Clinical chemistry · 2024
Classification of Brain Tumors by Nanopore Sequencing of Cell-Free DNA from Cerebrospinal Fluid.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Afflerbach Ann-Kristin, Rohrandt Christian, Brändl Björn, Sönksen Marthe, Hench Jürgen, Frank Stephan, Börnigen Daniela, Alawi Malik, Mynarek Martin, Winkler Beate, Ricklefs Franz, Synowitz Michael, Dührsen Lasse, Rutkowski Stefan, Wefers Annika K, Müller Franz-Josef, Schoof Melanie, Schüller Ulrich
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Molecular brain tumor diagnosis is usually dependent on tissue biopsies or resections. This can pose several risks associated with anesthesia or neurosurgery, especially for lesions in the brain stem or other difficult-to-reach anatomical sites. Apart from initial diagnosis, tumor progression, recurrence, or the acquisition of novel genetic alterations can only be proven by re-biopsies.
METHODS: We employed Nanopore sequencing on cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and analyzed copy number variations (CNV) and global DNA methylation using a random forest classifier. We sequenced 129 samples with sufficient DNA. These samples came from 99 patients and encompassed 22 entities. Results were compared to clinical diagnosis and molecular analysis of tumor tissue, if available.
RESULTS: 110/129 samples were technically successful, and 50 of these contained detectable circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) by CNV or methylation profiling. ctDNA was detected in samples from patients with progressive disease but also from patients without known residual disease. CNV plots showed diagnostic and prognostic alterations, such as C19MC amplifications in embryonal tumors with multilayered rosettes or Chr.1q gains and Chr.6q losses in posterior fossa group A ependymoma, respectively. Most CNV profiles mirrored the profiles of the respective tumor tissue. DNA methylation allowed exact classification of the tumor in 22/110 cases and led to incorrect classification in 2/110 cases. Only 5/50 samples with detected ctDNA contained tumor cells detectable through microscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that Nanopore sequencing data of cfDNA from CSF samples may be a promising approach for initial brain tumor diagnostics and an important tool for disease monitoring.
METHODS: We employed Nanopore sequencing on cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and analyzed copy number variations (CNV) and global DNA methylation using a random forest classifier. We sequenced 129 samples with sufficient DNA. These samples came from 99 patients and encompassed 22 entities. Results were compared to clinical diagnosis and molecular analysis of tumor tissue, if available.
RESULTS: 110/129 samples were technically successful, and 50 of these contained detectable circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) by CNV or methylation profiling. ctDNA was detected in samples from patients with progressive disease but also from patients without known residual disease. CNV plots showed diagnostic and prognostic alterations, such as C19MC amplifications in embryonal tumors with multilayered rosettes or Chr.1q gains and Chr.6q losses in posterior fossa group A ependymoma, respectively. Most CNV profiles mirrored the profiles of the respective tumor tissue. DNA methylation allowed exact classification of the tumor in 22/110 cases and led to incorrect classification in 2/110 cases. Only 5/50 samples with detected ctDNA contained tumor cells detectable through microscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that Nanopore sequencing data of cfDNA from CSF samples may be a promising approach for initial brain tumor diagnostics and an important tool for disease monitoring.