IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0266889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Direct comparison of circulating tumor DNA sequencing assays with targeted large gene panels

Author

Listed:
  • Lizhi Yu
  • Gonzalo Lopez
  • John Rassa
  • Yixin Wang
  • Tara Basavanhally
  • Andrew Browne
  • Chang-Pin Huang
  • Lauren Dorsey
  • Jin Jen
  • Sarah Hersey

Abstract

Next generation sequencing (NGS) assays with large targeted gene panels can comprehensively profile cancer somatic mutations in a tumor sample. Given the rapid adoption of such assays for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in clinical oncology, it is essential for the community to understand their analytical performance in liquid biopsy settings. Here, we directly compared five ctDNA NGS assays, most of which having a panel of 400 or more genes, with simulated samples harboring mutations relevant to solid tumors or myeloid malignancy. Our results indicate that the detection sensitivity and reproducibility of all five assays was 90% or higher when the mutations were at 0.5% or 1.0% allele frequency, and with optimal DNA input of 30 ng or 50 ng per vendor’s protocol. The performances decreased and varied dramatically, when mutations were at a 0.1% allele frequency and/or when a lower genomic input of 10 ng DNA was used. Interestingly, one of the assays repeatedly showed higher rate of false positivity than the others across two different sample sets. Multiple intrinsic technical factors pertaining to the NGS assays were further investigated. Notable differences among the assays were seen for depth of coverage and background noise, which profoundly impacted assay performance. The results derived from this study are highly informative and provide a framework to assess and select suitable assays for specific application in cancer monitoring and potential clinical use.

Suggested Citation

  • Lizhi Yu & Gonzalo Lopez & John Rassa & Yixin Wang & Tara Basavanhally & Andrew Browne & Chang-Pin Huang & Lauren Dorsey & Jin Jen & Sarah Hersey, 2022. "Direct comparison of circulating tumor DNA sequencing assays with targeted large gene panels," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0266889
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266889
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266889&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0266889?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0266889. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.