Francesco Ravera, MD, PhD, on the Rationale for Comparing cfDNA to MRI for Predicting pCR After Neoadjuvant Therapy in Breast Cancer


CancerNetwork® spoke with Francesco Ravera, MD, PhD, during the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021 to discuss a study that looked at cell-free DNA assessment compared with traditional MRI for determining pathological complete response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer.

CancerNetwork® sat down with Francesco Ravera, MD, PhD, fellow in the Department of Internal Medicine at the University of Genoa in Italy, to discuss research that was presented at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2021. The research examined plasma cell-free DNA as an accurate alternative for assessing pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. To understand why the investigators looked into this comparison with traditional MRI, Ravera explained the rationale for their hypothesis.


Today, the standard of care for the assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in [patients with breast cancer] is based on magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, which is the best radiological procedure for this purpose but presents data [with] suboptimal accuracy, especially in regard to the assessment of [nodal disease]. In radiological complete responders, [this requires] the assessment of nodal disease biopsy and lymph node biopsy, which is not as invasive as complete resection, but may cause collateral side effects. On the other end, cell-free DNA integrity has already shown potential for diagnostic and predictive purposes in breast cancer.


Cirmena G, Ferrando L, Ravera F, et al. Plasma cell-free DNA integrity predicts the achievement of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Presented at: AACR Annual Meeting 2021; April 10-15, 2021; virtual. Abstract LB063.

Related Videos
Investigators must continue to explore the space for lisocabtagene maraleucel in mantle cell lymphoma, according to Manali Kamdar, MD.
Those with CML should discuss adverse effects such as nausea or fatigue with their providers to help optimize their quality of life during treatment.
Patients with CML can become an active part of their treatment plan by discussing any questions that come to mind with their providers.
Jorge E. Cortes, MD, emphasizes proper communication between patients with chronic myeloid leukemia and their providers during the treatment course.
Dietary interventions or other medications may help mitigate diarrhea in patients who undergo therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia.
Whether CAR T-cell therapy or T-cell engagers should dominate the multiple myeloma landscape may be hard to determine, says David S. Siegel, MD.
Next steps for research in the multiple myeloma space may include the development of novel CAR T-cell strategies and bispecific antibodies.
Related Content