MRD as a Therapeutic Compass: Pharmacists at the Helm of Adaptive Oncology

Measurable residual disease (MRD) has emerged as a pivotal biomarker in modern oncology, offering a window into the depth of response following therapy.^1-3 Although MRD monitoring has historically been most relevant in hematologic malignancies, advancements in sensitive molecular and imaging techniques are expanding its application into the solid tumor realm.^4-6 For pharmacists, this evolution represents more than an academic concept; it is a practical tool for guiding therapy adjustments, supporting individualized treatment plans, and collaborating across multidisciplinary teams to optimize patient outcomes.

This article explores the role of MRD as a therapeutic compass, the detection of microscopic disease levels to guide treatment decisions, and actionable insights for pharmacists on its application in clinical practice. The discussion will focus on hematology—where MRD is well established—and on the growing application of MRD in solid tumors, highlighting its potential to reshape patient care and emphasizing how pharmacists can leverage MRD to influence treatment selection, dosing strategies, and monitoring.

Understanding MRD in Clinical Practice

MRD refers to the small number of cancer cells that persist after treatment, remaining undetectable by conventional morphologic assessments but identifiable using highly sensitive molecular, flow cytometric, or imaging techniques.^2-3 MRD is increasingly recognized as a prognostic marker and tool to guide therapeutic interventions, helping clinicians make evidence-informed decisions on therapy intensification, de-escalation, or switch strategies.^6-8 MRD enables clinicians to adjust therapy intensity based on biological disease activity rather than symptom management or toxicity levels alone.⁸ Levels at different periods can predict relapse differently: Early clearance signals low risk, while persistent MRD after consolidation indicates a poor prognosis.^6,8

For pharmacists, understanding the nuances of MRD detection methods—including polymerase chain reaction, next-generation sequencing (NGS), multiparameter flow cytometry, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays—is essential for integrating MRD results into pharmacologic decision-making.^2,6-8 Pharmacists can serve as bridges between laboratory findings and clinical applications, interpreting MRD data to inform dosing adjustments, evaluating risk of relapse, and anticipating therapy-related toxicities.^7,8 MRD is not merely a laboratory result; rather, it is a dynamic biomarker that can actively shape therapeutic strategy.^4,8 Pharmacists should also be aware of the sensitivity differences between MRD assays, such as NGS detecting 1 malignant cell among 1 million normal cells compared with flow cytometry detecting 1 in 10,000 cells, as these differences can directly affect clinical decision-making and timing of therapy adjustments.^2,6-8

Understanding sample type is also critical.⁶ In hematologic malignancies, bone marrow aspirates often provide higher sensitivity than peripheral blood, whereas ctDNA in plasma is becoming increasingly used in solid tumors.^6,9 Pharmacists should be familiar with the implications of sample source on MRD interpretation and therapy decisions.

Monitoring MRD kinetics over time, rather than relying solely on single time-point results, can provide early warnings of relapse and help pharmacists anticipate therapy modifications and supportive care needs.^4,6 Recognizing trends in MRD clearance can enable more proactive interventions in collaboration with the oncology team.⁶

MRD in Hematologic Malignancies

In acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia, MRD has been a cornerstone of patient management, with thresholds established as strong predictors of relapse.^4,6 Study results consistently show that patients achieving MRD negativity after induction therapy experience significantly better event-free survival than those with detectable disease.^4,6 Pharmacists can play a crucial role in monitoring MRD results to identify patients who may benefit from therapy intensification, including hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or novel immunotherapies.^4,6,10 They can adjust supportive care and prophylactic regimens based on predicted relapse risk, and they can collaborate with clinicians to interpret MRD kinetics over time to guide adaptive dosing of chemotherapeutic agents.^6,10

In both pediatric and adult ALL, MRD-directed therapy has become standard practice, with detection thresholds as low as 0.01% used to guide decisions.^6,10-13 Pharmacists can also track therapy adherence and manage toxicity in high-risk patients receiving intensified MRD-directed regimens.

MRD data can guide therapy optimization beyond simply escalating or de-escalating treatment.⁴ For instance, pharmacists can assess cumulative exposure to chemotherapeutic agents and suggest dose adjustments or schedule modifications to minimize toxicity, particularly in patients with renal or hepatic impairment.^4,14

In chronic lymphocytic leukemia, MRD negativity has emerged as a surrogate end point for progression-free survival, particularly in patients receiving combination targeted therapies and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies.^4,15,16 Pharmacists contribute to care by assisting in the scheduling and interpretation of MRD testing, often performed by flow cytometry or NGS, and by counseling patients on therapy duration adjustments guided by MRD status, especially for time-limited regimens.^2,6-8,10 They also play an essential role in mitigating adverse events in patients receiving escalated therapies based on MRD positivity.¹⁰

Pharmacists should anticipate adverse events associated with MRD-driven therapy intensification. In MRD-positive patients, the likelihood of myelosuppression, infection, and tumor lysis syndrome may increase, requiring proactive supportive care planning.¹⁷ Conversely, MRD-negative patients may benefit from reduced therapy exposure, decreasing long-term risks such as neuropathy, cardiotoxicity, or cumulative organ toxicity.¹⁷

Multiple myeloma offers another example of MRD’s clinical relevance.^4,12,18 MRD assessment has become integral to evaluating depth of response beyond conventional complete remission.^4,18 Techniques such as NGS and flow cytometry can detect 1 malignant cell among up to 1 million normal cells, providing crucial prognostic information.^4,19 Pharmacists can guide therapy intensification decisions in patients who remain MRD positive after induction or posttransplant therapy, and support de-escalation strategies in patients achieving long-term maintenance therapy, ensuring that MRD-directed interventions are both safe and effective.^4,18

In practical terms, MRD monitoring in hematology often guides the duration of therapy.⁴ Pharmacists can advise the oncology team on whether treatment should continue, taper, or stop based on MRD status, thereby personalizing therapy and reducing unnecessary drug exposure.²

Emerging Applications of MRD in Solid Tumors

Although MRD has been well established in hematology, recent advances in ctDNA detection and other liquid biopsy technologies are opening the door to MRD-guided therapy in solid tumors, particularly colorectal, lung, and breast cancers. In colorectal cancer, postsurgical MRD detection via ctDNA has demonstrated the ability to identify patients at high risk of recurrence even before imaging confirms relapse. Pharmacists can support personalized adjuvant therapy strategies by interpreting ctDNA MRD results and advising on therapy duration based on risk. Pharmacists should be aware of limitations in ctDNA detection, including low-shedding tumors and potential false negatives, and they can counsel clinicians and patients to interpret results cautiously while still incorporating MRD trends into clinical decisions. Rising ctDNA levels, even if MRD is intermittently undetectable, may warrant early imaging or therapy adjustments.^5,20

The timing and frequency of MRD testing in solid tumors is an emerging area of practice.^5,20 Results of early studies indicate that MRD positivity after curative-intent therapy strongly correlates with relapse, suggesting opportunities for early therapeutic intervention.^5,20 Pharmacists should work with the oncology team to coordinate testing after surgery, before adjuvant therapy, and periodically during follow-up to detect early recurrence, ensuring that therapy decisions are informed by the most current MRD data.²¹

Pharmacists as Adaptive Therapy Stewards

Pharmacists are uniquely positioned to integrate MRD data into therapeutic decision-making. MRD can inform whether therapy should be escalated, de-escalated, or discontinued, and pharmacists contribute by reviewing regimen intensity in the context of MRD results, assessing cumulative toxicity risks, and coordinating MRD assessments with therapy cycles.^8,21

Pharmacists can lead workflow integration by establishing clear channels for communicating MRD results. This may include alerts in electronic medical records, scheduled MRD review meetings with oncology teams, and coordination with laboratory services to ensure timely sample collection and reporting of results.

MRD results are often complex, and pharmacists can enhance patient understanding and empower active participation in adaptive oncology strategies by describing what MRD positivity or negativity means and how these results impact therapy decisions. Pharmacists can explain the rationale for therapy changes—even if patients feel clinically well—management of therapy-related adverse effects, and the importance of adherence, particularly in oral regimens.⁸

Pharmacists may also help identify eligible patients and guide them toward MRD-driven clinical trials, ensuring access to cutting-edge therapies while maintaining safe and effective medication use.

Clinical and Technical Implementation Challenges and Considerations

Despite the promise of MRD, several challenges complicate its integration into routine practice.^2,8,21 While MRD has the potential to detect a single malignant cell among up to 1 million cells, results may be influenced by a hemodiluted sample.² Variability in MRD assay sensitivity and reporting can complicate clinical interpretation, making standardization a priority.^2,8 Pharmacists can advocate for standardized testing and clear reporting formats to enhance utility. Determining optimal MRD testing intervals requires multidisciplinary collaboration, and pharmacists can coordinate testing schedules with therapy cycles and clinic visits. Cost and reimbursement considerations also play a role, and pharmacists are well positioned to counsel patients and care teams on cost-effective strategies and insurance coverage implications.²¹

Future Directions

The clinical landscape of MRD is rapidly evolving. In hematologic malignancies, MRD is already shaping adaptive therapy strategies, and its role in solid tumors is expanding as ctDNA and other sensitive assays become widely available.^5-8,20 The field is working to establish MRD as a primary surrogate end point in clinical trials to accelerate the approval of new cancer drugs.² Next-generation techniques are improving sensitivity for detection, which is crucial for determining truly deeply negative cases. Pharmacists will increasingly serve as critical stewards of MRD-informed therapy, translating laboratory findings into actionable interventions, optimizing therapy regimens, managing adverse events, and educating patients and care teams. As the field progresses, pharmacists will help ensure that MRD is not simply a prognostic marker but a central tool in precision oncology, guiding therapy in real time and improving patient outcomes.

MRD represents a therapeutic compass in modern oncology, and pharmacists are uniquely positioned at the helm, interpreting data, coordinating care, and supporting adaptive treatment strategies. The integration of MRD into clinical practice highlights the evolving and expanding role of pharmacists as essential collaborators in precision medicine, capable of translating complex molecular insights into actionable decisions that directly benefit patients.

References

1. Ferrario C. MRD: a shared compass for patients, clinicians, and regulators. Medscape. June 14, 2025. Accessed April 8, 2026. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/mrd-shared-compass-patients-clinicians-and-regulators-2025a1000fyx?form=fpf
2. Banerjee R, Mohyuddin GR. Measurable residual disease: what fellows need to know. American Society of Hematology TraineE-News. May 25, 2021. Accessed April 8, 2026. https://www.hematology.org/education/trainees/fellows/hematopoiesis/2021/measurable-residual-disease
3. Measurable residual disease. National Cancer Institute Dictionary of Cancer Terms. Accessed April 9, 2026. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/measurable-residual-disease
4. Chandhok NS, Sekeres MA. Measurable residual disease in hematologic malignancies: a biomarker in search of a standard. eClinicalMedicine. 2025;86:103348. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103348
5. Zhu L, Xu R, Yang L, et al. Minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in solid tumors using circulating tumor DNA: a systematic review. Front Genet. 2023;14:1172108. doi:10.3389/fgene.2023.1172108
6. Brüggemann M, Kotrova M. Minimal residual disease in adult ALL: technical aspects and implications for correct clinical interpretation. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2017;2017(1):13-21. doi:10.1182/asheducation-2017.1.13
7. Rhodes JM, Lopez CA, Barrientos JC. MRD-directed therapy in CLL: ready for prime time? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2023;2023(1):413-420. doi:10.1182/hematology.2023000441
8. Song M, Pan W, Yu X, et al. Minimal residual disease detection: implications for clinical diagnosis and cancer patient treatment. MedComm (2020). 2025;6(6):e70193. doi:10.1002/mco2.70193
9. Talotta D, Almasri M, Cosentino C, Gaidano G, Moia R. Liquid biopsy in hematological malignancies: current and future applications. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1164517. doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1164517
10. Loguidice CT, Litzow MR. Experts provide tips on harnessing MRD to guide ALL therapy. Oncology Live. June 4, 2020. Accessed April 9, 2026. https://www.onclive.com/view/experts-provide-tips-on-harnessing-mrd-to-guide-all-therapy
11. Wood B, Wu D, Crossley B, et al. Measurable residual disease detection by high-throughput sequencing improves risk stratification for pediatric B-ALL. Blood. 2018;131(12):1350-1359. doi:10.1182/blood-2017-09-806521
12. Lee JW, Kim Y, Ahn A, et al. Clinical implication of minimal residual disease assessment by next-generation sequencing-based immunoglobulin clonality assay in pediatric B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Front Oncol. 2022;12:957743. doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.957743
13. Furlow B. Integrating genetics, MRD improves risk stratification in childhood ALL. Cancer Network. November 28, 2017. Accessed April 9, 2026. https://www.cancernetwork.com/view/integrating-genetics-mrd-improves-risk-stratification-childhood-all
14. Hendrayana T, Wilmer A, Kurth V, Schmidt-Wolf IG, Jaehde U. Anticancer dose adjustment for patients with renal and hepatic dysfunction: from scientific evidence to clinical application. Sci Pharm. 2017;85(1):8. doi:10.3390/scipharm85010008
15. New data demonstrates AbbVie’s Venclyxto/Venclexta combination sustained progression-free survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients after four years off treatment. News release. AbbVie. June 10, 2022. Accessed April 9, 2026. https://news.abbvie.com/2022-06-10-New-Data-Demonstrates-AbbVies-VENCLYXTO-R-VENCLEXTA-R-Combination-Sustained-Progression-Free-Survival-in-Chronic-Lymphocytic-Leukemia-Patients-After-Four-Years-Off-Treatment
16. Wierda WG, Rawstron A, Cymbalista F, et al. Measurable residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: expert review and consensus recommendations. Leukemia. 2021;35(11):3059-3072. doi:10.1038/s41375-021-01241-1
17. Shahin NM, Hammad M, Hafez H, et al. The prognostic significance of incomplete hematological recovery in pediatric patients with low/intermediate risk AML and negative MRD after induction 1. Front Oncol. 2025;15:1661036. doi:10.3389/fonc.2025.1661036
18. Scott SA. The emerging role of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma. HOPA News. 2024;21(3):3-5. Accessed April 9, 2026. https://www.hoparx.org/documents/306/HOPANews_Vol21_Issue3-v7.pdf
19. Burgos L, Puig N, Cedena MT, et al. Measurable residual disease in multiple myeloma: ready for clinical practice? J Hematol Oncol. 2020;13(1):82. doi:10.1186/s13045-020-00911-4
20. Abdo T, Alhalabi A, Yaghi S, et al. Minimal residual disease in solid tumors: clinical applications and future directions. Cancer. 2026;132(3):e70286. doi:10.1002/cncr.70286
21. Cooperrider JH, Derman BA. Minimal residual disease negativity as the primary goal of multiple myeloma therapy. Drugs. 2025;85(10):1231-1251. doi:10.1007/s40265-025-02232-7