Translational research has revolutionized how we develop new treatments for cancer patients. The change from an organ-centric concept guiding treatment choice towards deep molecular analysis, driving a personalized approach, is one of the most important advances of modern oncology. Several tools such as next generation sequencing and RNA sequencing have greatly improved the capacity to detect predictive and prognostic molecular alterations. Detection of gene mutations, amplifications, and fusions has therefore altered the history of several diseases in both a localized and metastatic setting. This shift in perspective, in which attention is focused on the specific molecular alterations of the tumor, has opened the door to personalized treatment. This situation is reflected in the increasing number of basket trials selecting specific molecular targets. Nonetheless, some weaknesses need to be addressed. The complexity of cancer cells enriched with concomitant molecular alterations complicates identification of the driver. Moreover, tumor heterogeneity could be responsible for the lack of benefit when targeted agents are used. In light of this, there is growing interest in the role of multidisciplinary committees or molecular tumor boards to try to enhance selection. The aim of this review is to critically analyze the evolution of cancer treatment towards a precision approach, underlining some recent successes and unexpected failures.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis has emerged as a minimally invasive tool for detecting minimal residual disease (MRD) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. This enables dynamic risk stratification, earlier recurrence detection, and optimized post-surgical treatment. Two primary methodologies have been developed for ctDNA-based MRD detection: tumor-informed strategies, which identify tumor-specific mutations through initial tissue sequencing to guide ctDNA monitoring, and tumor-agnostic approaches, which utilize predefined panels to detect common cancer-associated genomic or epigenomic alterations directly from plasma without prior tissue analysis. The debate over which is superior in terms of sensitivity, specificity, cost-effectiveness, and clinical feasibility remains unresolved. This review summarizes studies published up to November 2024, exploring the utility and performance of tumor-informed and tumor-agnostic approaches for ctDNA analysis in CRC. We evaluate the strengths and limitations of each methodology, focusing on sensitivity, specificity, and clinical outcomes. Both strategies demonstrate clinical utility in postoperative risk stratification and guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in CRC patients. Tumor-informed approaches generally exhibit superior sensitivity and specificity for recurrence prediction, attributed to their personalized tumor profile designs. However, these methods are limited by the need for prior tissue sequencing and higher associated costs. In contrast, tumor-agnostic approaches offer broader applicability due to their reliance on plasma-only analysis, although with relatively lower sensitivity. Technological advancements, including fragmentomics and multi-omic integrations, are expanding the capabilities of ctDNA-based MRD detection, enhancing the performance of both approaches. While tumor-informed strategies currently offer higher precision in MRD detection, tumor-agnostic approaches are gaining traction due to their convenience and improving performance metrics. The integration of novel technologies in ongoing clinical trials may redefine the optimal approach for MRD detection in CRC, paving the way for more personalized and adaptive patient management strategies.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most devastating malignant tumors, being the seventh leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Researchers and clinicians are endeavoring to develop strategies for the early detection of the disease and the improvement of treatment results. Adequate biopsy is still challenging because of the pancreas’s poor anatomic location. Recently, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) could be identified as a liquid biopsy tool with huge potential as a non-invasive biomarker in early diagnosis, prognosis and management of PC. ctDNA is released from apoptotic and necrotic cancer cells, as well as from living tumor cells and even circulating tumor cells, and it can reveal genetic and epigenetic alterations with tumor-specific and individual mutation and methylation profiles. However, ctDNA sensibility remains a limitation and the accuracy of ctDNA as a biomarker for PC is relatively low and cannot be currently used as a screening or diagnostic tool. Increasing evidence suggests that ctDNA is an interesting biomarker for predictive or prognosis studies, evaluating minimal residual disease, longitudinal follow-up and treatment management. Promising results have been published and therefore the objective of our review is to understand the current role and the future perspectives of ctDNA in PC.

Cancer has become a global health issue and liquid biopsy has emerged as a non-invasive tool for various applications. In cancer, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be detected from cell-free DNA (cfDNA) obtained from plasma and has potential for early diagnosis, treatment, resistance, minimal residual disease detection, and tumoral heterogeneity identification. However, the low frequency of ctDNA requires techniques for accurate analysis. Multitarget assay such as Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) need improvement to achieve limits of detection that can identify the low frequency variants present in the cfDNA. In this review, we provide a general overview of the use of cfDNA and ctDNA in cancer, and discuss techniques developed to optimize NGS as a tool for ctDNA detection. We also summarize the results obtained using NGS strategies in both investigational and clinical contexts.

Most clinical practice guidelines recommend a selective approach for rectal cancer after clinical staging. In low-risk patients, upfront surgery may be an appropriate option. However, in patients with MRI-defined high-risk features such as extramural vascular invasion, multiple nodal involvement or T4 and/or tumors close to or invading the mesorectal fascia, a more intensive preoperative approach is recommended, which may include neoadjuvant or preoperative chemotherapy. The potential benefits include better compliance than postoperative chemotherapy, a higher pathological complete remission rate, which facilitates a non-surgical approach, and earlier treatment of micrometastatic disease with improved disease-free survival compared to standard preoperative chemoradiation or short-course radiation. Two recently reported phase III randomized trials, RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23, show that adding neoadjuvant chemotherapy to either standard short-course radiation or standard long-course chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer patients reduces the risk of metastasis and significantly prolongs disease-related treatment failure and disease-free survival. This review discusses these potentially practice-changing trials and how they may affect our current understanding of treating locally advanced rectal cancers.

Adjuvant chemotherapy following surgical intervention remains the primary treatment option for patients with localized colorectal cancer (CRC). However, a significant proportion of patients will have an unfavorable outcome after current forms of chemotherapy. While reflecting the increasing complexity of CRC, the clinical application of molecular biomarkers provides information that can be utilized to guide therapeutic strategies. Among these, caudal-related homeobox transcription factor 2 (CDX2) emerges as a biomarker of both prognosis and relapse after therapy. CDX2 is a key transcription factor that controls intestinal fate. Although rarely mutated in CRC, loss of CDX2 expression has been reported mostly in right-sided, microsatellite-unstable tumors and is associated with aggressive carcinomas. The pathological assessment of CDX2 by immunohistochemistry can thus identify patients with high-risk CRC, but the evaluation of CDX2 expression remains challenging in a substantial proportion of patients. In this review, we discuss the roles of CDX2 in homeostasis and CRC and the alterations that lead to protein expression loss. Furthermore, we review the clinical significance of CDX2 assessment, with a particular focus on its current use as a biomarker for pathological evaluation and clinical decision-making. Finally, we attempt to clarify the molecular implications of CDX2 deficiency, ultimately providing insights for a more precise evaluation of CDX2 protein expression.