Association of ctDNA detection and recurrence assessment in patients with neoadjuvant treatment

BACKGROUND: The utilization of neoadjuvant therapy is progressively expanding in various clinical settings. However, the absence of a clinically validated biomarker to evaluate the treatment response remains a significant challenge in the field. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection, a novel and emerging monitoring approach in the field of oncology, holds promise as a potential prognostic biomarker for patients with cancer. This meta‐analysis investigated the clinical significance of ctDNA detection as a predictive tool for cancer recurrence in patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted using public databases to identify relevant studies that investigated the association between ctDNA detection and cancer recurrence in patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. Hazard ratios (HRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated to assess the relationship between cancer recurrence and relevant factors. Cancer recurrence was considered the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies encompassing 1590 patients across eight different cancer types were included in the final analysis. Positive ctDNA detection was significantly associated with higher cancer recurrence, especially at post‐neoadjuvant treatment and post‐surgery time points. The risk values for the different cancer categories and geographic areas also differed significantly. CONCLUSION: Our comprehensive meta‐analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between ctDNA detection and a higher risk of cancer recurrence in patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. In addition, the risk of recurrence was influenced by variations in cancer type, timing of detection, and geographic region. These findings highlight the promising clinical applicability of ctDNA as a prognostic marker and monitoring approach for patients with cancer. However, the precise mechanism is unknown and more evidence is needed for further research.