4.7 Article

Quantitative characterization of tumor cell-free DNA shortening

Journal

BMC GENOMICS
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12864-020-06848-9

Keywords

Cell-free DNA; Cancer; Fragment size; Next generation sequencing; Chromatin structure; Nucleosome

Funding

  1. Characteristic Innovation Project of the Department of Education of Guangdong Province of China [2017KTSCX046]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundPrevious studies found that cell-free DNA (cfDNA) generated from tumors was shorter than that from healthy cells, and selecting short cfDNA could enrich for tumor cfDNA and improve its usage in early cancer diagnosis and treatment monitoring; however, the underlying mechanism of shortened tumor cfDNA was still unknown, which potentially limits its further clinical application.ResultsUsing targeted sequencing of cfDNA in a large cohort of solid tumor patient, sequencing reads harboring tumor-specific somatic mutations were isolated to examine the exact size distribution of tumor cfDNA. For the majority of studied cases, 166bp remained as the peak size of tumor cfDNA, with tumor cfDNA showing an increased proportion of short fragments (100-150bp). Less than 1% of cfDNA samples were found to be peaked at 134/144bp and independent of tumor cfDNA purity. Using whole-genome sequencing of cfDNA, we discovered a positive correlation between cfDNA shortening and the magnitude of chromatin inaccessibility, as measured by transcription, DNase I hypersensitivity, and histone modifications. Tumor cfDNA shortening occurred simultaneously at both 5 and 3 ' ends of the DNA wrapped around nucleosomes.Conclusions p id=Par Tumor cfDNA shortening exhibited two distinctive modes. Tumor cfDNA purity and chromatin inaccessibility were contributing factors but insufficient to trigger a global transition from 166bp dominant to 134/144bp dominant phenotype.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available