The work traces its roots to researchers at the Institute of Biochemical Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. A notable contribution came from NM Emanuel (IBCP) RAS, who proposed leveraging the analysis of blood circulating tumor DNA ctDNA to forecast the likelihood of breast cancer recurrence. This development was highlighted by officials from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation in discussions with socialbites.ca, underscoring the significance of this approach in modern oncology.
ctDNA refers to short fragments of genetic material shed by tumor cells into the bloodstream. The practice of liquid biopsy targets these fragments, typically by drawing a blood sample from a vein, isolating the tumor-derived DNA, and performing sophisticated analyses to detect mutations, methylation patterns, and other molecular hallmarks associated with cancer. This method provides a noninvasive window into the tumor’s biology, offering actionable insights without the need for invasive tissue sampling.
Collecting samples for ctDNA testing is generally straightforward, involving routine venous blood draws that can be repeated as needed. This repeated sampling capability makes it feasible to monitor tumor characteristics over time. In contrast, obtaining tumor tissue through conventional biopsy can be technically challenging and sometimes impossible, particularly when the disease has spread to distant sites. In such cases, ctDNA serves as a practical surrogate for assessing tumor biology and guiding treatment decisions.
In breast cancer, ctDNA analysis holds promise for both early detection and relapse monitoring. The appearance of ctDNA in the blood often precedes clinical symptoms, accompanied by systemic signals such as changes in blood flow or inflammatory markers, which may herald the onset of disease activity well before traditional imaging or physical findings detect an issue. This proactive signal can enable earlier intervention and more timely management of the patient’s condition.
During treatment, ctDNA testing can help estimate the risk of recurrence and evaluate how well a chosen therapy is working. Ongoing ctDNA surveillance provides real-time feedback on tumor response, allowing clinicians to adjust regimens as needed and potentially spare patients from ineffective treatments. The technology also supports dynamic assessment of minimal residual disease, which is increasingly recognized as a key predictor of long-term outcomes in breast cancer care.
As one researcher, a candidate of biological sciences from the Laboratory of Chemical Physics of Bioanalytical Processes at the Institute of Biochemical Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, notes, ctDNA can be detected in the plasma of patients with early-stage breast cancer and represents a promising diagnostic marker. The molecular abnormalities found in blood plasma ctDNA often reflect genetic changes present in the primary tumor, making ctDNA a meaningful proxy for tumor genetics and a potential guide for personalized therapy. The perspective offered by this line of inquiry aligns with broader efforts to integrate liquid biopsy into routine cancer workflows and to augment traditional diagnostic tools with molecularly informed strategies.
In the broader public health context, routine screening discussions consider the value of ctDNA-based approaches, especially for populations at higher risk or for whom standard screening has limitations. While conversations about expanding testing require careful consideration of cost, accessibility, and clinical validation, the potential to detect cancer sooner and tailor treatments more precisely remains a central theme in contemporary oncology. This evolving field continues to attract attention from researchers, clinicians, and health policymakers as they seek to improve outcomes through earlier detection, better monitoring, and more personalized care.
A historical note may be added for context: some screening recommendations emphasize age thresholds and risk factors, such as initiating periodic evaluations after age 40 for certain populations. These guidelines reflect a continuum of evidence that informs decision-making in clinical practice, balancing benefits with resource considerations and patient preferences.