive ctDNA increases/decreases, termed ctDNA waving), cPD (the earliest ctDNA increase) correlated with outcome in broad patient subsets but not individual patients. To deconvolute ctDNA waving, cPD was combined with three-point ctDNA Trends (Tr), resulting in a personalized cEoT clinical algorithm that, once retrofitted to the 27 cPD-positive patient dataset, aligned with PFS much better than cPD (cEoT/PFS vs cPD/PFS linear regression: R2 = 0.85 vs 0.35).

conclusionsEven in difficult ctDNA scenarios, the cEoT algorithm may help to: (a) predict treatment efficacy during drug development, (b) adaptively randomize for patient-specific, timely treatment switch in clinical trials, and (c) prevent premature treatment withdrawal in long-responders. Future randomized studies are warranted for cRECIST/RECIST 1.1 integration/personalization in different tumors/settings.

trial registrationNCT05735392.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCirculating Tumor DNAErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesAdultAgedBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisProspective StudiesResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesCtDNACtDNA-RECISTHER2-positive Breast CancerObjective response evaluationRECIST 1.1T-DM1

Identifiers

PMID41559726
PMCPMC12980920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.