PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 4, 2026Journal of Clinical Oncology1 citations

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as a real-time biomarker in marker-negative germ cell tumors (GCT): A proof-of-concept study.

View Full Paper
ZTZachariah ThomasMGMichael GloverAJAndrew Johns

Key Points

  • The study investigates the effectiveness of ctDNA as a real-time biomarker for monitoring marker-negative germ cell tumors.
  • Analyzed a database of patients with germ cell tumors who had ctDNA results
  • Correlated ctDNA detection with radiologic and pathologic evidence across four treatment phases
  • Classified results as concordant or discordant based on ctDNA outcomes and disease evidence
  • 33 ctDNA samples were obtained from 21 patients with various histologies of germ cell tumors
  • ctDNA detection showed 100% concordance with disease status across treatment phases
  • ctDNA provided diagnostic clarity in indeterminate imaging situations, with positive ctDNA correlating to active disease

Abstract

619 Background: Traditional GCT biomarkers include AFP, β-HCG, and LDH. Marker-negative GCTs—comprising seminoma, embryonal carcinoma, and teratoma with or without somatic transformation (SM)—pose diagnostic and monitoring challenges. While miRNA assays have shown promise, they are not widely available. ctDNA has emerged as a robust, dynamic biomarker across cancers, but its role in marker-negative GCT remains underexplored. Methods: A prospectively maintained institutional database of patients with GCT and available ctDNA results was analyzed. ctDNA detection was correlated with radiologic and pathologic evidence of disease across four treatment phases: orchiectomy, RPLND, initial chemotherapy, and salvage therapy. Results were considered concordant when ctDNA status matched radiologic or pathologic evidence of disease (positive/positive or negative/negative); all others were classified as discordant. Descriptive statistics were applied. Results: From December 2024 to September 2025, 33 ctDNA samples were obtained from 21 patients: 18 (86%) with testicular primaries and 6 (29%) with stage I disease. Histologies included seminoma (11, 52%), embryonal carcinoma (4, 19%), SM (4, 19%), mature teratoma (1, 5%), and mixed (1, 5%). Across all treatment phases, ctDNA detection showed 100% concordance with disease status. Serial measurements were available for 8 patients, 5 of whom had results before and after interventions (surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy). (See Table) Four patients were monitored serially during surveillance—2 maintained undetectable ctDNA with no relapse, while 2 showed ctDNA re-emergence preceding relapse. In 6 instances with indeterminate imaging, ctDNA provided adjunctive diagnostic clarity: 3/3 patients with detectable ctDNA had subsequent biopsy-proven active disease, whereas 3/3 with undetectable ctDNA remained disease-free on surveillance. Conclusions: This study provides proof-of-concept for ctDNA as a real-time biomarker in marker-negative GCTs. ctDNA trends mirrored treatment response and disease dynamics across all phases and served as a sensitive adjunct when imaging was inconclusive. To our knowledge, this is the first report of ctDNA utility in SM, warranting further exploration in monitoring and early detection of transformed teratoma. Patient Histology Pre-intervention value (MTM/ml) Intervention Post-intervention value (MTM/ml) Current Status 1 Transformed teratoma 83.77 Salvage surgery 0 (No evidence of disease)NED 2 Seminoma 0.2 RPLND 0 NED 3 Transformed teratoma 18.44 Salvage Chemotherapy 0.23 3 contd. 0.23 Salvage Surgery 0 NED 4 Seminoma 7.88 Salvage Radiation 0.24 On treatment 5 Seminoma 0.25 Orchiectomy 0 NED

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Thomas et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a7cc7ad48f933b5eed81a4https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.7_suppl.619
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper