Cargando…
STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods
The growing interest in liquid biopsies for cancer research and cell-based non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) invigorates the need for improved single cell analysis. In these applications, target cells are extremely rare and fragile in peripheral circulation, which makes the genetic analysis very...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5719346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29215049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17525-5 |
_version_ | 1783284471596843008 |
---|---|
author | Vander Plaetsen, Ann-Sophie Deleye, Lieselot Cornelis, Senne Tilleman, Laurentijn Van Nieuwerburgh, Filip Deforce, Dieter |
author_facet | Vander Plaetsen, Ann-Sophie Deleye, Lieselot Cornelis, Senne Tilleman, Laurentijn Van Nieuwerburgh, Filip Deforce, Dieter |
author_sort | Vander Plaetsen, Ann-Sophie |
collection | PubMed |
description | The growing interest in liquid biopsies for cancer research and cell-based non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) invigorates the need for improved single cell analysis. In these applications, target cells are extremely rare and fragile in peripheral circulation, which makes the genetic analysis very challenging. To overcome these challenges, cell stabilization and unbiased whole genome amplification are required. This study investigates the performance of four WGA methods on single or a limited number of cells after 24 hour of Streck Cell-Free DNA BCT preservation. The suitability of the DNA, amplified with Ampli1, DOPlify, PicoPLEX and REPLI-g, was assessed for both short tandem repeat (STR) profiling and copy number variant (CNV) analysis after shallow whole genome massively parallel sequencing (MPS). Results demonstrate that Ampli1, DOPlify and PicoPLEX perform well for both applications, with some differences between the methods. Samples amplified with REPLI-g did not result in suitable STR or CNV profiles, indicating that this WGA method is not able to generate high quality DNA after Streck Cell-Free DNA BCT stabilization of the cells. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5719346 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57193462017-12-08 STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods Vander Plaetsen, Ann-Sophie Deleye, Lieselot Cornelis, Senne Tilleman, Laurentijn Van Nieuwerburgh, Filip Deforce, Dieter Sci Rep Article The growing interest in liquid biopsies for cancer research and cell-based non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) invigorates the need for improved single cell analysis. In these applications, target cells are extremely rare and fragile in peripheral circulation, which makes the genetic analysis very challenging. To overcome these challenges, cell stabilization and unbiased whole genome amplification are required. This study investigates the performance of four WGA methods on single or a limited number of cells after 24 hour of Streck Cell-Free DNA BCT preservation. The suitability of the DNA, amplified with Ampli1, DOPlify, PicoPLEX and REPLI-g, was assessed for both short tandem repeat (STR) profiling and copy number variant (CNV) analysis after shallow whole genome massively parallel sequencing (MPS). Results demonstrate that Ampli1, DOPlify and PicoPLEX perform well for both applications, with some differences between the methods. Samples amplified with REPLI-g did not result in suitable STR or CNV profiles, indicating that this WGA method is not able to generate high quality DNA after Streck Cell-Free DNA BCT stabilization of the cells. Nature Publishing Group UK 2017-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5719346/ /pubmed/29215049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17525-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Vander Plaetsen, Ann-Sophie Deleye, Lieselot Cornelis, Senne Tilleman, Laurentijn Van Nieuwerburgh, Filip Deforce, Dieter STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title | STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title_full | STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title_fullStr | STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title_full_unstemmed | STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title_short | STR profiling and Copy Number Variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current Whole Genome Amplification methods |
title_sort | str profiling and copy number variation analysis on single, preserved cells using current whole genome amplification methods |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5719346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29215049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17525-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanderplaetsenannsophie strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods AT deleyelieselot strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods AT cornelissenne strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods AT tillemanlaurentijn strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods AT vannieuwerburghfilip strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods AT deforcedieter strprofilingandcopynumbervariationanalysisonsinglepreservedcellsusingcurrentwholegenomeamplificationmethods |