PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 12, 2025Clinical Cancer Research2 citations

Circulating tumor DNA is prognostic of patient outcome and enables therapy monitoring in metastatic uveal melanoma

View Full Paper
EREgle RamelyteJKJulian KöttALAleigha Lawless

Key Points

  • To evaluate the prognostic relevance of circulating tumor DNA in metastatic uveal melanoma across treatment modalities.
  • Analyzed 655 samples from 75 patients with metastatic uveal melanoma.
  • Monitored both the presence of circulating tumor DNA and mutant allele fraction (MAF) using a digital PCR assay.
  • Assessed overall survival and progression-free survival in relation to baseline ctDNA levels and MAF.
  • Absence of detectable ctDNA in baseline samples predicted better overall survival (HR=0.13) and progression-free survival (HR=0.31).
  • Detection of ctDNA within 3 months of therapy initiation correlated with worse clinical outcomes.
  • Patients with MAF >5% had a significantly poorer prognosis compared to those with MAF <5%.

Abstract

Abstract Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) refers to small DNA-fragments, shed from tumor cells into the bloodstream. Measuring ctDNA provides a non-invasive tool for real-time disease monitoring. While ctDNA predicted overall survival (OS) in metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) treated with tebentafusp, its broader prognostic value across treatment modalities remains unclear. Here, we assess the prognostic relevance of longitudinal ctDNA detection and mutant allele fraction (MAF) in patients with mUM treated with different modalities. Objective: To assess ctDNA monitoring as a tool in evaluating therapy response and clinical outcomes in patients with mUM, using an IVDR-certified digital PCR assay targeting GNAQQ209 and GNA11Q209 mutations. Results: We analyzed 655 samples from 75 patients with mUM. Absence of detectable ctDNA in baseline samples prior to first-line therapy was associated with improved OS (HR=0.13, p=0.02) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.31, p=0.008). Similar associations were observed in patients treated with any-line of therapy (OS: HR=0.19, p=0.002; PFS: HR=0.27, p=0.02). Detection of ctDNA within 3months of therapy initiation was associated with worse outcomes, independent of baseline detection. Furthermore, patients with MAF 5% any timepoint had a significantly poorer prognosis compared to patients with MAF 5% (median OS 4months vs 21months, p0.001; median PFS 2.5months vs 3.6months, p=0.004), emphasizing the added value of quantitative assessment. Conclusion: Both the presence and level of ctDNA at baseline, along with persistence of ctDNA within 3months of treatment-start, are strong negative prognostic markers in mUM. These findings support the clinical utility of ctDNA as a non-invasive tool for disease monitoring.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ramelyte et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/694019192d562116f28f6722https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-25-2274
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Abstract 3929: Prognostic significance of ctDNA in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma.2026
  2. 2Prognostic and Predictive Value of ct<scp>DNA</scp> for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis2025
  3. 3Association between clinical and disease characteristics and detectable or undetectable baseline ctDNA in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma.2024
  4. 4Longitudinal analysis of circulating tumor DNA in localized and metastatic urothelial cancer.2024 · 1 citations
  5. 5Longitudinal circulating tumor DNA kinetics and correlation with patient outcomes in metastatic melanoma.2024