ABSTRACT
Whole genome sequencing (WGS) provides comprehensive, individualised cancer genomic information. However, routine tumour biopsies are formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE), damaging DNA, historically limiting their use in WGS. Here we analyse FFPE cancer WGS datasets from England's 100,000 Genomes Project, comparing 578 FFPE samples with 11,014 fresh frozen (FF) samples across multiple tumour types. We use an approach that characterises rather than discards artefacts. We identify three artefactual signatures, including one known (SBS57) and two previously uncharacterised (SBS FFPE, ID FFPE), and develop an "FFPEImpact" score that quantifies sample artefacts. Despite inferior sequencing quality, FFPE-derived data identifies clinically-actionable variants, mutational signatures and permits algorithmic stratification. Matched FF/FFPE validation cohorts shows good concordance while acknowledging SBS, ID and copy-number artefacts. While FF-derived WGS data remains the gold standard, FFPE-samples can be used for WGS if required, using analytical advancements developed here, potentially democratising whole cancer genomics to many.
Subject(s)
Formaldehyde , Neoplasms , Paraffin Embedding , Tissue Fixation , Whole Genome Sequencing , Humans , Paraffin Embedding/methods , Neoplasms/genetics , Neoplasms/pathology , Whole Genome Sequencing/methods , Tissue Fixation/methods , Genomics/methods , Mutation , Genome, Human , ArtifactsABSTRACT
Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) permits comprehensive cancer genome analyses, revealing mutational signatures, imprints of DNA damage and repair processes that have arisen in each patient's cancer. We performed mutational signature analyses on 12,222 WGS tumor-normal matched pairs, from patients recruited via the UK National Health Service. We contrasted our results to two independent cancer WGS datasets, the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) and Hartwig Foundation, involving 18,640 WGS cancers in total. Our analyses add 40 single and 18 double substitution signatures to the current mutational signature tally. Critically, we show for each organ, that cancers have a limited number of 'common' signatures and a long tail of 'rare' signatures. We provide a practical solution for utilizing this concept of common versus rare signatures in future analyses.