Radiographic surveillance of colorectal cancer (CRC) after curative-intent therapy is costly and unreliable. Methylated DNA markers (MDMs) detected primary CRC and metastatic recurrence with high sensitivity and specificity in cross-sectional studies. This study evaluated using serial MDMs to detect recurrence and monitor the treatment response to anti-cancer therapies.

A nested case-control study was drawn from a prospective cohort of patients with CRC who completed curative-intent therapy for CRC of all stages. Plasma MDMs were assayed vis target enrichment long-probe quantitative-amplified signal assays, normalized to B3GALT6, and analyzed in combination with serum carcinoembryonic antigen to yield an MDM score. Clinical information, including treatment and radiographic measurements of the tumor burden, were longitudinally collected.

Of the 35 patients, 18 had recurrence and 17 had no evidence of disease during the study period. The MDM score was positive in 16 out of 18 patients who recurred and only 2 of the 17 patients without recurrence. The MDM score detected recurrence in 12 patients preceding clinical or radiographic detection of recurrent CRC by a median of 106 days (range 90-232 days).

Plasma MDMs can detect recurrent CRC prior to radiographic detection; this tumor-agnostic liquid biopsy approach may assist cancer surveillance and monitoring.

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a promising biomarker that may better identify stage II colon cancer (CC) patients who will benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) compared to standard clinicopathological parameters. The DYNAMIC study demonstrated that ctDNA-informed treatment decreased AC utilisation without compromising recurrence free survival, but medical oncologists' willingness to utilise ctDNA results to inform AC decision is unknown. Medical oncologists from Australia, Canada and New Zealand were presented with clinical vignettes for stage II CC comprised of two variables with three levels each (age: ≤50, 52-69, ≥70 years; and clinicopathological risk of recurrence: low, intermediate, high) and were queried about ctDNA testing and treatment recommendations based on results. Sixty-four colorectal oncologists completed at least one vignette (all vignettes, n = 59). The majority of oncologist were Australian (70%; Canada: n = 13; New Zealand: n = 6) and had over 10 years of clinical experience (n = 41; 64%). The proportion of oncologists requesting ctDNA testing exceeded 80% for all vignettes, except for age ≥ 70 and low-risk disease (63%). Following a positive ctDNA result, the proportion of oncologists recommending AC (p < 0.01) and recommending oxaliplatin-based doublet (p < 0.01) increased in all vignettes. Following a negative result, the proportion recommending AC decreased in all intermediate and high-risk vignettes (p < 0.01).

Emerging data have suggested that circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be a reliable biomarker for minimal residual disease (MRD) in CRC patients. Recent studies have shown that the ability to detect MRD using ctDNA assay after curative-intent surgery will change how to assess the recurrence risk and patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy. We performed a meta-analysis of post-operative ctDNA in stage I-IV (oligometastatic) CRC patients after curative-intent resection. We included 23 studies representing 3568 patients with evaluable ctDNA in CRC patient post-curative-intent surgery. Data were extracted from each study to perform a meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4. software. Subsequent subgroup analysis was performed for stages I-III and oligometastatic stage IV CRC patients. Results showed that the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence-free survival (RFS) in post-surgical ctDNA-positive versus -negative patients in all stages was 7.27 (95% CI 5.49-9.62), p < 0.00001. Subgroup analysis revealed pooled HRs of 8.14 (95% CI 5.60-11.82) and 4.83 (95% CI 3.64-6.39) for stages I-III and IV CRC, respectively. The pooled HR for RFS in post-adjuvant chemotherapy ctDNA-positive versus -negative patients in all stages was 10.59 (95% CI 5.59-20.06), p < 0.00001. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis has revolutionized non-invasive cancer diagnostics and monitoring, with two primary forms of analysis emerging: tumor-informed techniques and tumor-agnostic or tumor-naive techniques. Tumor-informed methods involve the initial identification of somatic mutations in tumor tissue, followed by the targeted sequencing of plasma DNA using a personalized assay. In contrast, the tumor-agnostic approach performs ctDNA analysis without prior knowledge of the patient's tumor tissue molecular profile. This review highlights the distinctive features and implications of each approach. Tumor-informed techniques enable the precise monitoring of known tumor-specific mutations, leveraging the sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA detection. Conversely, the tumor-agnostic approach allows for a broader genetic and epigenetic analysis, potentially revealing novel alterations and enhancing our understanding of tumor heterogeneity. Both approaches have significant implications for personalized medicine and improved patient outcomes in the field of oncology. The subgroup analysis based on the ctDNA method showed pooled HRs of 8.66 (95% CI 6.38-11.75) and 3.76 (95% CI 2.58-5.48) for tumor-informed and tumor-agnostic, respectively. Our analysis emphasizes that post-operative ctDNA is a strong prognostic marker of RFS. Based on our results, ctDNA can be a significant and independent predictor of RFS. This real-time assessment of treatment benefits using ctDNA can be used as a surrogate endpoint for the development of novel drugs in the adjuvant setting.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer type worldwide, with over 1.9 million new cases and 935,000 related deaths in 2020. Within the next decade, the incidence of CRC is estimated to increase by 60% and the mortality by 80%. One of the underlying causes of poor prognosis is late detection, with 60 to 70% of the diagnoses occurring at advanced stages. Circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) is probably the most promising tool for screening, diagnosis, prediction of therapeutic response, and prognosis. More specifically, the analysis of the tumor fraction within the ccfDNA (circulating tumor DNA, ctDNA) has great potential to improve the management of CRC. The present review provides an up-to-date and comprehensive overview of the various aspects related to ctDNA detection in CRC.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has already shown clinically relevant results in early-stage colon cancer patient management. Its prognostic value is by far much stronger than that of the available clinico-pathological biomarkers, therefore, has the potential to personalize the treatment after radical surgery through intensifying or de-intensifying the adjuvant therapy. Further developments and improvements should be pursued by (a) optimizing ctDNA assays and (b) validating its clinical utility in the different stages of this disease. Two main avenues of ctDNA testing are being pursued: tumor-informed vs tumor-agnostic assays. Two main clinical trial designs are under study: ctDNA-based strategy and ctDNA-by-treatment interaction. The former needs large sample sizes to address the main questions of the studies; thus, the target delta benefit may be the main challenge in these trial designs. The latter may be challenged by unavoidable contamination bias. To date, several clinical trials are ongoing worldwide. We believe that this large number of trials may provide an excellent common database for the demonstration of surrogacy of ctDNA for the classical 3-year disease-free survival endpoint. This would mark a huge methodological improvement to speed up new drug testing and development in the adjuvant treatment of this disease.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been increasingly recognized as a promising minimally-invasive biomarker that could identify patients with minimal residual disease and a high risk of recurrence after definitive treatment. In this study, we've compared the clinical utility and sensitivity of 2 different approaches to ctDNA analyses: tumor-informed and tumor-agnostic in the management of colorectal (CRC) patients. The clinical benefits of a single timepoint ctDNA analysis compared to serial ctDNA monitoring after definitive treatment were also evaluated to uncover the ideal surveillance protocol.

Patient-paired resected tumor tissues, peripheral blood cells, and a total of 127 pre-operative and serial plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) samples after definitive treatment from 38 CRC patients that had undergone curative intent surgery were analyzed using a commercial NGS cfDNA panel.

Up to 84% (32/38) of the recruited patients were detected with at least 1 genomic alteration from the tumor tissues that could be monitored using the tumor-informed ctDNA approach and none of the detected alterations were clonal hematopoiesis (CH) related. In contrast, 37% (14/38) of patients were detected with at least 1 monitoring alteration after exclusion of CH mutations using the tumor-agnostic approach. Serial plasma samples after definitive therapy were available for 31 patients. In the landmark ctDNA analysis, 24% (7/29) of patients had detectable ctDNA and were more likely to relapse than ctDNA-negative patients (p < 0.05). The landmark analysis sensitivity and specificity for recurrence were 67% and 87%, respectively. The incorporation of longitudinal ctDNA analysis at 6-months intervals improved the sensitivity to 100%. The median variant allele frequency (VAF) of the ctDNA mutations detected during surveillance was 0.028% (range: 0.018-0.783), where up to 80% (8/10) of the mutations were detected at VAF lower than the tumor-agnostic detection limit of 0.1%. Utilizing the tumor-agnostic approach reduced the recurrence detection sensitivity to 67% (4/6). Serial ctDNA analyses predicted disease recurrence at a median of 5 months ahead of radiological imaging.

Longitudinal monitoring using tumor-informed ctDNA testing shows high analytical sensitivity, low probability of false-positive results due to CH mutations, and improved sensitivity in detecting recurrence which may modify the clinical management of CRC.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level monitoring after surgery for colon cancer has been studied in stage II and III colon cancer to risk-stratify patients for adjuvant therapy. However, there is less data regarding the role of this diagnostic tool in the management of stage I disease, where current recommended surveillance is limited to screening colonoscopy at one year. In this report, we describe the case of a 57-year-old man with stage I colon cancer who underwent complete resection with adequate lymph node surgical sampling, normal preoperative CEA and no evidence of metastatic disease on initial imaging. The patient elected to undergo serial ctDNA monitoring after surgery. Rising ctDNA levels, five months after resection, prompted cross-sectional imaging which demonstrated metastatic disease to the liver. The patient subsequently received five cycles of leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan with bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI-Bev) and definitive microwave ablation to the liver metastases, with resulting undetectable ctDNA levels. The patient's imaging and colonoscopy one-year post-operatively showed no evidence of disease, with ctDNA levels remaining undetectable. This report highlights the value of ctDNA monitoring in patients with early-stage colon cancer and suggests that further, large-scale studies may be warranted to determine its appropriate clinical use.

Current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant (NAC) and/or adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancers (LAGCs). However, the choice and duration of NAC regimen is standardized, rather than personalized to biologic response, despite the availability of several different classes of agents for the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). The current trial will use a tumor-informed ctDNA assay (Signatera^™) and monitor response to NAC. Based on ctDNA kinetics, the treatment regimen is modified. This is a prospective single center, single arm, open label study in clinical stage IB-III GC. ctDNA is measured at baseline and repeated every 8 weeks. Imaging is performed at the same intervals. The primary endpoint is the feasibility of this approach, defined as percentage of patients completing gastrectomy.