Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 13:101200JCO2501534.
doi: 10.1200/JCO-25-01534. Online ahead of print.

Remission Assessment by Circulating Tumor DNA in Large B-cell Lymphoma

Affiliations

Remission Assessment by Circulating Tumor DNA in Large B-cell Lymphoma

Mark Roschewski et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: Large B-cell lymphomas (LBCL) are curable, but patients with residual disease after therapy invariably experience progression. Ultrasensitive methods to detect circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as minimal measurable residual disease (MRD) may improve the determination of remission.

Methods: We integrated data from five prospective studies of frontline anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with LBCL. Tumor-specific phased variants were identified from pretreatment samples and monitored at landmark timepoints. Serial plasma specimens were blindly analyzed for detectable ctDNA as MRD. MRD status was compared to conventional response criteria for prognosis of progression-free survival (PFS).

Results: We studied ctDNA-MRD in 137 patients by monitoring 409 plasma specimens over time. Detectable ctDNA rates decreased during therapy with 55% and 78% of patients achieving undetectable ctDNA after 2 cycles and at end of therapy, respectively. After a median follow-up of 37 months, the 2-year PFS for patients with detectable vs undetectable ctDNA after 2 cycles was 67% vs 96% (p=0.0025, hazard ratio 6.9) and after therapy was 29% vs 97% (p<0.0001, hazard ratio 28.7), respectively. Ninety-two (94%) patients with undetectable ctDNA at end of therapy remained alive without progression, while 19 (68%) patients with detectable ctDNA progressed or died. MRD status at end of therapy had greater prognostic utility than conventional lymphoma response criteria using PET scans (hazard ratio 3.6 for positive PET, and 28.3 for detectable ctDNA).

Conclusion: Ultrasensitive circulating tumor DNA detection after frontline LBCL therapy is more prognostic than conventional radiographic response criteria. A refined definition of remission with ctDNA-MRD may improve clinical and psychological outcomes for patients with LBCL (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04002947; NCT00398177; NCT02529852; NCT04231877; NCT04134936).

Keywords: MRD; circulating tumor DNA; large B-cell lymphoma; measurable residual disease; minimal residual disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Mark Roschewski: No conflicts of interest; David M. Kurtz: Stock, Employment, and Other Ownership Interests: Foresight Diagnostics; Consulting or Advisory Role: Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Genentech; Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent filings on ctDNA detection and methods for treatment selection based on statistical frameworks, assigned to Stanford University; Jason R. Westin: No conflicts of interest; Ryan C. Lynch: Research Funding: TG Therapeutics, Incyte, Bayer, Cyteir, Genentech, Pfizer, Rapt, Merck, Janssen, Allogene. Consultancy/Honoraria: SeaGen, AbbVie, Janssen, Merck, ADC Therapeutics; Ajay K. Gopal: Research Funding: Merck, I-Mab bio, IgM Bio, Takeda, Gilead, Astra-Zeneca, Agios, Janssen, BMS, SeaGen, Teva, Genmab, Beigene, Pfizer, Umoja, Consultancy/Honoraria: Incyte, Kite, Morphosys/Incyte, ADCT, Acrotech, Merck, Karyopharm, Servier, Beigene, Cellectar, Janssen, Compliment, SeaGen, Epizyme, I-Mab bio, Gilead, Genentech, Lilly, Caribou, Fresenius-Kabi, SciTech, Sana, Compliment; Stock Options: Compliment Corporation, SciTech; Stefan K. Alig: Consulting or Advisory Role: Foresight Diagnostics; Brian J. Sworder: Consulting or Advisory Role: Foresight Diagnostics, ADC Therapeutics; Stock Interests: CARGO Therapeutics, Allogene Therapeutics; Hua-Jay J. Cherng: Honoraria: ADC Therapeutics; Christian Kuffer: Employment: MorphoSys, a Novartis company; Derek Blair: Employment: MorphoSys, a Novartis company; Krystal Brown: Stock, Employment, and Other Ownership Interests: Foresight Diagnostics; Jordan S. Goldstein: Consulting or Advisory Role: Astra-Zeneca Andre Schultz: Stock, Employment, and Other Ownership Interests: Foresight Diagnostics; Sandra Close: Stock, Employment, and Other Ownership Interests: Foresight Diagnostics; Jacob J. Chabon: Stock, Employment, and Other Ownership Interests: Foresight Diagnostics; Maximilian Diehn: Ownership interest in CiberMed, Foresight Diagnostics, and Perception Medicine; patent filings related to cancer biomarkers licensed to Roche and Foresight Diagnostics; research funding from AstraZeneca; paid consultancy from AstraZeneca and Regeneron; honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb; and travel expenses from Foresight Diagnostics and Regeneron. Wyndham H. Wilson: No conflicts of interest. Ash A. Alizadeh: Leadership: Lymphoma Research Foundation; Stock and Other Ownership Interests: CiberMed, CAPP Medical, Forty Seven, Foresight Diagnostics; Honoraria: Roche, Janssen Oncology; Consulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Roche/Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Cibermed, Foresight Diagnostics; Research Funding: Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb; Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent filings on ctDNA detection, assigned to Stanford University; Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Gilead Sciences;

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Phased variant enrichment and detection by sequencing.
(a) The cartoon depicts the key features of phased variants. As opposed to single nucleotide variants, phased variants are multiple mutations that can be observed together on a single DNA molecule. The concordant observation of multiple mutations simultaneously significantly lowers the background error profile for MRD detection. (b) PhasED-Seq utilizes phased variants to track many phased variants simultaneously. Since the amount of cell-free DNA in plasma is limited, this is essential to enable detection to the parts per million range from a standard blood plasma collection.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. CONSORT diagram for pooled cohort inclusion.
The diagram summarizes the enrollment and sample availability across five prospective clinical trials included in the pooled ctDNA-MRD analysis. A total of 163 patients were initially considered. Patients were excluded due to absence of a baseline sample (n=2), failure to identify phased variants (n=9), lack of post-treatment plasma samples (n=13), incorrect histologic diagnosis (n=1), or prior systemic therapy (n=1), resulting in a final evaluable cohort of 137 patients. Sample availability at MRD landmark timepoints (Cycle 2 Day 1, Cycle 3 Day 1, and End of Therapy) is shown by trial.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. ctDNA kinetics during treatment.
(a) Dot plot illustrating variant allelic levels across treatment courses, stratified by progression-free survival (PFS) status during the follow-up period—red indicates patients who experienced a PFS event, and blue represents those who remained event-free. Variant allelic level is expressed as the fraction of molecules harboring lymphoma-specific phased variants among all informative molecules analyzed. Horizontal lines indicate median values within each group. Patients with undetectable ctDNA are annotated, and the proportion of patients with undetectable ctDNA is displayed at the bottom of the plot. (b) Bar graph depicting the percentage of patients with undetectable ctDNA at each profiled timepoint during treatment. C2D1, Cycle 2 Day 1; C3D1, Cycle 3 Day 1; EOT, end of treatment; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. Stratification and Performance Metrics of End of Therapy ctDNA Profiling.
(a) Kaplan-Meier curve for progression-free survival (PFS) stratified by ctDNA detection status at the end of therapy. Hazard ratio (HR) and p-value from Cox proportional hazards regression are shown. Donut plots display the proportion of patients with detectable ctDNA by PFS status, distinguishing cases with relatively high ctDNA burden (≥0.01%, i.e., ≥10−4) in dark red from cases with lower ctDNA levels (<0.01%, i.e., <10−4) in light red. b) Kaplan-Meier curve for freedom from progression (FFP) stratified by ctDNA detection status at the end of treatment. Hazard ratio (HR) and p-value from Cox proportional hazards regression are shown. Donut plots display the proportion of patients with detectable ctDNA by FFP status, distinguishing cases with relatively high ctDNA burden (≥0.01%, i.e., ≥10−4) in dark red from cases with lower ctDNA levels (<0.01%, i.e., <10−4) in light red. (c) Sensitivity (blue) and negative predictive value (NPV, purple) of end-of-treatment ctDNA profiling for predicting 24-month PFS, evaluated across analytical thresholds ranging from 10−6 to 10−4. EOT, end of treatment; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Prognostic Value of End-of-Treatment (EOT) ctDNA Detection Compared to PET/CT and Clinical Risk Factors.
(a) Kaplan-Meier curve for progression-free survival (PFS) stratified by EOT PET/CT status in patients eligible for analysis of both modalities. Hazard ratios (HR) and p-values from Cox proportional hazards regression are displayed. (b) Kaplan-Meier curve for PFS stratified by EOT ctDNA detection status in the same patient cohort. Hazard ratios (HR) and p-values from Cox proportional hazards regression are shown. (c) Kaplan-Meier curve for PFS stratified by EOT ctDNA detection status within the PET-negative subset. Hazard ratio (HR) and p-value from Cox proportional hazards regression are shown. The donut plot illustrates the proportion of patients with detectable ctDNA within the PET-negative subset. (d) Kaplan-Meier curve for PFS stratified by EOT ctDNA detection status within the PET-positive subset. Hazard ratio (HR) and p-value from Cox proportional hazards regression are shown. The donut plot illustrates the proportion of patients with detectable ctDNA within the PET-positive subset. (e) Forest plot showing HRs, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p-values derived from multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression for PFS, incorporating EOT ctDNA detection, EOT PET/CT, International Prognostic Index (IPI), cell-of-origin (COO), and histology subtype (ie, DLBCL versus PMBL or HGBL) as covariates. PFS, progression-free survival; EOT, end of treatment; HR, hazard ratio.

References

    1. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. : Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol 32:3059–68, 2014 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adams HJ, Nievelstein RA, Kwee TC: Prognostic value of complete remission status at end-of-treatment FDG-PET in R-CHOP-treated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Haematol 170:185–91, 2015 - PubMed
    1. Broglio K, Kostakoglu L, Ward C, et al. : PET-CR as a potential surrogate endpoint in untreated DLBCL: meta-analysis and implications for clinical trial design. Leuk Lymphoma 63:2816–2831, 2022 - PubMed
    1. Moskowitz CH, Schoder H, Teruya-Feldstein J, et al. : Risk-adapted dose-dense immunochemotherapy determined by interim FDG-PET in advanced-stage diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 28:1896–903, 2010 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Melani C, Advani R, Roschewski M, et al. : End-of-treatment and serial PET imaging in primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma following dose-adjusted EPOCH-R: a paradigm shift in clinical decision making. Haematologica 103:1337–1344, 2018 - PMC - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources