This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has evolved during the last decades, but recurrence remains a problem. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may result in an individualized treatment approach with improved survival and quality of life, but diverging results impede further development. In this systematic review, we addressed the quality of reporting and its impact on the interpretation of ctDNA results. We performed a systematic literature search using subject headings and search terms related to ctDNA and rectal cancer. The Quality of Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess bias. Nine studies, with substantial heterogeneity, were included in the analysis. Three out of nine articles had moderate or high risk of bias. No association was found between treatment response and ctDNA status at baseline. There was a negative association between ctDNA positivity at baseline, before and after surgery and survival. The ctDNA status may be of importance to the long-term prognosis, but the area of research is new and is short of dedicated studies. There is an obvious need for standardization in ctDNA research, and the issue should be addressed in future research.
This commentary attempts to discuss the required standardization of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses and thereby improve the clinical validity of ctDNA monitoring in the metastatic setting of solid tumors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.