ArticleThe journal of liquid biopsy2026
The potential survival gain and cost-effectiveness of circulating tumor DNA-guided treatment switching in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A simulation modeling study.
Article in The journal of liquid biopsy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a minimally invasive approach to assess treatment response in cancer. While ctDNA response has been associated with greater survival outcomes, the clinical benefit and economic value of using ctDNA to inform early treatment switching is unclear. The objective was to estimate the potential effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ctDNA-guided treatment switching in advanced NSCLC. Methods: We developed a semi-Markov model to estimate survival gains in weeks, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with ctDNA-guided treatment switching relative to standard of care (SOC). The model used survival parameters from the Prospective Clinico-Genomic study. We evaluated ctDNA testing at 6, 10, or 15 weeks post-treatment initiation, assuming varying degrees of improved efficacy with the subsequent treatment regimen with earlier switching (odds ratios 0.7-1.0). Results: In the base-case scenario, assuming 10-week testing with 10% mortality reduction, ctDNA-guided switching yielded 4.0 weeks survival gain (95% uncertainty interval: -2.5, 10.9) at an additional cost of $3975 ($3,755, $4179), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $87,941 per QALY. These findings suggest a 66% probability that ctDNA-guided therapy would be cost-effective at $150,000 per QALY. Earlier testing and stronger efficacy assumptions improved estimates, with survival gains ranging from 2.0 to 7.4 weeks across scenarios. Conclusions: ctDNA-guided treatment switching may provide modest survival benefits within accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds, though substantial uncertainty exists. The magnitude of clinical benefit and economic value depends on the timing of ctDNA assessment and the efficacy advantage conferred by earlier treatment switching.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.