Back

Molecular residual disease detection by serial tumour-informed circulating tumour DNA analysis in resectable oesophageal & gastroesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma: a prospective UK multi-centre study

Coles, H. R.; Freeman, A.; Jacobson, D. H.; Devonshire, G.; Grehan, N.; Millington, C.; Nutzinger, B.; Harvey, A.; Saunders, J. H.; Gossage, J.; Ma, R.; Mason, L.; Parsons, S. L.; Askinyte, V.; Massia, S.; Fitzgerald, R. C.; Jones, C. M.

2026-07-09 oncology
10.64898/2026.07.06.26357371 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background The value and optimal timing of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analysis in locally advanced oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) is uncertain. We hypothesised that perioperative detection would predict event-free (EFS) and overall (OS) survival, and that 3-6 months post-operative detection would predict recurrence. Methods In this prospective multi-centre cohort study, tumour-informed ctDNA assays were designed for 49 patients using whole-exome sequencing. Bloods were collected for ctDNA detection up to 8 days prior to surgery, and at 3-6 weeks and 3-6 months post-surgery, then correlated with clinicopathological characteristics, EFS and OS. Results Pre- and early post- surgery ctDNA positivity were associated with worse EFS (HRs 7.97 (95% confidence interval, CI 2.64-24.04), p<0.0001; 8.18 (95%CI 3.23-20.69), p<0.0001) and OS (HRs 7.82 (95%CI 2.22-27.54), p=0.00018; 13.69 (95%CI 4.52-41.49), p<0.0001). In pre-surgery positive patients, post-surgery ctDNA clearance associated with improved EFS and OS, and predicted better OS in those with a poor histopathological response to neoadjuvant treatment. 3-6 month ctDNA-positivity preceded standard-of-care recurrence detection by median 53.5 (interquartile range 39.3-200.0) days. Conclusions Perioperative ctDNA positivity associates with worse EFS and OS in OAC, identifying a subgroup with improved outcomes despite adverse pathological features. ctDNA testing at 3-6 months predicts recurrence earlier than standard-of-care surveillance.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
British Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.2%
2
Gut
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.2%
3
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.1%
4
Gastroenterology
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.4%
5
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
American Journal of Gastroenterology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 40%
2.7%
8
International Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.7%
9
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
10
European Journal of Cancer
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
11
Cancer Cell
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.3%
12
Annals of Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
13
Frontiers in Oncology
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
75 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.4%
16
Cancer Medicine
26 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
17
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
18
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
19
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
eClinicalMedicine
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
21
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.0%
22
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.0%
23
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
24
Frontiers in Immunology
638 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.9%
25
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
26
PLOS Medicine
110 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
27
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
28
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
29
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
30
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%