Translating ctDNA into cutaneous melanoma care: An international expert survey
- Author(s)
- Geidel, G; Fekade, N; Raabe, K; Smit, DJ; Adam, L; Heidrich, I; Rünger, A; Kött, J; Zell, T; Amaral, T; Ascierto, PA; Corrie, P; Dummer, R; Eggermont, A; Guo, J; Hassel, JC; Jalving, M; Johnson, DB; Kandolf, L; Kirkwood, JM; Lebbé, C; Lee, R; Long, GV; Lorigan, P; Malvehy, J; Mangana, J; Mohr, P; Patel, SP; Rizos, H; Robert, C; Schadendorf, D; Sondak, VK; Svane, IM; Wainstein, A; Zager, JS; Pantel, K; Hauschild, A; Gebhardt, C; Melanoma World Society Study Group;
- Journal Title
- European Journal of Cancer
- Publication Type
- Research article
- Abstract
- 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.
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Keywords
- Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA); Expert survey; Liquid biopsy; Melanoma; Minimal residual disease (MRD)
- Department(s)
- Medical Oncology
- Publisher's Version
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2026.116676
- Open Access at Publisher's Site
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2026.116676- Terms of Use/Rights Notice
- Refer to copyright notice on published article.
Creation Date: 2026-04-14 03:18:17
Last Modified: 2026-04-14 03:18:35