Abstract
Accurate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection has an immense biomarker potential in all phases of the cancer disease course. Presence of ctDNA in the blood has been shown to have prognostic value in various cancer types as it may reflect the actual tumor burden. There are two main methods to consider, a tumor-informed and a tumor-agnostic analysis of ctDNA. Both techniques exploit the short half-life of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA)/ctDNA for disease monitoring and ultimately future clinical treatment intervention. Urothelial carcinoma is characterized by a high mutation spectrum but very few hotspot mutations. This limits tumor agnostic usability of hotspot mutation or fixed sets of genes for ctDNA detection. Here we focus on a tumor-informed analysis for ultrasensitive patient- and tumor-specific ctDNA detection using personalized mutation panels, probes that bind to specific genomic sequences to enrich for the region of interest. In this chapter, we describe methods for purification of high-quality cfDNA and guidelines for designing tumor-informed customized capture panels for sensitive detection of ctDNA. Furthermore, a detailed protocol for library preparation and panel capture utilizing a double enrichment strategy with low amplification is described.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Thierry AR, El Messaoudi S, Gahan PB et al (2016) Origins, structures, and functions of circulating DNA in oncology. Cancer Metastasis Rev 35:347–376
Kustanovich A, Schwartz R, Peretz T, Grinshpun A (2019) Life and death of circulating cell-free DNA. Cancer Biol Ther 20:1057–1067
Alcaide M, Cheung M, Hillman J et al (2020) Evaluating the quantity, quality and size distribution of cell-free DNA by multiplex droplet digital PCR. Sci Rep 10:12564
Cristiano S, Leal A, Phallen J et al (2019) Genome-wide cell-free DNA fragmentation in patients with cancer. Nature 570:385–389
Christensen E, Birkenkamp-Demtröder K, Sethi H et al (2019) Early detection of metastatic relapse and monitoring of therapeutic efficacy by ultra-deep sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA in patients with urothelial bladder carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 37:1547–1557
Sanz-Garcia E, Zhao E, Bratman SV, Siu LL (2022) Monitoring and adapting cancer treatment using circulating tumor DNA kinetics: current research, opportunities, and challenges. Sci Adv 8:eabi8618
Steensma DP, Bejar R, Jaiswal S et al (2015) Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential and its distinction from myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood 126:9–16
Newman AM, Lovejoy AF, Klass DM et al (2016) Integrated digital error suppression for improved detection of circulating tumor DNA. Nat Biotechnol 34:547–555
Schmitt MW, Kennedy SR, Salk JJ et al (2012) Detection of ultra-rare mutations by next-generation sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109:14508–14513
Bae JH, Liu R, Nguyen E et al (2021) CODEC enables “single duplex” sequencing. bioRxiv. 2021.06.11.448110
Shendure J, Balasubramanian S, Church GM et al (2017) DNA sequencing at 40: past, present and future. Nature 550:345–353
Gerstung M, Papaemmanuil E, Campbell PJ (2014) Subclonal variant calling with multiple samples and prior knowledge. Bioinformatics 30:1198–1204
Birkenkamp-Demtröder K, Christensen E, Nordentoft I et al (2018) Monitoring treatment response and metastatic relapse in advanced bladder cancer by liquid biopsy analysis. Eur Urol 73:535–540
Pallisgaard N, Spindler K-LG, Andersen RF et al (2015) Controls to validate plasma samples for cell free DNA quantification. Clin Chim Acta 446:141–146
Salk JJ, Schmitt MW, Loeb LA (2018) Enhancing the accuracy of next-generation sequencing for detecting rare and subclonal mutations. Nat Rev Genet 19:269–285
Gorini F, Scala G, Di Palo G et al (2020) The genomic landscape of 8-oxodG reveals enrichment at specific inherently fragile promoters. Nucleic Acids Res 48:4309–4324
Brodin J, Mild M, Hedskog C et al (2013) PCR-induced transitions are the major source of error in cleaned ultra-deep pyrosequencing data. PLoS One 8:e70388
Ma X, Shao Y, Tian L et al (2019) Analysis of error profiles in deep next-generation sequencing data. Genome Biol 20:50
Chen L, Liu P, Evans TC Jr, Ettwiller LM (2017) DNA damage is a pervasive cause of sequencing errors, directly confounding variant identification. Science 355:752–756
Tate JG, Bamford S, Jubb HC et al (2019) COSMIC: the catalogue of somatic mutations in cancer. Nucleic Acids Res 47:D941–D947
Chan K, Roberts SA, Klimczak LJ et al (2015) An APOBEC3A hypermutation signature is distinguishable from the signature of background mutagenesis by APOBEC3B in human cancers. Nat Genet 47:1067–1072
Acknowledgments
We thank Mads Heilskov Rasmussen and Amanda Frydendahl Boll Johansen for collaboration on double capture protocol development. We thank Lotte Gernyx for technical assistance during of NGS library preparation and capture protocols development.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Nordentoft, I., Birkenkamp-Demtröder, K., Dyrskjøt, L. (2023). NGS-Based Tumor-Informed Analysis of Circulating Tumor DNA. In: Hoffmann, M.J., Gaisa, N.T., Nawroth, R., Ecke, T.H. (eds) Urothelial Carcinoma. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2684. Humana, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-3291-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-3291-8_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-0716-3290-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-0716-3291-8
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols