4.5 Article

A pilot study on the use of cerebrospinal fluid cell-free DNA in intramedullary spinal ependymoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 135, Issue 1, Pages 29-36

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-017-2557-y

Keywords

Spinal ependymoma; Spinal cord tumor; Neurofibramatosis type 2 (NF2); Cell-free DNA (cfDNA); Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF); Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA); Nucleic acid; Liquid biopsy; Droplet digital PCR

Funding

  1. Hearst Foundation [K08-NS901527]
  2. Curci Foundation [R21-CA 193046-01]
  3. Stanford MedScholars funding
  4. Stanford CHRI fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) represents a promising source of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) for tumors of the central nervous system. A CSF-based liquid biopsy may obviate the need for riskier tissue biopsies and serve as a means for monitoring tumor recurrence or response to therapy. Spinal ependymomas most commonly occur in adults, and aggressive resection must be delicately balanced with the risk of injury to adjacent normal tissue. In patients with subtotal resection, recurrence commonly occurs. A CSF-based liquid biopsy matched to the patient's spinal ependymoma mutation profile has potential to be more sensitive then surveillance MRI, but the utility has not been well characterized for tumors of the spinal cord. In this study, we collected matched blood, tumor, and CSF samples from three adult patients with WHO grade II intramedullary spinal ependymoma. We performed whole exome sequencing on matched tumor and normal DNA to design Droplet Digital (TM) PCR (ddPCR) probes for tumor and wild-type mutations. We then interrogated CSF samples for tumor-derived cfDNA by performing ddPCR on extracted cfDNA. Tumor cfDNA was not reliably detected in the CSF of our cohort. Anatomic sequestration and low grade of intramedullary spinal cord tumors likely limits the role of CSF liquid biopsy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available