MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407843020 · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56658-4

Longitudinal evaluation of circulating tumor DNA in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for early breast cancer using a tumor-informed assay

2025· article· en· W4407843020 on OpenAlexafffund
Mitchell J. Elliott, Philippe Echelard, Christodoulos Pipinikas, Sasha Main, Jesús Fuentes‐Antrás, Aaron Dou, Zachary Veitch, Eitan Amir, Michelle B. Nadler, Nicholas Meti, Eshetu G. Atenafu, Elizabeth Shah, Celeste Yu, Nathan Campbell, Robert Ventura, Lillian L. Siu, Philippe L. Bédard, Hal K. Berman, David W. Cescon

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreUniversité de SherbrookePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSt Mary's Hospital CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research Institute
KeywordsBreast cancerCirculating tumor DNANeoadjuvant therapyMedicineOncologyInternal medicineDNABreast tumorCancerCancer researchBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging biomarker for the treatment of early breast cancer (EBC). We sought to evaluate a highly sensitive tumor-informed ctDNA assay in a real-world cohort of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) to assess clinical validity and explore prognostic outcomes. ctDNA is detected in 77.2% (88/114) of participants at baseline, with 18/88 (20.5%) having a baseline estimated variant allele frequency (eVAF) of <0.01%. Persistent detection of ctDNA, measured midway through NAT (mid-NAT), is associated with disease recurrence in all participants, reaching statistical significance in those with HER2-negative disease. Stratified analyses demonstrate that ctDNA detected mid-NAT enhances the prognostic accuracy of the residual cancer burden (RCB) score for disease recurrence. Postoperative or follow-up detection of ctDNA demonstrates a 100% positive predictive value for disease recurrence, with a median lead time of 374 days (range: 13-1010 days). These data suggest that assays with high analytical sensitivity may improve baseline ctDNA detection in patients with EBC. The ability to replicate the prognostic association of ctDNA dynamics in a real-world cohort supports further investigation. Prospective trials incorporating ctDNA testing are warranted to assess and develop the clinical utility of ctDNA-guided treatment strategies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207