ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
Circulating tumor DNA clearance as a trial-level early efficacy signal in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a sensitive marker of residual disease and treatment activity, but its validity as a trial-level surrogate endpoint remains uncertain. Given scarce randomized evidence and clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we performed an exploratory, hypothesis-generating evaluation of trial-level associations between ctDNA clearance and clinical outcomes across solid tumors. Methods: Randomized controlled trials reporting ctDNA clearance and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), or recurrence-related outcomes were identified through April 2026. Analyses were exploratory and conducted at trial level. Weighted regression, leave-one-out cross-validation, copula correlation, Bayesian hierarchical modeling, and sensitivity analyses were performed, with cross-validated R Results: Eighteen trials were included. Out-of-sample performance was limited: R Conclusions: These exploratory, hypothesis-generating findings identify an endpoint- and setting-dependent trial-level signal, with the largest observed association for PFS, but do not validate ctDNA clearance as a surrogate endpoint. Wide uncertainty intervals, few contributing trials, and limited cross-validated performance require prospective validation before use in trial qualification or individual treatment decisions.
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.