Evidence Hub

Circulating tumor DNA Clearance as a Predictive Biomarker of Pathologic Complete Response in Patients with Solid Tumors Treated with Neoadjuvant Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

C. Valenza, E. Saldanha, Y. Gong, P. De Placido, D. Gritsch, H. Ortiz, D. Trapani, F. Conforti et al.

Annals of Oncology, 2025

380 participants · 45 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In patients with solid tumors undergoing neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, identifying biomarkers to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) preoperatively could enhance treatment modulation. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) clearance is a potential predictor of pCR, though its analytical and clinical validity has yet to be established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the role of ctDNA clearance as a predictor of pCR in patients with solid tumors treated with neoadjuvant ICIs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE and conference proceedings up to 5 August 2024 was carried out to identify phase 1b, 2 or 3 clinical trials investigating ctDNA clearance and pCR in patients with solid tumors and detectable ctDNA, undergoing neoadjuvant therapy with ICIs. Using a bivariate model, we estimated the pooled sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA clearance in predicting pCR, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Thirteen trials involving 380 patients with detectable ctDNA at baseline were included. ctDNA was assessed with a tumor-informed approach in 11 (85%) trials. Overall, 38% of patients achieved pCR and 73% had ctDNA clearance before/at the surgery. Pooled sensitivity was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.86, 1.00), specificity was 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.69), PLR was 2.09 (95% CI: 1.48, 2.93), NLR was 0.04 (95% CI: 0.01,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 380 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free