Back

Formalising Limits of Circulating Tumour DNA Detection: A Signal Detection Framework for Clinical Threshold Specification

Walinjkar, A.

2026-06-10 oncology
10.64898/2026.06.08.26355204 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) liquid biopsy is now established across oncology for early cancer detection, minimal residual disease surveillance, and treatment monitoring. Detection thresholds for all current ctDNA assays are derived empirically through receiver operating characteristic analysis on training cohorts - a statistically valid but theoretically uninformed approach that does not specify the minimum detectable tumour fraction given assay technical characteristics, nor identify when increasing sequencing depth ceases to provide additional clinical information. Methods: We model ctDNA detection as a binary hypothesis testing problem with Binomial-distributed mutant allele counts against a sequencing error noise floor. The Neyman-Pearson lemma is applied to derive the uniformly most powerful detector and the minimum detectable tumour fraction in closed form. The sequencing assay is modelled as a binary symmetric channel and Shannon channel capacity is calculated. Empirical validation uses n=61 data points extracted from five published peer-reviewed analytical validation studies across five independent institutions in the US and EU (2018 - 2025): Yu et al. 2022, Stetson et al. 2018, Frydendahl et al. 2023, Northcott et al. 2024, and Cheng et al. 2025. Results: The minimum detectable tumour fraction is derived in closed form as f_min approximately equal to (z_alpha + z_beta) multiplied by the square root of (epsilon divided by N), where N is sequencing depth, epsilon is the platform error rate, and z_alpha, z_beta are standard normal quantiles at the specified false positive and false negative rates. Shannon channel capacity is C = 1 minus H(epsilon) bits per read, where H(epsilon) is binary entropy. Empirical validation yields 84.3% agreement for single-locus assays. Discordance for multi-locus tumour-informed assays (NeXT Personal, duplex WGS) is consistent with the single-locus model scope and identifies the principal theoretical extension required. Conclusions: This framework provides the first formal Neyman-Pearson optimality proof for ctDNA detection, a closed-form detection limit, and a platform-independent efficiency metric for NHS and regulatory standardisation. Keywords: circulating tumour DNA; liquid biopsy; Neyman-Pearson detection; Shannon channel capacity; sequencing depth; limit of detection; minimal residual disease; signal detection theory

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.3%
2
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
3
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 1%
8.3%
4
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.7%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
6
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.0%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 42%
3.0%
9
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.0%
10
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.8%
12
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
15
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
16
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.6%
17
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
18
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
19
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
20
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
21
Interface Focus
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
22
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
23
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
24
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
25
Nature Cancer
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
npj Genomic Medicine
33 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
27
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.7%
28
Life
27 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
29
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
30
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%