The success of neoadjuvant immunotherapy trials like Niagara and those with EV-Pembro means most patients will receive immune therapy before surgery. This fundamentally shifts the clinical landscape, making the question of starting adjuvant immunotherapy less relevant as perioperative treatment becomes the standard.

The INVIGOR-11 trial data should be applied carefully. A positive ctDNA result post-surgery indicates when to *initiate* adjuvant immunotherapy. However, if a patient on neoadjuvant therapy becomes ctDNA-negative, this signals treatment efficacy and is a reason to *continue* the planned course, not a justification for stopping it early.

In early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, the presence of circulating tumor DNA before surgery is not a statistically significant predictor of survival. However, detecting ctDNA after curative-intent surgery is a strong negative prognostic indicator, highlighting the critical value of post-operative testing.

In adjuvant bladder cancer trials, ctDNA status is both prognostic and predictive. Patients with positive ctDNA after surgery are at high risk of relapse but benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors. Conversely, ctDNA-negative patients have a lower risk and derive no benefit, making ctDNA a critical tool to avoid unnecessary, toxic therapy.

While adjuvant immunotherapy benefits ctDNA-positive patients, it may not be the optimal strategy. Given their near-certainty of relapse (95%), using a single-agent immunotherapy when a more potent combination like EV-Pembro exists for metastatic disease raises the critical question of whether these high-risk patients are being undertreated.

A critical warning for clinicians: data showing that ctDNA-negative patients can skip *adjuvant* therapy (InVigor011) should not be extrapolated to the *neoadjuvant* setting. Stopping the post-operative portion of a perioperative EV-Pembro regimen based on a negative ctDNA result is unsupported by data and risks under-treating patients.

A positive ctDNA result post-surgery in an immunotherapy-naive patient warrants starting treatment. Conversely, if a patient received neoadjuvant immunotherapy and remains ctDNA positive after surgery, it signals resistance, making continuation of the same therapy illogical and creating a clinical paradox.

The interpretation of ctDNA is context-dependent. Unlike in the adjuvant setting, in the neoadjuvant setting, remaining ctDNA positive post-treatment signifies that the current therapy has failed. These high-risk patients need a different therapeutic approach, not an extension of the ineffective one.

While a positive ctDNA test clearly signals the need for adjuvant therapy, a negative result is less actionable for deciding initial treatment. The key prognostic value comes from being *serially* undetectable over time, information that is not available when the immediate post-surgery treatment decision must be made.