ReviewCancer2026
Circulating tumor DNA in early breast cancer: Evidence, challenges, next steps.
Review in Cancer, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a tumor-derived, circulating bioanalyte that can be detected in blood using minimally invasive, blood-based biomarker procedures and has prognostic value in early breast cancer. Quantitative features of ctDNA, including baseline detectability and levels, have shown prognostic potential in early breast cancer by reflecting tumor burden and biologic aggressiveness, thereby supporting risk stratification. Post-treatment ctDNA detection may identify minimal residual disease and can precede radiologic or symptomatic recurrence by several months to years. Nevertheless, ctDNA has not yet been adopted in routine clinical practice in early breast cancer, partly because of biologic constraints, including low and heterogeneous tumor DNA shedding, as well as pre-analytical and analytical variability that can affect testing sensitivity. Ongoing efforts are focused on methodological standardization and clarification of the clinically actionable context. This narrative review examines the challenges in applying ctDNA to early breast cancer, spanning patient selection, sampling logistics, specimen handling, assay performance, and sources of assay failure. The authors outline determinants of ctDNA measurement that restrict the proportion of evaluable patients and limit translation to clinical practice and then summarize evidence supporting ctDNA for early response monitoring during neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative minimal residual disease detection, and longitudinal molecular surveillance. Finally, ctDNA-guided therapeutic interception strategies and emerging multimodal cell-free DNA approaches are discussed.
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.