Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2026

Determining Genome-wide Transcript Decay Rates in Proliferating and Quiescent Human Fibroblasts
Published on: January 2, 2018
Common analysis pitfalls in longitudinal ctDNA studies: lead time, sensitivity and immortal time bias
Dominik Hlauschek1, Nadia Dandachi2, Michael Gnant3
1Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria; Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group [ABCSG], Vienna, Austria.
None:
Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as one of the most promising biomarkers in oncology, with potential applications from detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) and diagnosis to prognosis, treatment guidance, and response monitoring. This personal view critically examines recurring methodological and statistical pitfalls in ctDNA studies with longitudinal measurements. We highlight important issues with lead time definition and demonstrate that performance metrics like sensitivity and specificity are inherently time-dependent. Furthermore, we show why immortal time bias arises when classifying patients incorrectly as always positive, based on becoming positive during surveillance in MRD related studies. With a combination of toy data examples, simulations, and re-analysis of published data we provide practice-oriented guidance to support the design, analysis, and reporting of ctDNA trials. This viewpoint paper aims to sensitise the community and raise awareness of pitfalls in longitudinal ctDNA analysis, rather than offer definitive solutions-more evidence is needed first.
Related Concept Videos
Longitudinal Research
Replication in Eukaryotes
Many Proteins Orchestrate Replication at the Origin
Eukaryotic replication follows many of the same...
Real Time RT-PCR
The real-time quantification of the number of amplified products is...
