TY - JOUR
T1 - Translating ctDNA into cutaneous melanoma care
T2 - An international expert survey
AU - L.ZimmerLisafor the Melanoma World Society Study Group
AU - Geidel, Glenn
AU - Fekade, Nathan
AU - Raabe, Katharina
AU - Smit, Daniel J.
AU - Adam, Laura
AU - Heidrich, Isabel
AU - Rünger, Alessandra
AU - Kött, Julian
AU - Zell, Tim
AU - Amaral, Teresa
AU - Ascierto, Paolo A.
AU - Corrie, Pippa
AU - Dummer, Reinhard
AU - Eggermont, Alexander
AU - Guo, Jun
AU - Hassel, Jessica C.
AU - Jalving, Mathilde
AU - Johnson, Douglas B.
AU - Kandolf, Lidija
AU - Kirkwood, John M.
AU - Lebbé, Celeste
AU - Lee, Rebecca
AU - Long, Georgina V.
AU - Lorigan, Paul
AU - Malvehy, Josep
AU - Mangana, Joanna
AU - Mohr, Peter
AU - Patel, Sapna P.
AU - Rizos, Helen
AU - Robert, Caroline
AU - Schadendorf, Dirk
AU - Sondak, Vernon K.
AU - Svane, Inge Marie
AU - Wainstein, Alberto
AU - Zager, Jonathan S.
AU - Pantel, Klaus
AU - Hauschild, Axel
AU - Gebhardt, Christoffer
AU - Aarts, Maureen J.B.
AU - Arance, Ana
AU - Asher, Nethanel
AU - Becker, Jürgen C.
AU - Bhatia, Shailender
AU - Blank, Christian U.
AU - Block, Matthew S.
AU - Boutros, Celine
AU - Burton, Elizabeth M.
AU - Butler, Marcus
AU - Carvajal, Richard D.
AU - Davar, Diwakar
N1 - Copyright © 2026 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
PY - 2026/5/15
Y1 - 2026/5/15
N2 - Background Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a promising biomarker in melanoma, with higher sensitivity for tumor burden detection than conventional diagnostics. While well established in research, clinical routine implementation remains pending. Key global questions concern optimal clinical applications and barriers to adoption. Methods A web-based survey of 116 members of the Melanoma World Society Study Group assessed international expert opinions on ctDNA utility across predefined clinical scenarios. The questionnaire included 18 general questions on ctDNA use and 5 clinical vignettes with de-identified patient data and retrospectively obtained ctDNA results. Results ctDNA was rated most valuable for detecting minimal residual disease (mean score 3.63), surveillance of recurrent disease (3.85), and stage IV melanoma (3.82), with limited utility in early stages. Experts considered ctDNA superior to S100 and LDH for early relapse detection and identifying progressive disease. Most participants (80%) agreed that ctDNA correlates with radiographic response, and 82% favored its integration into routine follow-ups. In urgent high-tumor-burden settings, 82.8% would initiate BRAFi/MEKi therapy based on ctDNA if tissue analysis was pending, and 93.9% if unavailable. For central nervous system lesions, 62% did not support blood ctDNA, while 66% considered cerebrospinal fluid valuable. Pragmatic approaches with small to mid-size targeted panels and short turnaround times were preferred. Major barriers included the need for prospective trials (85%), standardized guidelines (83%), and reimbursement policies (82%). Conclusion Key opinion leaders regarded ctDNA as a valuable adjunct selected melanoma scenarios. Validation through prospective studies, guideline development, and reimbursement frameworks are essential for broader clinical implementation.
AB - Background Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a promising biomarker in melanoma, with higher sensitivity for tumor burden detection than conventional diagnostics. While well established in research, clinical routine implementation remains pending. Key global questions concern optimal clinical applications and barriers to adoption. Methods A web-based survey of 116 members of the Melanoma World Society Study Group assessed international expert opinions on ctDNA utility across predefined clinical scenarios. The questionnaire included 18 general questions on ctDNA use and 5 clinical vignettes with de-identified patient data and retrospectively obtained ctDNA results. Results ctDNA was rated most valuable for detecting minimal residual disease (mean score 3.63), surveillance of recurrent disease (3.85), and stage IV melanoma (3.82), with limited utility in early stages. Experts considered ctDNA superior to S100 and LDH for early relapse detection and identifying progressive disease. Most participants (80%) agreed that ctDNA correlates with radiographic response, and 82% favored its integration into routine follow-ups. In urgent high-tumor-burden settings, 82.8% would initiate BRAFi/MEKi therapy based on ctDNA if tissue analysis was pending, and 93.9% if unavailable. For central nervous system lesions, 62% did not support blood ctDNA, while 66% considered cerebrospinal fluid valuable. Pragmatic approaches with small to mid-size targeted panels and short turnaround times were preferred. Major barriers included the need for prospective trials (85%), standardized guidelines (83%), and reimbursement policies (82%). Conclusion Key opinion leaders regarded ctDNA as a valuable adjunct selected melanoma scenarios. Validation through prospective studies, guideline development, and reimbursement frameworks are essential for broader clinical implementation.
KW - Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)
KW - Expert survey
KW - Liquid biopsy
KW - Melanoma
KW - Minimal residual disease (MRD)
KW - Biomarkers, Tumor/blood
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Circulating Tumor DNA/blood
KW - Melanoma/genetics
KW - Female
KW - Surveys and Questionnaires
KW - Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma
KW - Skin Neoplasms/genetics
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105035528096
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/2170e154-e7bc-3fa3-81b3-66ec154fbc5c/
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejca.2026.116676
DO - 10.1016/j.ejca.2026.116676
M3 - Article
C2 - 41932032
AN - SCOPUS:105035528096
SN - 0959-8049
VL - 239
JO - European Journal of Cancer
JF - European Journal of Cancer
M1 - 116676
ER -