Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42325535›Full record

ArticleThe journal of liquid biopsy2026

Development of a LiDia-SEQ™ platform compatible breast cancer panel and testing with metastatic breast cancer patient samples: A rapid, sample-to-result, fully integrated next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based platform, LiDia-SEQ, for use at the point-of-need.

Mohammadali Yavari Ramsheh, Raquel L Fraccari, Rossitza Christova, Jarrett Killpack, Jean-Rene Acquah, Georgios Nteliopoulos, Evie Wren, Farah Rehman, Karen Page, Jacqueline A Shaw and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of liquid biopsy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

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

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

20 authors.

Mohammadali Yavari RamshehDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Raquel L FraccariDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Rossitza ChristovaDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Jarrett KillpackDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Jean-Rene AcquahDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Georgios NteliopoulosDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Evie WrenDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Farah RehmanDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Karen PageLeicester Cancer Research Centre, School of Medical Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Jacqueline A ShawLeicester Cancer Research Centre, School of Medical Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Atreyee SahaDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Ryan WongDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Subhas PradhanDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Peter NovotnyDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Marie PerasDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Beth ArnoldDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Michele WisniewskiDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
Hrishikesh JoshiDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.
R Charles CoombesDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Division of Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Samuel ReedDNAe Group Holdings Ltd, Scale Space, 58 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RZ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Plasma circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analysed using next generation sequencing (NGS) reflects the evolving tumour molecular landscape. However, barriers to routine adoption of NGS ctDNA analysis in clinical settings to detect breast cancer recurrence and therapy selection and monitoring include high costs, the need for highly trained personnel to perform complex workflows and specialised laboratories. DNAe is addressing this with its sample-to-result NGS-based LiDia-SEQ™ platform. This benchtop platform is simple to operate, rapid, fully automated and likely cost-effective. Materials and methods: A clinically relevant panel (DNAe panel) covering 127-point mutations on three key genes - Results: Out of the 32 clinical samples tested with the two panels, 12 samples had no mutations, and 20 samples contained mutations. Fifteen samples had mutations detected by both panels and five had a single mutation detected by one or the other panel. Conclusion: Using clinical samples, we show that the DNAe panel with analysis using DNAe's pipeline detects mutations comparably to the commercial Oncomine-Assay. This paves the way for development of the DNAe panel into a test for the LiDia-SEQ platform.

Indexed as

Breast cancerCirculating tumour DNA (ctDNA)Liquid biopsyNext generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID42325535
PMCPMC13277592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.