ctdna

Current ctDNA/cfDNA are imperfect for advanced cancers which should have a lot of shedding to begin with.

Secondly, they focus on either cfDNA or ctDNA, indicating that cancer has already progressed significantly or spread to other areas.

These tests on the other hand detect circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), among other things.

The ctDNA are just fragments of DNA which have been shed by the tumor and are now circulating in the blood stream.

Would you say ctDNA tools are sensitive and specific enough now to be able to make a decision about post op adjuvant therapies?

For starters cf/ctDNA can be detected in stage I disease (and some limited reports of in situ).

And if that does happen, with ctDNA, can you detect that there is a relapse before you would otherwise find it with standard imaging.

Most studies I’ve seen have shown that this happens and ctDNA is a good biomarker for early detection of relapse.

They might also be great combined with early-stage detection via ctDNA.

In the medium term, I think there’s an opportunity for a company to build ctDNA screening on a different sequencing platform.

I’ve seen it most commonly thought of as using ctDNA to detect relapse earlier.

One idea: if you have a biomarker you can track via CTCs or ctDNA, then you could watch the rate at which that marker's availability increases.

- The eternal challenge in ctDNA is achieving a "useful" sensitivity and specificity.