[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.238.189.171. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Comment & Response
October 2018

Regarding the Congruence Between 2 Circulating Tumor DNA Sequencing Assays—Reply

Author Affiliations
  • 1The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(10):1431-1432. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2326

In Reply We thank Oxnard and Paweletz for their comments on our article.1 Kuderer et al2 demonstrated similar discrepancies comparing Guardant360 with tumor tissue, being more frequent at low variant allele fractions (VAFs). However, we disagree that including VAFs “would allow the reader to fully understand the data” because it could only partially explain the discrepancies, and its inclusion would be only mildly informative because it would be necessary to reanalyze the DNA to determine the true nature of these discrepancies with the caveat that other major factors such as timing and processing methods3 would not be considered.

×