Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42593771›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2026

Tissue-Free vs Tumor-Informed ctDNA Assays for Molecular Residual Disease Detection in Early Triple Negative Breast Cancer.

Niamh Cunningham, Rosalind J Cutts, Claire Swift, Maria Coakley, Prithika Sritharan, Kathryn Dunne, Monisha Dewan, Lucy Kilburn, Katie Goddard, Peter Hall and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 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.

Niamh CunninghamThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Rosalind J CuttsBreast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Claire SwiftThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Maria CoakleyBreast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Prithika SritharanBreast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Kathryn DunneThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Monisha DewanClinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Lucy KilburnClinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Katie GoddardClinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Peter HallInstitute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Catherine Harper-WynneMaidstone Hospital, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Maidstone, UK.
Iain R MacphersonSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Alicia OkinesThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Andrew WardleyOutreach Research & Innovation Group Ltd, Manchester, UK.
Simon WatersVelindre Cancer Centre, Velindre University NHS Trust, Cardiff, UK.
Carlo PalmieriThe Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Matthew WinterWeston Park Cancer Centre, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Judith BlissBreast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Isaac Garcia-MurillasThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Nicholas C TurnerThe Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Molecular residual disease (MRD) detection has potential to transform the selection of adjuvant therapy. Most evidence is from tumor-informed assays. Tissue-free assays not requiring sequencing of the primary tumor may simplify workflows if they offer accuracy similar to that of tumor-informed assays. Objective: To evaluate tissue-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and compare the tissue-free assay with tumor-informed assay results. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prognostic and exploratory analysis of patients with TNBC at moderate to high risk of recurrence who were participating in the ctDNA surveillance period of c-TRAK TN, a multicenter phase 2 clinical study. Plasma samples were collected from participants every 3 months for up to 2 years after the completion of adjuvant therapy and analyzed prospectively with digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR). Data for the analysis were from a database lock on September 28, 2021, with subsequent follow-up through January 18, 2023. Data were analyzed from July 2025 to May 2026. Intervention or Exposure: Tissue-free assay leverages cancer differential methylation patterns to detect ctDNA. Main Outcome and Measures: Recurrence-free survival by tissue-free ctDNA detection status. Comparison between tissue-free ctDNA detection and both dPCR and whole-exome sequencing-powered multivariant tumor-informed assays. Results: The analysis included 1026 plasma samples from 159 patients (mean [SD; range] age, 51.4 [11.4; 25.0-78.0] years; 159 females [100%]). The tissue-free assay detected ctDNA in 54 patients (34.0%), with detection strongly associated with risk of recurrence (HR, 27.2; 95% CI, 13.7-54.2; P < .001). Among patients with ctDNA detected by both the tissue-free assay and dPCR (42 patients [26%]), tissue-free detection occurred at an earlier time point in 14 patients (33.3%); dPCR detection occurred before tissue-free detection in no patients. Median lead time to recurrence was 7.9 (95% CI, 6.1-10.5) months for tissue-free vs 5.8 (95% CI, 3.3-10.0) months for dPCR (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.95; P = .03). Concordance between tissue-free and multivariant tumor-informed assays was good. Among patients detected by both assays (41 of 133), 12 of 41 (29.3%) had ctDNA detected earlier by multivariant tumor-informed assay with 1 (2.4%) earlier by the tissue-free assay. Median lead times to recurrence were 7.6 (95% CI, 4.6-10.5) months with tissue-free and 7.1 (95% CI, 5.7-10.0) months with multivariant tumor-informed assay (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.87-2.44; P = .15). Conclusion and Relevance: In this prognostic study, tissue-free ctDNA detection during surveillance was strongly prognostic for recurrence in patients with TNBC. Comparable lead times between the tissue-free and multivariant tumor-informed assays support tissue-free MRD detection in a clinical trial setting, permitting ctDNA testing when tissue is not available.

Identifiers

PMID42593771
PMCPMC13474100

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.