4.7 Article

Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis in Patients With Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists Joint Review

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 36, 期 16, 页码 1631-+

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.8671

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Varian Medical Systems
  2. AstraZeneca
  3. Bayer AG
  4. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  5. Genentech
  6. Eli Lilly
  7. Merck
  8. Pfizer
  9. EMD Serono
  10. Baxter
  11. Foundation edicine
  12. ONYX
  13. Boston Biomedical
  14. Placon Therapeutics
  15. Puma Biotechnology
  16. Merrimack Pharmaceuticals
  17. Parexel
  18. Menarini Silicon Biosystems (fka Veridex/Johnson Johnson)
  19. Roche
  20. Inivata
  21. Clovis Oncology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Clinical use of analytical tests to assess genomic variants in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is increasing. This joint review from ASCO and the College of American Pathologists summarizes current information about clinical ctDNA assays and provides a framework for future research. Methods An Expert Panel conducted a literature review on the use of ctDNA assays for solid tumors, including pre-analytical variables, analytical validity, interpretation and reporting, and clinical validity and utility. Results The literature search identified 1,338 references. Of those, 390, plus 31 references supplied by the Expert Panel, were selected for full-text review. There were 77 articles selected for inclusion. Conclusion The evidence indicates that testing for ctDNA is optimally performed on plasma collected in cell stabilization or EDTA tubes, with EDTA tubes processed within 6 hours of collection. Some ctDNA assays have demonstrated clinical validity and utility with certain types of advanced cancer; however, there is insufficient evidence of clinical validity and utility for the majority of ctDNA assays in advanced cancer. Evidence shows discordance between the results of ctDNA assays and genotyping tumor specimens and supports tumor tissue genotyping to confirm undetected results from ctDNA tests. There is no evidence of clinical utility and little evidence of clinical validity of ctDNA assays in early-stage cancer, treatment monitoring, or residual disease detection. There is no evidence of clinical validity and clinical utility to suggest that ctDNA assays are useful for cancer screening, outside of a clinical trial. Given the rapid pace of research, re-evaluation of the literature will shortly be required, along with the development of tools and guidance for clinical practice. (C) 2018 by American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据