Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2026
Detection and Monitoring of Tumor Associated Circulating DNA in Patient Biofluids
Published on: June 8, 2019
Tissue-Free vs Tumor-Informed ctDNA Assays for Molecular Residual Disease Detection in Early Triple Negative Breast
Niamh Cunningham1, Rosalind J Cutts2, Claire Swift1
1The Ralph Lauren Centre for Breast Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Importance:
Molecular residual disease (MRD) detection has potential to transform the selection of adjuvant therapy. Most evidence is from tumor-informed assays. Tissue-free assays not requiring sequencing of the primary tumor may simplify workflows if they offer accuracy similar to that of tumor-informed assays.
Objective:
To evaluate tissue-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and compare the tissue-free assay with tumor-informed assay results.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This was a prognostic and exploratory analysis of patients with TNBC at moderate to high risk of recurrence who were participating in the ctDNA surveillance period of c-TRAK TN, a multicenter phase 2 clinical study. Plasma samples were collected from participants every 3 months for up to 2 years after the completion of adjuvant therapy and analyzed prospectively with digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR). Data for the analysis were from a database lock on September 28, 2021, with subsequent follow-up through January 18, 2023. Data were analyzed from July 2025 to May 2026.
Intervention Or Exposure:
Tissue-free assay leverages cancer differential methylation patterns to detect ctDNA.
Main Outcome And Measures:
Recurrence-free survival by tissue-free ctDNA detection status. Comparison between tissue-free ctDNA detection and both dPCR and whole-exome sequencing-powered multivariant tumor-informed assays.
Results:
The analysis included 1026 plasma samples from 159 patients (mean [SD; range] age, 51.4 [11.4; 25.0-78.0] years; 159 females [100%]). The tissue-free assay detected ctDNA in 54 patients (34.0%), with detection strongly associated with risk of recurrence (HR, 27.2; 95% CI, 13.7-54.2; P < .001). Among patients with ctDNA detected by both the tissue-free assay and dPCR (42 patients [26%]), tissue-free detection occurred at an earlier time point in 14 patients (33.3%); dPCR detection occurred before tissue-free detection in no patients. Median lead time to recurrence was 7.9 (95% CI, 6.1-10.5) months for tissue-free vs 5.8 (95% CI, 3.3-10.0) months for dPCR (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.95; P = .03). Concordance between tissue-free and multivariant tumor-informed assays was good. Among patients detected by both assays (41 of 133), 12 of 41 (29.3%) had ctDNA detected earlier by multivariant tumor-informed assay with 1 (2.4%) earlier by the tissue-free assay. Median lead times to recurrence were 7.6 (95% CI, 4.6-10.5) months with tissue-free and 7.1 (95% CI, 5.7-10.0) months with multivariant tumor-informed assay (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.87-2.44; P = .15).
Conclusion And Relevance:
In this prognostic study, tissue-free ctDNA detection during surveillance was strongly prognostic for recurrence in patients with TNBC. Comparable lead times between the tissue-free and multivariant tumor-informed assays support tissue-free MRD detection in a clinical trial setting, permitting ctDNA testing when tissue is not available.
