Get your free personalized podcast brief
We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
Personalized, tumor-informed ctDNA approaches (like Signatera) are more specific and sensitive for bladder cancer than general panel-based assays. This is because bladder cancer has a distinct mutational landscape and because panel approaches can yield false positives from clonal hematopoiesis, making the personalized technique essential for accurate results in this disease.
Related Insights
ctDNA is not a simple positive/negative binary test. Like PSA in prostate cancer, the quantitative level of ctDNA correlates with patient outcomes. Higher levels indicate a worse prognosis and a faster time to relapse, allowing for more nuanced risk stratification beyond a simple presence or absence of the biomarker.
Data from trials like Niagara suggests a powerful new paradigm for assessing treatment success. Combining urine tumor DNA (uTDNA) for local disease and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for systemic relapse offers a more dynamic view than traditional pathology and is poised to become the superior surrogate endpoint in bladder cancer trials.
Upcoming trials like RETAIN and IMVigor011 are using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to guide complex treatment choices in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. This biomarker-driven approach aims to personalize therapy, potentially enabling bladder preservation for some patients and identifying others who need additional adjuvant treatment.
The future of bladder cancer surveillance may involve using two types of liquid biopsies in tandem. A patient who is utDNA-positive but ctDNA-negative likely has a local, primary bladder issue. Conversely, a utDNA-negative but ctDNA-positive result suggests the cancer has already spread systemically, providing crucial information for treatment planning.
The original Signatera assay used 16 personalized probes based on whole-exome sequencing to find ctDNA. The next-generation version, based on whole-genome sequencing, expands this to 64 probes. This is expected to significantly increase sensitivity, detect molecular relapse earlier, and provide a longer window for clinical intervention.
Beyond a simple positive/negative result, the quantitative level of ctDNA is highly prognostic in bladder cancer. Similar to PSA in prostate cancer, higher ctDNA levels correlate with a significantly worse prognosis, offering a more nuanced risk assessment tool than a binary test.
Experts suggest urinary tumor DNA (utDNA) may better reflect local disease in the bladder, while circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) indicates systemic disease. Using both tests in parallel could provide a more complete picture, with dual-negative results potentially becoming a key criterion for safely pursuing bladder-sparing approaches.
Tumor-informed assays like Signatera sequence a patient's tumor to create a personalized test, making it highly sensitive but taking 3-4 weeks. Tumor-uninformed assays are faster (1 week) but less sensitive as they screen for a generic panel of cancer mutations.
Urinary tumor DNA (utDNA) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) offer complementary information. Used together, they provide superior risk stratification. Patients negative on both tests have a >70% chance of a complete pathological response, while those positive on both have only a ~5% chance, demonstrating clear additive value.
Hematologic cancers often have a single, common genetic marker per disease, enabling MRD detection with simple PCR for decades. Solid tumors are genetically diverse, lacking a universal marker. This required developing personalized, multi-probe assays like Signatera to track unique mutations, explaining the field's more recent progress.