Back

Landmark ctDNA molecular response represents an early predictor of immunotherapy outcomes in lung cancer

Niknafs, N.; Sivapalan, L.; Balan, A.; Wehr, J.; Pereira, G.; Hosseini-Nami, S.; Rao, N.; Jolly, S.; Velliangiri, K.; Beadles, I.; Loftus, T.; Chesnick, B.; Medina, J.; Xiao, W.; Pabani, A.; Marrone, K. A.; Li, Q. K.; Murray, J. C.; Rinaldi, L.; Dracopoli, N. C.; Sausen, M.; Hann, C. L.; Scott, S. C.; Feliciano, J.; Lam, V. K.; Levy, B.; Velculescu, V. E.; Brahmer, J. R.; Forde, P. M.; Vellanki, P. J.; Anagnostou, V.

2026-02-23 oncology
10.64898/2026.02.18.26346415 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeCirculating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses are informative as an early indicator of immunotherapy response in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the clinical value of ctDNA molecular response requires further validation. Patients and MethodsAs part of a prospective clinical protocol (NCT05995821), we conducted targeted error-correction sequencing of ctDNA (n=328) and matched WBC DNA (n=109) from 109 patients with metastatic NSCLC who received anti-PD-(L)1 either as monotherapy or in combination. Following cellular origin resolution of 2,818 variants, landmark molecular response (mR) was defined as undetectable ctDNA within 3-9 weeks of treatment initiation. ResultsPre-treatment ctDNA burden, but not blood tumor mutation burden, predicted survival. Implementing a tumor-naive WBC DNA-informed approach increased the number of evaluable cases without compromising the overall accuracy of landmark ctDNA molecular responses. A direct comparison of single-timepoint on-therapy ctDNA assessment with ctDNA dynamics from baseline to the 3-9-week interval, along with an analysis of heterogeneity in molecular response within the 3-9-week window, showed that undetectable ctDNA at the landmark timepoint can effectively predict survival outcomes. A significant enrichment in landmark ctDNA mR was noted among patients with progression-free survival (PFS) [≥]6 months with immunotherapy (p=2.5e-05) and chemo-immunotherapy (p=0.02). Patients in the landmark mR group had longer progression-free (p=1.6e-06) and overall survival (p=2.5e-05) than those with molecular progression. ConclusionsLandmark ctDNA molecular response provides a real-time, accurate approach for monitoring immunotherapy clinical outcomes. Although not currently validated for regulatory use, these findings demonstrate the potential utility of ctDNA as an early endpoint in clinical trials. Translational RelevanceEmploying circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) dynamics as an early indicator of immunotherapy response requires a roadmap for the next-generation sequencing approach, definition of molecular response and establishment of its clinical sensitivity. In this study, we introduce the concept of a landmark ctDNA molecular response, determined 3-9 weeks after initiation of immunotherapy, that maximizes the number of evaluable patients without sacrificing the specificity of the approach. Notably, when evaluating heterogeneity in ctDNA detection within the landmark 3-9-week window and assessing the impact of landmark interval dynamics on survival, we found that a single ctDNA assessment performed similarly to multiple ctDNA measurements within the landmark window (most notably, regardless of whether the timepoints were concordant or discordant). Our findings demonstrate that a single assessment of early on-therapy landmark ctDNA molecular response, can identify patients at risk of disease progression and enable future intervention and therapy optimization.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.2%
2
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.5%
3
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
4
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 43%
3.0%
6
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
7
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.6%
50% of probability mass above
8
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
9
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.3%
10
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 36%
2.0%
11
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
12
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
14
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.6%
15
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.5%
17
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
18
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
19
Molecular Oncology
50 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
20
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
21
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
22
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
23
Journal of Hematology & Oncology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
24
Molecular Cancer
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
25
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
27
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
33 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
28
Nature Cancer
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
Cancer Immunology Research
34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
OncoImmunology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%