Back

Systematic benchmarking of multi-modal approaches for tumor-naive ctDNA detection and quantification

Qi, T.; Odinokov, D.; Lakshmanan, L. N.; Grachet, N. G.; Lou, M.; Saelee, S.; Garcia-Montoya, G.; Mun, W. P.; Rahman, R. C.; Asgharian, H.; Yi, A. T. X.; Pyone, N. H. Y.; Wang, L. Y.; Tan, G. T.; Carrie, H.; Lim, A.; Ting, L. Y.; Hsia, A. G. H.; Yean, P. P. S.; Ngo, S.; Snyder, J.; Kaur, H.; Tan, A.; Yap, Y. S.; Tan, D. S.; Tan, I. B. H.; Penkler, J.-A.; Utiramerur, S.; Kumar, D.; Skanderup, A. J.

2026-06-24 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.06.19.733293 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Longitudinal monitoring of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a promising framework for characterizing treatment response dynamics in cancer. Scalable tumor-naive approaches for quantifying ctDNA often involve whole-genome sequencing (WGS) or DNA methylation profiling, but their comparative performance and capacity for complementary integration remain poorly understood. Here we systematically benchmarked tumor-naive WGS- and methylation-based ctDNA quantification methods using plasma from 150 patients with colorectal, lung and breast cancer. Using paired high-depth WGS and EM-seq data, we generated 40,000 in silico samples and evaluated detection accuracy, limits of detection (LoD) and quantification (LoQ) across cancer types and sequencing depths (0.1x-30x). We further assessed single- and multimodal method combinations, identifying conditions under which integrated approaches enhance analytical performance for detection and quantification relative to single modalities. This benchmark delineates key performance trade-offs and provides a practical framework to support method development and guide future research applications in ctDNA-based biomarker studies.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 20%
8.1%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 6%
8.1%
3
Briefings in Bioinformatics
354 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.9%
4
Analytical Chemistry
218 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.6%
5
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.4%
6
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.1%
7
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
8
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.1%
9
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.3%
10
Cancer Research Communications
51 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
11
Nature Biotechnology
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
12
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
39 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
13
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 12%
2.0%
14
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.8%
15
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
16
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
17
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
18
BMC Bioinformatics
457 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
19
BMC Methods
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
20
npj Precision Oncology
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
21
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
22
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
23
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.1%
24
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
25
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.9%
28
Oncotarget
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
29
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.9%
30
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%