ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
CSF ctDNA analysis guides molecular reclassification of diffuse glioma patients.
Article in Journal of neuro-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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a critical need for better strategies to diagnose and monitor patients with gliomas. Liquid biopsies are less invasive than tissue biopsies and are amenable to serial collection at multiple timepoints. However, the analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from patients with gliomas remains underutilized in clinical practice due to technical challenges.
methodsWe collected CSF samples from 43 patients with various types of gliomas and evaluated ctDNA derived from CSF with a next generation sequencing (NGS) panel interrogating 600 cancer-related genes.
resultsTotal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) concentration obtained from CSF (0.4-5 mL) ranged from 0.09 to 60 ng/µL. Mutations were detected in 26/43 (60%) samples including 19/43 (44%) with single nucleotide variants (SNV), 11/43 (25%) with copy number variants (CNV), 8/43 (18.6%) with frameshifts and 1/43 with fusion (2.3%). Mutations were not identified in 17 CSF samples, and most of these samples (15/17; 88%) had suboptimal DNA input (< 30 ng). We identified diagnostic alterations in CSF including mutations in IDH1 (3/6 IDH-mutant gliomas), TERTp (7/29 glioblastomas), EGFR amplification (5/29 glioblastomas), and H3-3 A (4/4 pediatric high-grade gliomas). Some of these mutations, in combination with other clinical parameters, allowed us to identify specific CNS tumor types based on the 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of CNS tumors, resulting in the reclassification of 3 patients. Furthermore, we observed a significant association between the CSF-ctDNA detection and imaging features.
conclusionThis study highlights the potential clinical utility of CSF-ctDNA analysis for evaluating and reclassification of patients with gliomas.
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.