ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Plasma cfDNA and peripheral blood gDNA provide complementary information for molecular monitoring in myeloproliferative neoplasms.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Molecular monitoring of Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) relies on genomic DNA (gDNA) from peripheral blood (PB). As variant allele frequency (VAF) reduction correlates with clinical outcomes, optimizing monitoring strategies has become important. However, whether gDNA accurately reflects bone marrow (BM) clonal dynamics and whether cell-free DNA (cfDNA) provides complementary information remains undefined. Methods: We compared cfDNA and PB gDNA using methylation-based deconvolution, a cell line-derived xenograft (CDX) model, and paired clinical samples from two independent MPN cohorts (technical, n=7 with matched BM; validation, n=40 with longitudinal monitoring). Results: Methylation deconvolution showed an enrichment of BM-derived DNA in cfDNA (47.4% vs 18.9%, Conclusions: While constrained by sample size and specific treatment contexts, our observations suggest that cfDNA and gDNA provide complementary value for MPN monitoring. Supported by preclinical models and technical analysis, cfDNA more effectively reflects BM clonal burden, while longitudinal observations suggest its capacity to track treatment-related clonal dynamics. In contrast, gDNA is more informative in confirming treatment response. The lymphocyte percentage predicts cfDNA utility, enabling rational test selection and a practical framework for optimizing MPN management.
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.