Circulating tumor DNA: toward evolving the clinical paradigm of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over a decade of sequencing-based genomics research has unveiled a diverse somatic mutation landscape across patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and the identification of druggable mutations has aligned with the development of novel targeted therapeutics. However, despite these advances, direct translation of years of PDAC genomics research into the clinical care of patients remains a critical and unmet need. Technologies that enabled the initial mapping of the PDAC mutation landscape, namely whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing, remain overly expensive in terms of both time and financial resources. Consequentially, dependence on these technologies to identify the relatively small subset of patients with actionable PDAC alterations has greatly impeded enrollment for clinical trials testing novel targeted therapies. Liquid biopsy tumor profiling using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) generates new opportunities by overcoming these challenges while further addressing issues particularly relevant to PDAC, namely, difficulty of obtaining tumor tissue via fine-needle biopsy and the need for faster turnaround time due to rapid disease progression. Meanwhile, ctDNA-based approaches for tracking disease kinetics with respect to surgical and therapeutic interventions offer a means to elevate the current clinical management of PDAC toward higher granularity and accuracy. This review provides a clinically focused summary of ctDNA advances, limitations, and opportunities in PDAC and postulates ctDNA sequencing technology as a catalyst for evolving the clinical decision-making paradigm of this disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".