4.3 Article

Plasma genetic and genomic abnormalities predict treatment response and clinical outcome in advanced prostate cancer

期刊

ONCOTARGET
卷 6, 期 18, 页码 16411-16421

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.3845

关键词

prostate cancer; liquid biopsy; plasma; cell free DNA; next generation sequencing

资金

  1. Advancing a Healthier Wisconsin fund [5520227]
  2. National Institute of Health [CA157881]
  3. Gail Gassner Development funds for prostate cancer research
  4. Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Liquid biopsies, examinations of tumor components in body fluids, have shown promise for predicting clinical outcomes. To evaluate tumor-associated genomic and genetic variations in plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and their associations with treatment response and overall survival, we applied whole genome and targeted sequencing to examine the plasma cfDNAs derived from 20 patients with advanced prostate cancer. Sequencing-based genomic abnormality analysis revealed locusspecific gains or losses that were common in prostate cancer, such as 8q gains, AR amplifications, PTEN losses and TMPRSS2-ERG fusions. To estimate tumor burden in cfDNA, we developed a Plasma Genomic Abnormality (PGA) score by summing the most significant copy number variations. Cox regression analysis showed that PGA scores were significantly associated with overall survival (p < 0.04). After androgen deprivation therapy or chemotherapy, targeted sequencing showed significant mutational profile changes in genes involved in androgen biosynthesis, AR activation, DNA repair, and chemotherapy resistance. These changes may reflect the dynamic evolution of heterozygous tumor populations in response to these treatments. These results strongly support the feasibility of using non-invasive liquid biopsies as potential tools to study biological mechanisms underlying therapy-specific resistance and to predict disease progression in advanced prostate cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据