Personalized circulating tumor DNA dynamics inform survival and response to immune checkpoint blockade in recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) is an aggressive disease with limited predictive biomarkers, often leading to ineffective treatments and unnecessary toxicity. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) provides a promising real-time, non-invasive tool for monitoring disease activity. In this study, we analyzed 137 plasma samples from 16 patients with R/M HNSCC receiving immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), using a tumor-informed, highly sensitive next-generation sequencing assay (RaDaR, NeoGenomics). Serial ctDNA monitoring was performed at baseline and throughout treatment, and its association with clinical outcomes, including disease control, three-year overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS), was evaluated through univariable and multivariable analyses. ctDNA negativity during treatment was significantly associated with improved disease control (OR 21.7, 95% CI 1.86-754.88, p = 0.0317), three-year OS (HR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.47, p = 0.0103), and PFS (HR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00-0.37, p = 0.0057). Early increases in ctDNA levels correlated with disease progression. Our findings suggest that ctDNA negativity, regardless of PD-L1 expression, ICB regimen, or line of therapy, is a strong predictor of favorable outcomes in R/M HNSCC.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Personalized circulating tumor DNA dynamics inform survival and response to immune checkpoint blockade in recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer
- Date Crossref
- 22/08/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.