Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of tumor-informed and tumor-naïve sequencing assays for ctDNA detection in breast cancer.
Santonja, Angela; Cooper, Wendy N; Eldridge, Matthew D; Edwards, Paul A W; Morris, James A; Edwards, Abigail R; Zhao, Hui; Heider, Katrin; Couturier, Dominique-Laurent; Vijayaraghavan, Aadhitthya; Mennea, Paulius; Ditter, Emma-Jane; Smith, Christopher G; Boursnell, Chris; Manzano García, Raquel; Rueda, Oscar M; Beddowes, Emma; Biggs, Heather; Sammut, Stephen-John; Rosenfeld, Nitzan; Caldas, Carlos; Abraham, Jean E; Gale, Davina.
Afiliação
  • Santonja A; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Cooper WN; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Eldridge MD; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Edwards PAW; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Morris JA; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Edwards AR; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Zhao H; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Heider K; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Couturier DL; Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
  • Vijayaraghavan A; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Mennea P; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Ditter EJ; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Smith CG; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Boursnell C; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Manzano García R; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Rueda OM; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Beddowes E; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Biggs H; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Sammut SJ; MRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
  • Rosenfeld N; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Caldas C; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Abraham JE; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
  • Gale D; Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, Cambridge, UK.
EMBO Mol Med ; 15(6): e16505, 2023 06 07.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37161793
Analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to monitor cancer dynamics and detect minimal residual disease has been an area of increasing interest. Multiple methods have been proposed but few studies have compared the performance of different approaches. Here, we compare detection of ctDNA in serial plasma samples from patients with breast cancer using different tumor-informed and tumor-naïve assays designed to detect structural variants (SVs), single nucleotide variants (SNVs), and/or somatic copy-number aberrations, by multiplex PCR, hybrid capture, and different depths of whole-genome sequencing. Our results demonstrate that the ctDNA dynamics and allele fractions (AFs) were highly concordant when analyzing the same patient samples using different assays. Tumor-informed assays showed the highest sensitivity for detection of ctDNA at low concentrations. Hybrid capture sequencing targeting between 1,347 and 7,491 tumor-identified mutations at high depth was the most sensitive assay, detecting ctDNA down to an AF of 0.00024% (2.4 parts per million, ppm). Multiplex PCR targeting 21-47 tumor-identified SVs per patient detected ctDNA down to 0.00047% AF (4.7 ppm) and has potential as a clinical assay.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / DNA Tumoral Circulante Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: EMBO Mol Med Assunto da revista: BIOLOGIA MOLECULAR Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / DNA Tumoral Circulante Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: EMBO Mol Med Assunto da revista: BIOLOGIA MOLECULAR Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article