MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413110410 · doi:10.1111/pcmr.70047

Prognostic and Predictive Value of ct<scp>DNA</scp> for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2025· review· en· W4413110410 on OpenAlexaff
Mariana Macambira Noronha, Luís Felipe Leite, Luiz F. Costa de Almeida, Pedro Robson Costa Passos, Pedro Cotta Abrahão Reis, João Evangelista Ponte Conrado, Valbert Oliveira Costa Filho, Lucas Diniz da Conceição, Maurício Fernando Silva Almeida Ribeiro, Samuel D. Saibil, Erick Figueiredo Saldanha

Bibliographic record

VenuePigment Cell & Melanoma Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMeta-analysisOncologyMelanomaSubgroup analysisMEDLINEProspective cohort studyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is a rare disease associated with poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Recent studies showed that detecting ctDNA is feasible and can aid treatment decisions for patients with mUM. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for eligible studies published up to May 2025 that included patients with mUM and reported data on the association between ctDNA and survival outcomes (OS and PFS). Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4 software. Of the initial 450 records, seven studies met eligibility, including 518 patients with mUM. At baseline, ctDNA positivity was associated with significantly worse PFS (HR 2.34; 95% CI 1.56–3.51; p &lt; 0.01; I 2 = 0%) and OS (HR 3.32; 95% CI 2.09–5.29; p &lt; 0.01; I 2 = 48%). In patients treated with tebentafusp, ctDNA clearance was associated with superior OS (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.07–0.49; p &lt; 0.01; I 2 = 46%) and any decrease in ctDNA was associated with better OS (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22–0.80; p &lt; 0.01; I 2 = 0%). This meta‐analysis underscores ctDNA as a potential predictor of worse survival in patients with mUM, highlighting its potential to refine risk stratification and guide treatment strategies. Trial Registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42025638076

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.326 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePigment Cell & Melanoma ResearchSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207